Modern Wisdom - #658 - George TheTinMen - Why Do The Left Not Care About Men’s Problems?

Episode Date: July 24, 2023

George TheTinMen is a filmmaker, pro-mens advocate and a content creator. The conversation around the issues of men and boys has been dominated by the Right for a long time now. The Left largely seem to have abandoned the entire male sex. So what happens when an openly Left-leaning man creates a huge Instagram account talking exclusively about male issues? Expect to learn how the patriarchy can be so powerful if men aren't flourishing more, why the Left stopped talking to men and boys, why George has an army of haters online trying to cancel him, what gets missed in the conversation about struggling males, how divorce impacts the development of young men, what people misunderstand about the gender pay gap, what men want from the women in their lives and much more... Sponsors: Get the Whoop 4.0 for free and get your first month for free at http://join.whoop.com/modernwisdom (discount automatically applied) Get over 37% discount on all products site-wide from MyProtein at https://bit.ly/proteinwisdom (use code: MODERNWISDOM) Get 15% discount on Craftd London’s jewellery at https://craftd.com/modernwisdom (use code MW15) Extra Stuff: Get my free Reading List of 100 books to read before you die → https://chriswillx.com/books/ To support me on Patreon (thank you): https://www.patreon.com/modernwisdom - Get in touch. Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/chriswillx Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/chriswillx YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/modernwisdompodcast Email: https://chriswillx.com/contact/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Hello everybody, welcome back to the show. My guest today is George from the Tin Men, he's a filmmaker, pro men's advocate, and a content creator. The conversation around the issues of men and boys has been dominated by the right for a long time. Now, the left largely seems to have abandoned the entire male sex, so what happens when an openly left-leaning man creates a huge Instagram account talking exclusively about male issues. Expect to learn how the patriarchy can be so powerful if men aren't flourishing more, why the left stopped talking to men and boys, why George has an army of haters online trying to cancel him, what gets missed in the conversation about struggling males, how divorce impacts

the development of young men, what people misunderstand about the gender pay gap, what men want from the women in their lives, and much more. I mentioned that we have another huge modern wisdom cinema production coming up, and we do, and it is with Sam Harris, the neuroscientist and moral philosopher, one of my favourite voices throughout my entire life, one of the biggest influences on the way that I see the world, and definitely my education and introduction into the world of sort of alternative media, sense-making, heterodox thought, all that stuff. I recorded with him in LA on Friday and it was phenomenal. It's a beautifully shot conversation.

Another full production cinema team flew everybody out, booked an entire warehouse. It's great. And that episode goes live one week today. So, if you're new here or if you're returning listener, make sure that you've hit the subscribe button because that is the only way that you can ensure that you will never miss an episode, including that one with Mr. Sam Harris, seven days from today. In other news, this episode is brought to you by Woop. Woop is the only fitness tracker that I have ever stuck with because it's the best one

that I've ever found. It's a personalized digital fitness and health coach that monitors your body's physiology 24-7 via non-invasive wearable and provides you with feedback on your lifestyle, training, sleep, and recovery via an accompanying app. It doesn't just tell you what you've done, but it tells you what you need to do as well. It tracks your sleep, your rest, your recovery, your heart rate, your resting heart rate, your heart rate variability, your blood oxygen level, how much you're breathing throughout the night, your stress throughout the day, all of the walks and everything that you're doing to try and improve your health is captured by one small band that just sits on your wrist. On top of that,

you can join for free, pay nothing for the brand new Woop 4.0 strap, plus you get your first month for free, and there's a 30-day money back guarantee, so you can buy it for free, try it for free, and if you do not like it after 29 days, they'll give you your money back. Head to join.woop.com slash modern wisdom. That's join.woop.com slash modern wisdom. That's join.woop.com. Slash. Modern wisdom. In other, other news this episode is brought to you by my protein. They are the number one spot supplement company worldwide with over 12 million customers and it is no surprise. They make the best tasting and most advanced spot supplements. On the planet, their clear way is a game changer. It's the best protein that I've ever found.

It looks and tastes like juice. It's a light and fruity that you can basically see through it. It means you can sip it during a workout or have it in hot weather. And it doesn't give you digestive discomfort, but it has more protein in than a normal protein shake. So, and there's a vegan version. So the vegans out there,

you also can get in on the Clearway action. As well, my proteins got best in class, shakers, bottles, accessories, sports supplements, things like creating pre-workouts, everything. Whatever it is that you need, my proteins got it, plus they ship internationally. You don't need to go searching for super secret sales to see if there's something happening.

My code, Modern Wisdom, from that page will give you the biggest discount always. Bit.ly slash protein wisdom and modern wisdom. A checkout. And in final news, this episode is brought to you by Crafted London. The number one men's jewelry company worldwide. They are making consistently amazing pieces. They've just released this new minimal collection for men, some fantastic bracelets. I love everything that they make. It's really hard to find cool men's jewelry. And if you've seen the episode that I did with Chris Bumstead a couple of weeks ago,

and you were asking about what that necklace was, that is Crafted London. They've got necklaces, chains, pendants, bracelets, rings, and earrings, custom designs in gold and silver, and the sweat proof, waterproof, heat proof, and gym proof. Best of all, they come with a lifetime guarantee. So if the piece breaks for any reason during the entire life of the product, they will give you a new one for free. Head to bit.ly slash cd wisdom, that's b-i-t dot l-y slash letter c letter d wisdom and use the code mw15 for an exclusive 15% discount of everything site wide and worldwide.

But now ladies and gentlemen, please welcome George from the Tin Man. You have one of the most interesting Instagram accounts that I've followed probably in the last year and everybody needs to go and follow at the Tin Men on Instagram. I absolutely love it. These infographic carousel slides that you've been doing, I think are the phenomenal, very well researched, I think you're an incredibly balanced voice in this space. So what's the reason that you personally decided to get interested in the topic of talking about men and men's issues? Well, I work in the creative industry. I create content for living. I've been doing it specifically

even film for about 13 years now. I've always found it very interesting to sort of communicate data to audiences. I also engage heavily in sort of progressive left leaning sort of political spaces. And as those two parts of my life were developing, I sort of noticed an unwillingness from progressive left spaces to engage in good faith with an area which I was always passionate about which is men and boys advocacy. And to be honest, like I was quite naive when I started the journey, I didn't know a huge amount about anything I spoke about. So there's a lot of reading and I remember just being absolutely shocked at the data. Like some of the information I was reading, I just could not believe it. And I felt like as a creative, I've a lot of experience, I was like I've been dealt a

winning hand here, there was so much interesting information, so many undeniable facts of our men and boys. I saw an area of advocacy, men and boys advocacy, men's right advocacy especially, is experiencing what I think is a massive branded entity crisis. It's like very loud, very aggressive. It's very sort of in your face.

And I thought, if I can just change the way you present this information, which is compelling, and I'm sure I'll get into, if I can just change the way we present it through my own experience, I think I can change some minds. And some, some minds having changed, some minds having been entrenched, but I just had to do it. I just thought I had to do it. I, I just didn't see in my reality what I was being told about what it is to be a man, and the fact that it didn't seem to add up panels, I just need to try and present these things. To be honest, it wasn't even really supposed to be a public channel. I was engaging so much in these discussions with a lot of feminists, and I just wanted a space on my phone quite literally to be able to reference information about like suicide, domestic violence, violent crime, homelessness and drug addiction.

And I just wanted something to be under the table. And I mean, like, quite literally under the table, so I could switch. Like, swipe through and following my own beliefs, like, engaging this discussion with that due diligence. And then people would have started to follow. And then some of the wrong people started to follow and gave me some some shit, which is fine. And then it grew and it grew and it grew. And then I spent a bit more time, like personalised in a content to make it a little bit more entertaining, a bit more attractive in a way that you described. So kindly. And then I'm here. And now I'm here.

So you are somebody that is from the left, very much so. I've seen your political compass test. And yet your pro men, what is, first off, why is it such a rare position? And secondly, what's unique about what you've learned being in those spaces, holding those beliefs and yet talking about the issues of boys and men. I mean, even saying pro men is sort of,

it makes you wince, doesn't it? It's like, oh my God, that's unpopular. I mean, obviously I'm pro, all human beings, including women, of course, I speak. I do speak actively about human as well. This is something I've always found frustrating, is that whenever we have these discussions, it always starts with some sort of perspective apology

where we sort of get down on these and we plead and we have to let someone I just talk to you the other day said you have to kiss the ring And you always have to kiss the ring you always have to acknowledge women and girls you can't just talk about men and boys I know you spoken in Richard Reeves he does this quite often he starts everything by saying Now I'm going to speak about boys and men that doesn't mean I don't care about women and girls And if anything talk about men and boys is a benefit to women and girls And I find by doing that you sort of undermine your own point before you've been begun.

And I genuinely believe men and boys deserve a conversation in their own right, not for the benefit of women and girls, although that is a benefit and indirect benefit. But primarily, this is about men and boys. We have to do it now. That doesn't mean I don't care about women and girls. And I'm not going to say that again for the rest of the podcast, because I don't think I need to continually have to prove myself.

But as for your question, I just think I do think the right is then a better job of talking about men and boys. Certainly not perfect, but the progressive left spaces just seem very intent on blaming men and boys for their own problems. So if men have poor health outcomes, it's because men aren't going to adopt us enough. If men have mental health problems, it's not speaking enough. If a man gets assaulted on the street, we ask who did it. And we don't actually engage with these discussions in that good faith.

And it's always an accusatory finger. And then we obviously get to the concepts of toxic masculinity and patriarchy, which in my opinion, again, speaking as someone who works as a living, writing, copy, I feel like those words, they just place the blame back on men's shoulders and they divide people. And I was just like, I think I could do a better job. I think I can do a better job. I think I can bring the progressive topics into my account.

Because the frustrating thing is so many of the issues I talk about are I would say left wing issues. If you're gonna classify left wing as social equality, if you're talking about homelessness, everyone's in homelessness, which is great, but 80% of homeless people are men, 90% of homeless deaths are men. So really if you send for homelessness, you sort of indirectly stand are men, 90% of homeless deaths are men. So really if you stand for

homelessness you sort of indirectly stand for men too. A lot of people like hate war. Like I want war ended but then 99% of war deaths are men. And there's so many issues that men that people care about, including like BLM for example, that are men's issues, men and boys' issues are sort of recategorized as something else. So like BLM, for example, is certainly a racial issue, but I never really saw it mentioned at all that like 95, 96% of Americans killed by police are men. And if you were to line up like all

of the black Americans killed in 2020 at the George Floyd, 99% of those black Americans are black men, more, more in fact. And it's a great database. I think it's the George Floyd, 99% of those black Americans are black men, more, more in fact. And it's a great database. I think it's the Washington Post, a fatal force where they basically have every single American killed by police and you can search by race. And it's like literally 244 black men killed in 2022 women.

And I never saw it brought up personally. That's when I've disagreed with a lot of people in my community, but I never saw it mentioned as a racial and agenda issue. And really, if you deny police brutality as a men's issue, I feel like that's even worse than denying as a black issue, because it is both. It's way more men, probably, than it is black. So I'm talking about what is such a good point, dude. The conversation around, look at the proportion. How many white people were killed by police versus how many black people were killed by police? And they're maybe an imbalance and they're maybe required to redress beyond simply the

sort of situational environments to the different groups and have it. But the real thing would be look at the 99.45% of people who were male that were killed by police compared to the ones that were female. Yeah, so I think a number something like black Americans when you normalize to a population, about 3.5 times more like to be killed by police in white Americans, which

is a disparate that's what I'm discussing, but men are 20 times more likely to be killed by a woman. And then when you tell people that you put them in a very difficult piece of cognitive dissonance because they start reaching for more men or more violent, which is why they could buy police. And that certainly would explain some of the disparity. But then are you going to apply that to the racial disparity as well? And I was like, good luck with that one.

Good luck with that one. And to be honest, it gets even worse, because I feel like not only did it left Nicolette that part of the problem, but I would say the left actively encourage it. I would say the left create the very problem they're trying to solve in police brutality, because a lot of these left progressive spaces actively participate in that very dehumanizing fear mongering around men. Like men are dangerous, like cross the street, watch out. Keep your distance, like men are terrifying,

men are determined and violent. And I'm like, that is actually feeding into the divisive fear mongering rhetoric. You're sort of creating a cultural fear around men. And I'm like, who is going to pay the biggest price for that? And the answer is black men. Like, because when police start fearing black men, that's when black men get shot. And I'm like, are the left creating the very problem they claim to want to end by explicitly fear mongering around men? And that's a controversial question to staff with, but a good one nonetheless, I think.

So what do you find when you bring these sorts of positions up with the left-leaning friends that you will have? What's the kind of... Presumably, your left-leaning credentials must get questioned at some point. Yeah. That you're evidently not from the left, you must be confused. Despite the fact that being left or being right is fundamentally a social issue, right? It's to do with problems of class and economics. It's not to do with, are you pro men? Like even the conversation around being pro-life or pro-gun.

Neither of those things should really factor into whether you are or whether you want. It's just a predisposition that's grouped certain people with a particular suite of beliefs into different cohorts. So what happens? You're sat at the pub with your left-leaning friends, some of whom have got blue hair, and you bring up this conversation around. Suddenly not. Men. Yeah, yeah.

What happens? I've lost friends. I've lost friends. I've lost, like, in people that acquaintances of mine, like family members, like quite literally stand up and walk out the room. I've lost friends, I've lost friends, I've lost like in people that acquaintances of mine, like family members like quite literally stand up and walk out the room, like people that I thought were important to me and cared about things that are important to me, and that's fine. I know, I mean, putting into a case in point I have a friend, a male friend who lost one of his old flatmates to suicide who was a man, and he sent round the the virtuous text message to all his

guy friends asking him to talk and it's good to speak and share if you want to reach out let me know which is like very worthwhile and I think that all men should do that. But then I remember a week later I posted some information on sexual violence against men and how it's in the reported in America and there was a significant number of male rape victims. And then the next time I saw him, he pulled me aside. And that just basically castigated me in, called me tone deaf for saying that. And I was just like, mate, do you realize that a boy who has been sexually abused in adolescence when he grows up with 10 times more likely to attempt suicide, like sexual violence and suicide are inextric relinx, they're a massive part of one another. And so how could you, one week say,

male suicide is a big problem, let's talk about it. And then the following week we call me tone deaf, when I talk about one of the biggest causes of suicide. And I mean, we talk about a lot, but one of the biggest things I've learned is like, if you want to talk about male suicide, you need to go a lot deeper than we've currently gone, which is just surface level, men can talk, men can cry, which is again a very valid

point. And I would like to use useful training to encourage men to talk about the problems. But if you think suicide starts and stops there, you're wrong. It's not seen primarily as a mental health crisis, but as a societal issue. Like, it's a really great paper, I'm going on with Tungent now, but a really great report that said, male suicide is not a mental health issue primarily. It even described it as a rational decision on a solution-based outcome when men simply cannot deal with the problems around them.

A lot of the men who attempted suicide didn't even consider that they had a mental problem. They didn't consider themselves mentally and well. They're like, I'm not mentally and well. I'm in debt. I've lost my job. I'm losing my children in child custody courts. I'm a victim of domestic violence. Like that's another, another really difficult, a bit of hypocrisy from the left where if you look at male victims of domestic violence, of which are currently 3 million in the UK, 11% of those men will attempt suicide. So it's frustrating when you talk to advocates who are against male suicide and that's a important issue to them, but then they will refuse to talk about domestic violence against men. I mentioned child custody and Martin Sego who is an excellence psychologist. He's

linked 20% of the suicides in the UK to child custody battles, family courts, relationship breakdown. And like the family court system in the UK is one of the most heartbreaking institutions you'll ever see. And like for a father to lose his child in a corrupt family court causes so much pain and a lot of those men, they're not mentally and well, they've just lost their child. And if you're a male suicide, I'd advocate male suicide and you're not talking about child custody, joblessness, male victims and domestic violence, I will question how effective you're being. And if anything, there are people that I genuinely feel like I'm not talking about the real issues, they're just trying to sell things like if anything

sort of exploiting the issue by not wanting to get their hands dirty by, you know, playing in the mud like I am. I'm the one. So they want to. They want to talk about the very virtue, virtuous and applauded elements of communicating with men and boys, which is, you need to learn to open up, you need to get rid of your man box of expectations around what it means to be a man, but when you talk about what are the precursors to this, which are a little bit more politically unpopular, things like male male rapes, things like men who are being mistreated through family court, men who have lost things in marriages and divorce court and stuff like that. That is a much more contested area. I mean, this is the absolute rubber meeting the road situation of every social topic. If you hold a belief and say that you're standing up for a maligned group and yet that belief is applauded by most people, that's not really making any sort of a sacrifice.

Like you, somebody who is from the left talking about something that the left absolutely hates, which is men's problems and not only that, talking about men's problems in a domain which is almost exclusively dominated by women. That's somebody, as far as I can see, that is paying the price. You mentioned before, and this is something I've seen pop up on YouTube quite a lot, about family court, child custody, separations and stuff like that.

This is an area that I have done zero research into. I know absolutely nothing. So given that you are coming at it from evidence-based research-backed lens, what don't people know about how family court and divorces and separations and stuff works for men? I would say the fact that you don't know, and I would say I don't know, huge amount of it either.

But the fact that we don't know is an interesting outcome in and of itself. Like we don't know because we're not allowed to know. Like family courts are secret, the secret family courts. So you're not allowed to press, you're not allowed to public. There's very little oversight. Like parents go in of children and then a father comes out on his own, hard broken.

We don't know what's going on there. I mean, I would be very I'll be looked and talked too much about it, but I know it's something I'm learning about and I every time I speak to a dad who's fighting for his child that is probably the most heartbreaking story I'll hear like I don't When we talk about I feel like when we talk about politics so much if it's descended into things like women not having pockets or the sound of my Alexa being a woman's voice. And there's a sort of issues that are important, but you need to put those down on the ladder a little bit. When a man is losing his child, I would ask any parent, like, what's the one thing you don't want to lose?

And I would say like nine times a 10, I would say my child, and when you consider how many men are losing their child in a system that is corrupt, I feel like that's a bigger issue than we pretend is. And not just family courts, but men are discriminated against in many areas of criminal court. Like I know there's been some interesting research by Professor Sondar Starn, she found that women are twice as like to avoid prison for the same crime. And if they are sentenced, men will get 63% longer sentence, that's an America. But again, for the same crime, same criminal history. And if they are sentenced men will get 63% longer sentence, that's an America. But again, for the same crime, same criminal history in the UK, like the Ministry of Justice

came out of report and I think it said men are 88% more likely to be sentenced to prison and similar criminal circumstances. And very little said and done, that's the Ministry of Justice's own report. And a similar phenomenon, I said said earlier, where there is a sentence in bias against black Americans, 10% is found. So if you're black in America, you'll get 10% longer, men get 63% longer. And if you're a black man, it's 63 plus 10%. So you've got the compounding of the problem itself. And you see that everywhere, it's the same, obviously, BLM we talked about, men are an at risk group, black men are even higher at risk group. And I think that intersectional approach is a really

interesting and valuable lens that we should be using. But- Isn't that fascinating? So if you bring the word of intersectionality, it triggers the base of the amygdala goes on a lot of people because what they've been taught about to do with intersectionality is that this is a justification for somebody who's got a gluten intolerance and is left handed to be able to claim some sort of victim. Whereas what you're saying here is that not using the lens of intersectionality allows us to ignore the problems of boys and men and actually means that a more politically popular way of segmenting out different cohorts that are having problems is much easier to do if you ignore the problems of boys and men.

Well, you see the biggest victims of the problems I talk about are minority men. We talk about black men and never get examples gay men. Obviously, we talk a lot about the historical sort of criminalization of gay people, but very few talk about the fact that it was almost always gay men in particular who were criminalized. So in the UK, it was illegal to be gay and it was, but it was actually illegal to be a gay man. Like being a lesbian was certainly not tolerated by any means but you weren't castrated, you weren't sentenced three years of hard labor, the same with the Nazi party when they were sending gay people to concentration camps but they weren't gay people, they were all gay men and again, lesbianism was notoned, but he weren't rounded up and executed tens of thousands.

I've seen like popular Instagrammers talk about what happened to gay people in an Nazi party and you look at the photos and you look at their all men, like why are you so afraid to say gay men? That's an important, like the intersection of masculinity and homosexuality is a really, really important point to make and we are losing that perspective by indulging in this sort of political correctness that I'm not wanting to talk about, men. I've never, I've never thought about this lens before.

I've never thought about the other side of intersectionality that you know, you use it from this lens that allows you to erroneously fold in unnecessary characteristics in order to maximize the way that a group is being claimed to be maligned. Not just into your black, but it's that you're black and you've got a club shot. And the mass something. Yeah. But when you do it on the other side, it allows you to hide what may be one of the biggest

determining factors for this. And this is almost exclusively, I would guess, a problem of the left. So this is a problem that is mostly present in and mostly driven by people from the left, which are who are ostensibly the group of tolerance and inclusion and trying to raise up maligned groups, but because of this blind spot toward the problems of boys and men, it's actually the intersection, or not using an intersectional lens, is a disadvantage. Yeah, I genuinely feel that some of the issues I discuss often new perspectives that are, you may not have to agree with it, but there's certainly more discussing it at the very least, like combining what we talked about in terms of

men being seen as inherently guilty, not just by society, but by quite literally the criminal court. So like I said, 63% longer sentences for men. If you applied as sort of inherent guilt that society seems to see men as, and you apply that to being gay, that I think explains why we see women as sort of innocently gay. being gay, that, I think, explains why we see women as sort of innocently gay. You know, it's a phase, I'll get through it, don't worry about it, it's fine, you're just experimenting, it's not all innocent fun, but men are guilty of being gay, because we're applying that inherent guilt onto gay men, and they are quite literally guilty of being gay, there's an, you know's an abomination, as it's called, in the Bible.

And like I said, criminalized in the most literary possible. I had a conversation that I was doing in Qatar, probably about two or three months ago now, but me and you were chatting beforehand because I wanted to make sure that I was absolutely on the nose of this conversation I was having. And you sent me something,

and I've built this out for a project that I'm working on at the moment. I actually wanted to read to you a bastardized version of what you sent me a few months ago. A common question is, why don't men just do better? Surely they can try harder in school, employment and health? Well, no other group is told when they suffer with reduced performance or accolades in the real world that they should just pull themselves up by their bootstraps. We don't tell any other group to talk about their problems. Instead, we spend billions in taxpayer money and private

charity to set up committees, departments, campaigns and funds to solve the problem. In simple terms, if a woman has a problem, we ask, what can we do to fix society? If a man has a problem, we ask, what can men do to fix themselves? It's a blatant double standard and people who are unwilling to admit any structural disadvantages faced by men are standing in the way of us solving the problems that are hurting men and also the potential partners who they may no longer be viable for. What's the point in asking men to talk if we are unwilling to listen or even acknowledge the societal issues that they're talking about? The problems are not in men's heads but out there in society,

we should not gaslight men into thinking they can solve these problems by just trying harder or being less toxically masculine. If the patriarchy is so powerful, why aren't men flourishing more? Well, yeah, I mean, that's an excellent re-wording of what I said. I'm happy to take credit for it. I hope it went down well.

Thank you, that is. I mean, to take credit for it. I hope it went down well. Thank you very much. I mean, can I respond with a quote of my own? Absolutely. Going back to suicide is a really interesting vessel to talk about this. This is said, APPG, a Boys and Men, there's a new organisation that's launched in the UK. It's all party parliamentary groups, so it's different members of different political parties coming together to discuss an issue. There's one on everything. Now there's one on Boys and Men. they did an absolutely amazing report on male suicide

and this is what they found. Sort of what I said earlier, the APPG heard that the focus has been on doing suicide primarily as a mental health problem when in reality it is largely the outcome of a range of external issues or personal stresses that take many men down the path to suicide. Suicide is a symptom or outcome of a build up of stresses. Suicide is a choice made by men when these stresses reach a critical level and the stress bucket overflows. It is not the result of either a single course or men not talking. These stresses range from a combination and culmination of issues such as relationship

breakdown, work culture, employment, financial worries, and are more widely impacted by social isolation, loss of belonging, the lack of male friendly services, and the lack of empathy towards men. We heard evidence that many men view suicide as a rational decision and a solution based outcome based on their failure to fix these stresses. They often do not conceptualize their problems as being mental health problems. So I mean, I'll read those issues again and you tell me, Chris, which of these can be solved through tears. Relationship breakdown, work culture, employment,

financial worries, like being in debt isn't solved by crying. I mean, I'm sure about it. Just talk about it. Yeah, it's like, I'm going to accept that and you'll be out of your own. Yeah, yeah. Can you talk about this for a moment? And don't get me wrong.

Like talking is a way of dealing of the problem But I don't know how much it solves the problem. It certainly doesn't solve it in its complexity I I work a lot of a male suicide research called Susie and Together we've done some very large studies together. We did one of the biggest studies into male suicide ever and She has more experience talking to suicide men than I think anyone you could ever meet and what she told me on my podcast was that she was like the more I talked to these men and listen to the life they're living the more I'm like, fuck, I'm not

surprised you want to kill yourself, like it sounds awful, like you don't have a mental health problem, we need to stop pathologizing male suicide and masculinity and actually listen to what these men are saying. Like it's no point men talking if we're not willing to listen. And the three words I tried to bring in are listen, ask and act. Like what's the point talking to go listen, go to act and you got to ask. And there's no point. There really is a limited utility to men talking if society is not willing to listen. Or if we're willing to tell people what they can't talk about.

I get told what I can't talk about on my own page. People come into my page and they're like, you can't say that, you can't say that, don't say it this way. And I'm like, I'll say what I want. But it's strange how you say men can talk, but not about these things. And it's like, well, it's not really talking if you can't talk about the things I want. But it's strange. I you say Ben can talk but not about these things. And it's like, well, it's not really talking if you can't talk about the things I want to

talk about. I love that. I love that insight. You're not saying the right things. Yeah. Talk about this stuff. We want you to open up, but we don't need to open up in that way. We don't need to open up in a politically uncomfortable way. Do you see John Barry's sentence, male psychology? Did you see his new study? I still always podcasted you. Oh, so this is a new one. This is John DM me this a couple of days ago. My latest research has just been published. It assessed the views of over 4,000 men in the UK and found that thinking masculinity is bad for your behaviour

is linked to having worse mental wellbeing. Around 85% of respondents thought that the term toxic masculinity is insulting and probably harmful to boys. Yeah, yeah, the funny thing is I put that into a post a long ago where I talked about the indoctrination of boys. We talked a lot about how angiotate is indoctrinated boys and a lot of ways he has. I didn't support angiotate in the least, but we haven't also talked about how there are organizations that are going into schools right now to indoctrinate boys, educate them

just like Andrew Tate, but to educate them that they are violent rapists in waiting. The John Barry research you're talking about, I put that in. It was like a percentage of boys that have been introduced to the concept of men being bad for society and the percentage of boys being told like talks about masculinity at like 10 years old and it was really, really high

and the reason why I don't know the actual stats, it's because that slide was actually deleted by Instagram. Somehow that slide got reported and deleted and I was like, there's nothing wrong about that site so it's a really great example of like I can't you don't get to talk about it. Tell you what shows associated story you might have seen I put a reel up maybe a month ago talking about the fact that I'd once recorded a podcast with Andrew Tate but never released it

and I was talking about the fact that I'd had the opportunity to I recorded it maybe three years ago when he was relatively small and then I could have re-released it or I could have released it the first time. At the height of his fame, it would have got millions of plays. Everybody in the comments, a couple of things. First off, everybody in the comments was saying, this is your morality standing on the shoulders of sort of a high horse here. Like I didn't need to know about the fact that you can

city yourself. Virtuous. Well, if I had released it three years after a very bombastic guy was talking in the middle of a global pandemic, I would have also been accused of hangar mate, you've stitched him up. He didn't believe this anymore. And it would have been harsh on Andrew. I did most of the reason that I didn't release that a couple of years

later is it's a shit thing to do to someone who was making claims when there was a lot of unknowns and now there are knowns and you can prove that you can prove false a lot of the claims that he was making. It's just a bad thing to do. I don't care who he is or what you think about him. You don't stitch somebody up with a three-year-old video anyway. That was the first thing. Second thing, Instagram took that down. Instagram deleted it and it had two seconds of him saying, hello, good to be here. That was it. He fixed in a video, so that is how tight they are

on a number of topics, especially around boys and men. So the thing that I've got in my head, we've got this individual elements here, whether it be suicidality, homelessness, education, relationship breakdown. Looking at a bit of a more macro level, why do you think people get angry if you start to discuss the basic truth that boys and men face disadvantages? Have you ever liked how it wear you spend the whole day out in town you walk around meeting friends you know go on a date or go for dinner and you get

home and you've had like food stuck between your teeth all day and it's like embarrassing. That is what I think is going on at the left where they've budged themselves quite literally bought the t-shirt about their political ideas they've budged themselves and made their political beliefs a fundamental part of who they are. Some people's jobs are quite literally bought the t-shirt about their political ideas, they badge themselves and made their political beliefs a fundamental part of who they are. Some people's jobs are quite literally dependent on certain political philosophies and theories being true and people will fight to the death to defend them. They'll look in the mirror and be like oh no and they'll get angry at everyone else not telling them and I feel like to overcome that identity crisis where your community, your friends, your job,

your lifestyle is all built around a certain set of ideas. If something comes along that challenges ideas, it's a very difficult thing to change. It's like changing your skin, you can't really do it. So which is why I try not to identify with any political movement, neither M.O.A or feminism, I try not to identify with any political movement, neither MRA or feminism, I try to identify as George. And George is a constantly shifting selection of ideas that I'm

able to bring in, take out, as and when I choose. I'm not sort of confined to my community. I know there's a, I can't name him, I can't remember who said it, but he was saying how he's a psychologist and he talked about how opinions don't exist and they say they exist in someone's skull, they exist in a community. It's like a shared belief that community has, it's not like in someone's mind. So the change of someone's mind, you either have to disassociate yourself from that community and lose friends family in a way that I described earlier, or you have to change the mind of the entire community. That's how you change someone's mind. And they're both extremely hard things to do,

especially when you're talking about very important issues, like domestic and sexual violence, where sadly a huge amount of men and women have personal experiences of that. And I genuinely try to understand, like when people hate men, I try to understand what has happened to that person for them to hate men so much. When I say the same principle applies, I look at violent men, I don't

just see them as an end product of violence. I also try to look into what are they experienced, so they've become this way. I truly believe that the vast majority of people are not born bad, they've become bad from their experiences and their environment, so I tried to ask, challenge people to ask themselves, what's what journey has that man been on? And in the same way, the angry, the angry people I get in my comments and DMs, I tried to ask, like, what have you experienced at the hands of men that has made you hate them so much? I tried to apologize, I'm sorry, whatever happened to you happened, and I hope you give a second chance. But do you think that most people who do hold those beliefs have had first-hand personal

experience of being mistreated by men, or do you think that they see a culture online that praises and raises up people who push back against men? As far as I can see, it's way more that mimetic, I am holding a belief that is currently politically popular to hold, which is to, I'm gonna stand up for the dispossessed groups. And I will ignore information that suggests that a group which isn't commonly seen as being dispossessed actually might be,

therefore, men, bad women, good, white, bad, black, good, immigrants, like good. Just, just, it's not easy. Yeah, if I had a catchphrase, it would be treat the issue not the gender, like just look at the issue. And if that issue impacts 80% of women, then 80% of the benefits will go to women,

but we need to look at the issue and like not see just gender,, if you look at domestic violence, even in the most conservative estimates, one in three victims is a man, and yet there is virtually no way for men to go. So one in three victims at one percent of refugees for men, and that is not acceptable. If I were to say there was a group of survivors who make up one in three victims and they are systematically shut out of refuges, people would lose their mind. I tried that all the time. If you look at homeless people, 90% of deaths are of one type of group and people get outraged, upset, and then you reveal it's men. And then again, they're confronted the same sense of dissonance. But I don't know, it's just a lot to overcome for some people.

And I just don't think people are willing to put in the effort. Like, it's too much part of their life. And it's a shame. It seems to me, I learned this originally from Destiny, but I know that you kind of hold it a similar belief here, which is that one of the reasons that the right has dominated the conversation with men so much is because it's largely being evacuated by the light, that you don't get to tell men that they are a problem or have a problem or need to do better

and not hold up any potential role models for them to step into. You have to provide a positive, inspirational, aspirational view for what men could become, and that has almost exclusively been dominated by the right. And, you know, for every single person, every single person, I don't care who you are that says, I have a problem with Andrew Tate, I have a problem with Jordan Peterson. Okay. Who do you suggest instead? And I asked the guy who you helped me prep for that debate that I did in Qatar. He came out and they played this video that was like a bunch of individuals, famous individuals that might be accused of being toxically masculine in one form or another.

The first one was my logianopolis. And I was like, look, if you've brought me here to defend fucking my logianopolis, I'm on the wrong show. Yeah. Jordan Peterson, Joe Rogan, the usual David Goggins, the usual crowd. And I was like, okay, I understand my interlocutor. I understand that you have a problem with the people that have just been held up

as potential role models for men. Please tell me who you would suggest instead. And it took 10 minutes in front of a, sorry, 10 seconds in front of a live audience of silence for him to say, my brother-in-law. And I was like, how about somebody that we all know? It was, I didn't mean to be mean, but I think it was a really important moment that showed if you are from the left, it is really hard to find a positive image

for what men could and should be. It just, it goes back to what you said before. If women have a problem we say, what can we do to fix society? If men have a problem, we say, what should men do to fix themselves? Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, quoting all my work now. Thank you. Yeah, I feel like it's I would say a better example is like an example of a masculine man. Like there's often, it's often certain role models by left of men, but I would say they don't, I wouldn't say they're traditionally masculine in the way they present themselves. And the strange thing is that the things that define masculinity, we do celebrate them, but in women, so when a woman is like confident and loud in your face and they go get her

in a boss and you know, we love that. And quite rightly so, but if you say, oh yeah, man, confident they go getting fierce in a a fighter, it's like, oh no, we don't like that. Toxic, toxic, toxic, and that it's a shame because we just don't seem to be benefactors of the lessons of history, because this isn't the first time we've pathologised agenda. Like I, I, I, pardon me, thinks that toxic masculinity is just a modern equivalent of female hysteria, where we take female distress and we pathologize it as something to be treated, something that's wrong inside of them, and we subject them to this crazy sort of experiments to fix the problem.

And we're doing the same now, we see masculinity as a problem to be fixed. And we're subjecting men to the same bogus sort of corrective therapies, like the new masculinity workshops sort of corrective therapies like the new masculinity workshops sort of presented like new masculinity workshops are like really, really expensive workshops that are about curing men of their masculinity that extraordinarily expensive and entirely ineffective. They're done by just really just Instagrammers who have done like a six week course on some of it or whatever and that thinks they're a therapist, a therapeutic coach, I think they have to call themselves.

And it's basically about correcting the problems of masculinity. It's the same thing we subjected women to, like 50 or 60 years ago for the so-called – What's the female history? I don't know the story about it. – So female hysteria was basically a phenomenon that looked at women's distress and it basically pathologized it as a problem to be solved. I think, I mean, I think it was, part of it was masturbation therapies that were a cure. I am pro or anti pro pro. Yeah, yeah, yeah, more masturbate more and it'll get more to your stereo. More to my area. I'm sure that there are many women

that are like very, very hysterical all the time. I feel like I need this treatment. Well, I'm sure that there are many women that are very hysterical all the time. I feel like I need this treatment. Well, I can't hurt to try. If you google it, you see the same black and white photo as a women's core, it's horrific. I feel like we pathologised female distress. Instead of listening to it, we pathologised it as something that was wrong in them. And I just feel the same about toxic masculinity. I feel like the frustrating thing is that the people that disagree with me often don't realize that the thing we disagree on is semantics. Because I do believe there

was, there are problems within men, there are violent men, there are men that are just very aggressive, competitive, that are not greater expressing their feelings. Those are the problems that I agree exists that are so-called toxic masculinity, but I feel like toxic masculinity is a term. Takes the problem and stuffs into men's heads and this is your problem. And if you wanna solve it, only you can solve it.

Rather than saying it's a societal issue. So I mean, I would say toxic attitudes towards men, or toxic attitudes towards masculinity, which all of society is guilty of perpetuating, including women. And I feel like toxic masculinity, you just again, confines a problem to men's heads. It sort of takes a problem and puts men into men's heads. And it's like the opposite patriarch you wear, it sort of puts men inside of the problem. So patriarchy puts men inside of the problem, toxic masculinity puts the problem inside of men.

And whatever it is, it's like, this is your problem. And like for political movement, that's all about accountability. It's like, well, aren't we all accountable for what's happening to men? Like, what about the way we value men or sort of dating standards that men are held to? Are they not?

And they're not part of it. There's a really great study by a child psychologist in Canada called Crystal Thompson. And she found that, it was actually mothers who were perpetuating harmful gender stereotypes into their children. Men, the fathers didn't really care either way, but it was often the mother.

And I'm like that's true. So, they did basically a IAT test, I think it is, where you're looking at different images of girls and boys exhibiting different behaviours and it basically measures the response of mothers and fathers to the different expressions of emotion. So a boy crying for example and it found that the mothers were a lot more disapproving of like things like boys crying so boys breaking the agenda stereotypes and And then it found that surprisingly farthest didn't seem to have really any sort of preference either way They're just why do you think that is why do you think there's a sex difference there?

I mean it could simply be that mothers spend more time of children I mean, it could simply be that mothers spend more time with children. I honestly don't know. I don't, I wouldn't want to comment on something I'm not, not, not calm. Get out over your skis, George. Let's get some. Yeah, let me give you one. Let me give you one. Let me give you one from me.

So there's something called the sexy sun hypothesis. And in it, look at it already. Yeah, in it, it suggests basically that what women are trying to do is find fathers that are going to give them attractive sons because attractive sons are more likely to have kids. Right. I think that what you see here is maybe an inbuilt biological mechanism that women have, which is a predisposition to make their sons attractive to future women. And they have deep down and understanding that the more prestigious and domineering

men on average have better mating outcomes, they're more likely like remember what we are. We are grand children optimizing machines. That's what humans are. We're not children optimizing machines. We are grand children optimizing machines and once you get two generations away from you, away you go crack on. But I think that that could potentially be a big part of it. I loved your breakdown when we were talking about that conception of left and right and how people see it. One side is a mindless cacophony of anti-male bigotry, minimization and derasia, the other and equally antiquated and equally restrictive worldview of alpha males and pick-up artistry.

So good. Do I say that? Oh yeah, you did, mate. You weren't smith that very well. Yeah, yeah, well, I say a lot of stuff, and I don't know. Fan of your own work. But yeah, I think, so one of the things that you're trying to do is improve this conversation and improve the way that it's communicated, given the fact that you're trying to display

these ideas, what have you learned about the way that it is effective and ineffective, what is missing from the communication side of the conversation when it comes to this topic? I just think that really people just want to live in denial a lot of the time. People don't want to believe, there's not how much information you present to them or how compelling an argument you make. Some of the studies I've presented in domestic violence especially, we're talking about a meta-analysis of 200 surveys taken across 30 years collected by probably the greatest expert ever on domestic violence.

The man who founded the field of family violence research did a study and he found that it's not gendered issue. Men and women abuse each other at more or less equal rates. Professor Murray Strauss, the late-mortem ratio. He's like, I don't know if he literally invented the instruments we now use to study domestic violence. And he's saying that. So if I'm given that data, and I still can't change someone's mind, I really don't know what hope there is.

But I have learned, I've learned, I still find the issues extremely interesting, but more and more, I'm finding it even more interesting how reluctant people are to listen to what I'm saying, like especially when it's so compelling, not only not listen, but not even want to discuss, and any discussion of it makes you a misogynist or an in-sale or some sort of virgin, I don't quite know. I've learned that the way I described it was

minds aren't changed through like cells of a spreadsheet, this change with the cells of a human heart, which by that I mean that it doesn't matter how many pie charts I flick around or how many spreadsheets or diagrams, it's very, to humanizing a way of talking about very important issues, because one single story from one single person

is way more powerful than any pie chart. I mean, I don't want to go into the habit of quoting Stalin, but he said, one deaf is a tragedy, a million is a statistic, and I've really learnt the power of personal anecdotes. And that's something we can all learn from feminism, where they're saying the personal of information, like I like to see some data, I like to see some personal quotes and stories, maybe some expert testimony. I try to mix them around in different ways, present them in different sort of perspectives and strategies. Sometimes I take the same issue, remix it, and other, honestly, overall, it's been very difficult, it's been kind of frustrating, but at the same time, it hasn't added benefit,

because so many people are not willing to talk about these issues. It's excellent for me as a content creator, because there's so many topics that I can talk about. The no one else wants to talk about. It's like, I described it once as like, eating from the garden, forbidden fruit. Where no one wants to talk about these issues. And I'm there gobbling all up.

I'm like, yeah, this is great. No one's talking about this. No one's talking about this. No one's talking about that. This is a great perspective at Noan. And like, I know doubt by chicken to come home to Ruse eventually. Yeah. I feel it's a combination of many different things. I do feel that it's a brand identity crisis within men and boys, but I also feel there

is a reluctance to actually give a shit from people. Like people always talk about why I don't talk, why I don't make crying. It's all maybe because no one cares. Maybe that's why. Maybe we simply don't care. There is a division of in-space about whether that's a biological thing or an environmental thing.

Normally, most things it's both. But I do feel like we seem to care more. An empathy cap is male gender blindness. I think John Barry talks about on your body. Gamma bias. Gamma bias. Yeah, John Barry, two for two today. I've got you. Yeah, sometimes you read stuff and you're just like, that is so true. Like we do, we do like a raise male to gamma bias is how we highlight and minimize gender depending on what we're talking about. So we highlight male privileges. In the area of privilege, we highlight the male sex, and in the area of victimisation,

we highlight the female sex. And by that, I mean, like, if you look at newspapers, any of your visitors want to go away and just to homework, look at how the news reports social issues. If there's like a hundred people killed and two of them are women, you'll be like 98 passengers killed, including two women. And what we're doing is we're highlighting women when they're impacted and we're erasing men when they're when they are impacted. Like another example I can give you is in London where I currently live last year, we had the worst year in history of knife crime in terms of

the amount of teenagers killed. I mentioned earlier how we talked about gay people historically and we don't talk about gay men, same for this. We used to wear teenagers. Never teenagers stopped to their 30, 35 teenagers. And then I looked at the data, which no one's going to do, apart from some nerd like me, every single one is a boy, not 90%, not 95%, everyone, all of them. Every single one is a boy a boy or young man mostly inner city black boys and Who were reporting them the new state was as teenagers or children or like 15 year old like and I was just like you should be saying boys If it was just women if it was just women that would be headline news and what I know another more recent example was that

There's another investigation the shocking results came out from a study into the metropolitan police And it found that they were strip searching children as young as eight. So if you again, you google it, children as young as eight strip search by police, that will be your headline you find again and again and again and then it is me digging into their data and I found that 95% of those children were boys, black again, black boys and sometimes race was brought into the title. Sometimes it's like black children, but never 95% boys. And it's just like, we wouldn't put up with that

if it was the other way around. It was 95% girls, people would lose my mind, including who's their mind, including myself. Like, we wouldn't put up with that. But when it happens to men and boys, we erase it. Another place we highlight gender is in perpetration. So obviously you have like, good man, henchman, and knife man,

con man, and it's like again, oh man, man, man, man, man. I know that like a, we look at like 9-11 for example, we very much highlight the fact that all of the terrorists were men, all of them. But no one highlighted the fact that every single firefighter, I want to every single one I mean 100% of the firefighters killed running into his buildings were men I think it was like 340 something firefighters killed and I might fire men like I get it I'm all for firefighters but when it is all fire men please say fire men like and that's I feel like Please say fire men, and I feel like when we erase men for most situations, the heroism of men, bravery and sacrifice of men, we also erase our ability to construct the very role

models we talked about. Because we're not seeing 300 men sadly lose their lives dragging innocent Americans out of buildings. That is something that is tragic and it upsets me that male-ness masculinity is often defined by sacrifice in the loss of life. But that is something that we should all be proud of and that's something that men can look to be like wow those men gave their lives for others and they are heroes from now until forever. And like I guess that feeds into what you said about where are the male role models and the answer is we'd say raise

masculinity, we highlight the bad bit, we are raised a good bit. And I'll give you one final example is that the year after George Floyd's killed, I was a really, really shocking murder of a young woman called Sarah Everard and London. And it was awful by Wayne Cousins who was just human filth. And again, the headlines were the same male violence, male violence, male violence, which is fine. same male violence, male violence, male violence, which

is fine. We'll talk about male violence. But the following week, a young man dived into the Thames to save women. He didn't even know, and he died. He lost his life saving a woman. And there were no headlines about male heroism, male sacrifice, male bravery, and we just stuck again, highlighting the bad, minimising the good, creating a very warped, one-sided perspective of men and masculinity that really does hurt everyone, including boys, because they're growing up in society that doesn't show the good of men and only shows the bad, and that's what leaves people back to and you take, who I don't appreciate, and I feel I don't like him for my own personal reasons, because I think he brings a very bad brand to the sort of area I talk about and he's a poor role model

but he's a result of the left's failure in my opinion. He's a reflection of our inability to talk about boys and men in good faith in a way that isn't toxic there, some patriarchy that in all of the other nonsense. We're not giving boys the space to talk in good faith or men and they're going to other people it makes sense and if we don't fix it It won't be undertaken be someone else to be someone worse potentially and he is our failure and our master cleaner and I just wish more people would see that Well think about this way man Being your political leaning is very highly heritable right right? Whether you're from the left or from the right,

it is very, very highly influenced by your genetics, which means that there are going to continue to be people from the left and there are going to continue to be people from the right. And some people can move between two, but there are a large cohort of people who were born to be on the left and born to be on the right. Is there maybe a little bit of a gender skew one way or the other? There might be, there might be a few more, a small percent more women on the left or maybe women on the right. I don't know. My point being both cohorts have massive, massive numbers, billions of men and women inside of both of them. And if one side decides that they're going to abandon the conversation, they are seeding ground to a side that they don't agree with.

And here's the other thing. People are more politically racist than they are racially racist. People, parents of children, a huge proportion, nearly 50% of Democrats fear their child marrying a Republican. They fear their child marrying a Republican. I hate that. I hate that. Way more people than fear their child marrying a Chinese man, marrying like an African lady or something. Like, do you know what I mean mean? Like way more, there is much more bias against the other political party than there is against

pretty much anything else. So given the fact that we have this, if you are from the left, if you refuse to have this conversation with boys and men, what you're doing is condemning all of the boys and men that are from the left to not be able to hear any positive role models, which is why the right dominates masculinity, not just the conversations boys and men, but masculinity as well, because let's say that people from one side are necessarily always prepared to hear the ideas from the other.

If one side isn't speaking to them and you can't cross the streams to be able to understand what the other side says, you basically have maybe 50% of all men unable to hear what another side is talking to them about because they don't have anyone from their own political party that wants to engage. Yeah, I mean, the left and all, it's talk of diversity, never seems to want to talk about diversity of ideas, points of view perspective, it's certainly sort of things like, I'd say things like arbitrary, which is like race and gender, which story don't mean that much, but diversity of opinion is what I'm interested in. I mean, I've seen what you talked about, the unwillingness to sort of date or be romantically

involved with those of other political opinions. I know when I was dating, in my dating profile, it was like, I'm a labor member, but if you're a Tory, I've still gone a date with you. I'm not a baby. I'm not a baby. Yeah, yeah, and I've got so many people without just calling me like, they know all sorts of stuff. And I'm just like, it's not gonna work out.

It's not gonna work out for us. And yeah, I mean, we all know it. We're sort of engaging very much in like a very tribal sports team style. Let's defeat the other side at any cost sort of politics where I mean, I support Leicester City Football Club and they've just been relegated. I will support them for the rest of my life no matter how badly they do. That's how sports team works, but we're doing that in politics now where it doesn't matter how much we fuck up, we will still support the left or the right and we don't look at

it the same amount of balance. It is interesting as well how you talk about voting. I always find it interesting how women have outvoted men in America every year for about 40 years. So every year women vote way more than men. And if you look at power, we always talk about power dynamics and people will talk about whoever is in office has power, which is true. But there was also power held by those who put that person in office. And ultimately, women can choose who goes into office because they outnumber men every single year, every single sort of election. And I wish more men would vote.

I don't think it's anything wrong. Like every right text size, they're democratic vote. But it's interesting. I would talk about women as sort of a powerless people when in fact they are the biggest voting block in America. And that's why so many policies are for them. That's why you have to buy an agenda of women, Obama's sort of review of women's issues and we have the White House Commission of Women and Girls which don't exist for men and boys. There's a dozen or so 15 I think states and a half commissions for

women and girls set up by politicians Non for boys. There's four offices of Women's health in America non for boys and men. There's like a national coalition for women and girls education doesn't exist for men But even like the Bureau of Labor as a women's women's bureau not for men and it's that If you consider the fact that thousands and thousands of men die at work every single year in America more men die at work in America every year than all of the American military deaths in the entire Iraq war for 20 years so all the deaths in the Iraq war in America that's how many men die every year at work massive issue no men's bureau in the bureau of labor. And I'm like, come on,

like going back to men's, there's no office for men's health for women. And I'm all supportive of that. I'm not saying that's closed the women's ones down. I'm just saying, let's make some for men. Like if you look at the 10 top causes of death in America, nine of them are dominated by men, nine, men lead nine of the top 10 causes of death, no office for men's health. And not only that, but like men are more likely to, men and boys are more likely to die at every age group, at every age group from neonatal to old age, more likely to die and not just America either, but across the world, in every country, men and shorter lives on average. And nothing is certain done. There is no, I don't understand the structure

of male advantage. Why does it have so few commissions, committees, departments, offices that actually solve these problems? So I guess that's a criticism of the patriarchy theory for you. What do people get wrong about the gender pay gap? I know this is something that you've looked at quite a lot. Yeah, yeah, I mean, it's so much to say. I mean, I guess first of all, I'd say it's not a gap between men and women. It's a gap between mothers and fathers. And there's some really excellent, I mean, I love graphics. There's a really great graphic of like different countries. And you see men and women's salaries going up by this together

over time. And then women comes down and men's carries and going. And it's like, well, what happened there? It was all going so well. It was all going so well. And then suddenly boo, and it's like, child, they had a child, and the women have taken time off work to have a child. They get longer returns to the midterms of the even UK. And if they do go back to work, they go back part-time, if at all. So I'd say it's better seen as a child penalty paid by mothers,

and the solution to that penalty is probably something to do equal paid parental leave for fathers. So if we can give fathers equal leave to mothers, mothers will be able to return to work sooner and then return to their sort of career journey and the payout will be closed through more parental leave for dads. And that's a really good example of like,

a approach I like to take where we look at men's and women's issues as symbiotically links the problem of one is the problem of another and like any equation you've got to look at both sides so I'd say one side the problem is to pick up the other side is parental leave for fathers and you've got to solve them both. I mean there's also a lot of evidence where men work longer hours, men travel further, and then more dangerous jobs and working industries where I'm more high paying, which is true. But then I guess you've got to deal with the discussion

of like, well, why are men choosing these jobs? Why are women not working in engineering? Why are women not working in STEM? And there's so much to say about that. But it really comes down to the individual differences of men and women in general. Like, do we have different interests? Do we have different behaviors? And if so, are they shaped by a biology? Are they shaped by our environment? Is it both? And I mean, it's both. It's surely both. So I guess the answer to what you're saying

is that men make different decisions, men behave differently, they go for different jobs, they don't take equal parental leave, they, there's different people in general and a lot of that has an impact on salary. There's a really good, the biggest study ever on the pay gap, I think was done by Harvard and you basically looked at Uber drivers in America. So the big reason was the biggest because they had so much data, Uber obviously has so much data and men and women both drive Uber's in America. So the big reason was the biggest because they had so much data, Uber obviously has so much data and men and women both drive Uber in America. And they looked at the paying and they were like, well, women are getting paid lesser Uber. So how does that make sense? Because it's obviously all automated.

So they're like, what a great way of studying male or female behavior to work out what is in the scap and there's three things in the gap. The first was, men drove at different times a night. So men would do the graveyard shifts, the early mornings, when he'd get paid more. They would want to do that. Women less so. The second was that men were more likely to stick with the platform for longer.

So they had more experiences, and they benefited from experience, makes sense of any job. And the third reason, which is 50% of the gap, was that men just drive faster. Which is... So it says drive a little faster guys, and you'll close that gap for the second time.

Ah! Yeah, I mean, I guess it's, I mean, yeah. That's super. That shows it's not, it wasn't discrimination that's causing the pay gap in Uber, it was just different types of behavior. Heavy right foot. Different types of behavior. And I guess we can have a discussion of what shapes that behavior, but we need to start that conversation with it.

It's not discrimination, at least in Uber, different types of behavior. And if you factor in, you know, with men and women, same job, same experience, same level, same hours worked, the pay gaps like 99 cents to the dollar. And in fact, Asian men are paid even more than white men. And Asian women. And it's like, well, Asian privilege, baby. Yeah, it's like what we're about. Asian privilege. I really, I love learning about this from some of your infographics. And what I love is the conception of the difference is between asking why are women paid less and when are women paid less. That's the conception, right? It's not about a reason it's about a time and the time is motherhood, the time is becoming a mother. And here's the thing, man, you know,

you've seen this in the Scandinavian countries, this was sort of Peterson's big break, whatever, five or six years ago, when he was talking about, as you make countries more egalitarian, you see gender differences between the sexes increase, not shrink, because you open up the ability for your biological predisposition, which isn't predetermined, but it is a predisposition, for you to be able to go and do the things that you want to do. Now, the interesting thing is I wonder if you were to say a mother and a father, how much is leaving the UK is like nine months usually right for a month?

It's 12 months, but it's sort of split in government and the work. Okay, so let's say that you increased it, and let's say that there was 18 months, and that had to be split between the father and the mother. So you have 18 months, and that's the household, and you can choose to split this however you want. Something tells me that would be making the system more egalitarian, right? The decision is now completely in the hands of the family.

Something tells me that there is a lot of mothers that would just go, looks like I'm getting 17 months and one week of leave, like crack on honey. Because it completely fails to account for the fact that women who are mothers, a lot of the time love being mothers. For the most part, the reason that they chose to become mothers. That's too loud. Yeah, presuming that, presuming that women actually enjoy the experience of becoming a mother, which for lots and lots of my female friends who are writers, who work in offices, who are high-powered, lean-in, career-style boss-based women, it's been the

single most transformative thing that they've done. It's absolutely adorate, and if I was to tell them that they had to get themselves back to work earlier, they would feel like they've lost. Well, part of the life. I'd say that I'd say the ideal choice for both fathers and mothers is part-time parenting, part-time work. That's what the data says, both parents want. Women want it more. I've looked, there's been some interesting studies where, I think it's the New York Times, they asked parents what they wanted.

Do you want like part-time work, full-time work, full-time parenting. And then I found some interesting Bureau of Labor Statistics data on what actually happens, like what is the reality. And it was like the biggest difference between what a parent wants and what they get was a full-time dad's. So that the vast majority of dads are working full-time. But a lot of them want to be sort of part-time parents whereas if you look at the data for like full-time parenting, full-time motherhood, that was actually the closest, that was where the what mothers wanted and what mothers got married at the most. So you got like working dads over here, lots of them work full-time but lots of them wanted to be parents as well. So I'm like, I don't know why we don't see workers

not to choice either. Like everyone talks about a mother, isn't it, choice, and it isn't. But then dads don't get that choice either. Like they have to go to work. They can't be like, I'm not going to go to work today because they do. That's how it works. And I don't know if we talk about the sacrifices

fathers make in that way. We do talk about mothers not enough and we can talk about them more. But I mean, my dad, he was a career father and he was very successful. He spent his whole life traveling the world, going to conferences, speaking at large events, like really smart guy. But we never saw him. He was out earning money and my mum took a time off of her career to raise my sister and I and as a result

she's built a massive network of friends like all her girlfriends were on a village or she imagined she met them when she was going to like play school and going to play going to pick us up. My dad has none of that now they're very retired and he I guess he's not got that same network of friends like my mother my mum has and I'm, the price of his sacrifice is being paid now. But the price of my mum's sacrifice was paid at the time. Now she's enjoying, she's enjoying retirement. She's got all her friends, she's got a family, she's got a great connection with me and my sister,

because you spent so much time with her. And I'm like, I don't know if my dad has that same benefit, because he spent his life working, working for us. And he didn't have a choice. You didn't know, if you met my mum, he would not, he had to go to work. And I think we should see the benefit of both and we should uplift women to become mothers if they want to. We should give a woman CEO as much value in respect as a mother, like both are just as

respectful and just as valuable. And it's like when we talk about a lot of the left, they talk about how empowering women to do whatever they want, women's autonomy. But then it's like, the autonomy ends when it's her decision to do something they don't like, like be a mother, like what if a mum wants to be full-time mum?

And it's like, well, now she's internally oppressed. She's been conned by the patriarch who's being a domestic housewife. She's a proponent of the patriarch, of course. She's brainwashed. She has to be brainwashed. Any woman has a different opinion to me. It has to be brainwashed.

And it's like again, if a darker sense, like abusive women, that's a decision women make too. But we ignore that. We don't accept that level of autonomy. When a woman chooses autonomy to be abusive or violent, we have a really hard time seeing that and accepting that. A woman who wants to become a CEO, excellent, we love it. A woman who wants to be an abuser, less so. And I know, I mean, I'll quote Margaret outward to you, but she talked about

my fundamental position as that women are human beings capable of both saintly and evil doings. And I think that's true. They're not perfect. They're just as flawed as men are. They're no better, not all worse. And we need to sort of see them in the full sort of color of their beauty. And good or bad, that's what autonomy is. And I don't know if we extend that autonomy to that breadth. In motherhood or anywhere else. And that is a real tangent. What have you learned talking about women and how they communicate and interact with men? What have you learned about what men want from the women that are in their lives, the kinds

of conversations that they wish that they could have other things? I know you ask your audience a lot for feedback. And you know, you get these stories from men talking about what they wish that women would know about them, what they wish that women would understand. You know, what is it that you think men want women to know more about them, whether it be in terms of relationships, sexuality, mindset, mental health, career goals, lifestyle goals and all of that. I felt that for women to understand what the med experience is when you're walking around lockdown, writing the myths of the coronavirus was how I feel like is to be a man where people are afraid of you, people avoid you, people cross the road,

like you go to a supermarket and someone steps back, that feeling of unease and unfriendliness and fear. Even like the fact that your emotions are masked. I feel like it's such an interesting reflection of the male experience, that feeling of unease and fear. Same as just like it's frustrating how the male and female experience exists in the opposite ends of the spectrum in a sense that men have so few things nice said about them. Like the vast majority of normal men never receive a compliment and go weeks, months, years, about anything kind of being said about them. But women have compliments, shouted at them from car windows, like in the street, like this cat called, and it's like, ah, like men walk through society, just completely ignored a lot of the time, just ignored doesn't matter. And there's benefits

to that and disadvantages. But women have like a spotlight society burning down on a shoulder It's all time, especially if you're on a track to young women and I'm like Whatever the differences are is not for me to say, but surely the answer is just through talking about them Not identifying men as toxic of violence or patriarchal, but actually just listening to what men are like I we talked about men manboxes talked about how we're lifting men out of the boxes of career provider status, which I think can be harmful boxes to be in. We're taking them out of this boxes, but we're just putting them into another set of boxes, like male privilege, male violence, patriarchy, male freedom. These are just more boxes.

I don't want to go in a box, we just want to be given the chance to live our lives and any answers through listening basically. Yeah, talk to me about fragile masculinity. I've seen you bring this up a couple of times. It's a really interesting conception when you think about that. I remember that you you use this example on one of your posts about the research. Yeah, girl products and like Ellen DeGeneres, like snide in comment, took the piss out of Bic, making her for her pet. So yeah, explain fragile masculinity and how that's interesting and through the lens of ruthless capitalism.

Well, I lifted that idea from a music blog. I wrote, I read from a Trans Transwoman and she was talking about, because obviously she's experienced both sides of the gender divide. And she was saying how it's amazing, how when we see pink razors or BIC for her who marketed at women, we laugh at BIC. We laugh at the Razor company. We're like, how stupid is that? I can't believe you're trying to define women by being pink. And I laugh too. But when a nuts for men comes out, or crisps for men, or chocolate bar, big chocolate bar, we don't

do the same, we blame men, we're like, oh, look at these fragile men wanting to buy their blue Razor, or their blue, oh, so fragile. And it's like a real difference in a way we approach the two things. We blame the products when they're gendered to women, but we blame the man when they're gendered to men. And I guess that's fragile masculinity. And it's basically the same thing, which treated in two different ways. And I hope people open their eyes a bit more to that.

What's the story of Nora Vincent? No, Nora Vincent was a gay woman and a journalist who really had a story. She fought her book, I think the book's called Inside Man. She basically lived as a man for I think 18 months just to sort of understand what the male experience is like and she didn't enjoy it. She had to stop early and she early and check herself into psychiatric care. Then actually, earlier this year, she ended her life, sorry, last year, ended her life by suicide as a mental health. I mean, a lot of people are politicising her death as a way of being like, oh, look, God, it's a be a man. And the reason why she

decided end her life wasn't directly because of the whole man thing, but she just developed a really strong sense of gender dysphoria as a result, as living as the opposite gender, wasn't necessarily because it was a man. So I want to make that caveat, but she came back from her experiment and she was like, as a woman, don't know what it's like to be a man. We don't know. That's the basis I try to start out when I'm trying to understand women's issues, women's experiences. I don't know what it's like to be a woman, I have no idea it's like to be a woman. Like sometimes I'm near by attractive women and I see how they're treated in my society and it's horrible, but I don't think women understand my experience any better

than I understand theirs. And whatever the answer is, like I said earlier, the solution has to come from listening in good faith. Like, I have learned to take a seat and listen to what women go through when it comes to reproductive rights. And I think it's important that I do, but so too, it is a seat next to me. And women should sit in that when it's time to talk about things like male suicide, men's mental health. Like, there's a seat for everybody and a time to listen and too often like male suicide especially is so often gay kips by people that aren't even men and it's like there's a time to listen. How's it getting held in gay kept?

Well as far as we've got like the whole concept of like suicide is caused by toxic masculinity which is a popular feminist concept that originally came from the myoproetic lens movement, but it's obviously been adopted by feminism. And that's used as a lens, a walked and ineffective lens, in my opinion, to understand male suicide again, to blame the blame men on being so toxic. If men would talk more, and surely the male suicide rates would come down but the problem is there's been studies on that, there's been studies on that too and it was once study last year, University of Manchester, it looked at men who had completed suicide and of all the

middle-aged men who had died by suicide, 91% of them had sought help, so 91% had actually been and sought counter therapy or some sort of healthcare provider and I think 30% of them had sort of help. So 91% had actually been sought counter therapy or some sort of healthcare provider. And I think 30% of them had sort of helped the week before their suicide. So it's like, well, you're telling men to talk but 9 to 1% of men who died by suicide did talk and they still died. And even more shocking is that of those men who died by suicide who had been sort of seen by a clinician, 80% of them were deemed low-risk or no-risk. So of these people, of these men that died by suicide, 80% were seen as no-risk or low-risk.

So it's, I think it's more likely that we're simply this misreading male distress because a lot of a lot of our psychiatric interventions and the psychological industry in general is often based around women's needs and women's behavior Because it's an industry dominated by women, makes total sense. Like a look at industries that are dominated by men and we rightly identify the ways in which it creates spaces for men, like environments for men, like ideas and strategies for men. But we don't look at that as psychological industry, which is dominated by women. It's like 85% of clinical psychologists are women and naturally not saying it's intentionally done, but naturally that will create ideas and approaches that are perhaps more beneficial to women than they are to men. And maybe that will help us better understand

why suicide interventions just don't seem to be working on men as well as they do for women. It's certainly worth discussing at the very least. Does that Richard Reeves bit where he says four times more female fighter pilots are in the US Air Force by percentage than male kindergarten teachers in the United States? Which just blows my mind every time I think about that. Yeah, yeah. And you know, when you use, when words like toxic masculinity are used, and this is another Richard Reeves thing, it's the same concept as original sin. It's like there is something inside of you which is inherently wrong.

It is a part of your makeup and it must be expunged. We must come in and we must do the exorcism. You must prostrate yourself upon the altar of gender ideology to be able to fix this problem. And the main thing that it does, like regardless of whether you think that there are toxic elements of masculinity or not, what it does is it causes men and boys to check out of the conversation. If I am told that there is something inherently built

inside of me, which is wrong and reprehensible and it must be cleansed, it must be sanitized and sterilized out of me, which is wrong and reprehensible and it must be cleansed, it must be sanitized and sterilized out of me. Guess what? I'm not fucking listening. I'm not going to listen to what you've got to say to me because you evidently have such a transparent, veneer-thin level of care for any experience that I go through from hearing anything that I've got to say. We're not existing on the same plane. No, yeah, no. The parallels between like patriarchy theory and original sin are very interesting to explore. And it just lacks, it doesn't have the same depth that I think is required

to understand very complicated issues, very complicated issues. You look at domestic violence, which is often seen as men's, men enacting patriarchal control over women. Although power and control is certainly a factor, it's only one of about three dozen factors, many of which are more important than power and control. And by just seeing domestic violence through patriarchy theory, we're actually losing a huge part of the picture. Another example, University of Cambridge, University of Cambridge study looked at violent fantasies and men, so men who fantasize about being violent, often that man is called toxic, that's a toxic man. But then they looked at his experiences and adolescence and they found that about 97% of the most bullied

boys in school went on to have violent fantasies later in life. So a huge percentage, 97% of the most bullied boys, violent fantasies in adulthood. And the academics working at paper, they hypothesized that fantasies of violence are coping mechanism developed by boys to deal with violence to come. So these boys are being bullied so much that they develop this coping mechanism of fantasizing about violence that they never got rid of

and they carried into adulthood and they became a man who fantasized about violence. So I guess I would encourage people to not see the man who is fantasizing about violence and instead see the bully boy behind him. And certainly you can start to get a bit more compassion for that man. And you don't even necessarily need to have compassion, you just need to understand that we can talk about these things about justifying it, but we do need to understand that some of these issues

are more complex than just simple one word catchphrase and hashtags. And the fact that we use paid chocky theory, not just to understand domestic violence, we use it to understand it, it loads it if an issue such as the pay gap as you mentioned. And it's not good enough. I always think of it as like trying to explain complex societal issues, who have the same one word answer, is like trying to fix a really meticulous watch of a sledgehammer. It doesn't work. It's not fine enough. It's just you just make an amiss. And like we now have access to really interesting complex economic psychological anthropological tools that can help us understand the pay gap, for example. And we should start

using them rather than falling back on these antiquated, progressive, very divisive, and extraordinarily vague words that are just not good enough anymore. We'd need to have a real academic evidence-based conversation around its different issues that isn't so dramatic. It's so dramatic, it's spooky. It's scary these words, like the patriarchy, the emanace fear, toxic masculinity, it's like, it's borderline on fairy tale sort of language, and it's like, I think we can do better. And I hope I've proven a little bit of how we can do better through my page.

I absolutely love the way that you speak. I think that it's incredibly eloquent. I think it's very, very balanced. And the main thing that I want people to take away from today, you know, if you're a woman and you've been listening to this, it probably is a bit uncomfortable because it's hard to hear a struggles. The modern framing of almost any conversation about one group and another is that if you are talking about the struggles of one, it is implied that the other is somehow to blame. At no point during this conversation, have we said, women, they're the problem, it's them, these bitches. At no point, as we said this, I'm about what I would really love is for more of this conversation. This is exactly the conversation.

I talked previously, you may have heard me talk about a third wave Manusphere. You heard me talk about this? No, okay, so first with hey, this is the Ah, really Shakudemia coming up. Can't wait to know it's not this is this is cutting edge bro signs So first wave you understand there was different waves of feminism. They were fighting for different things Good first, first wave of Manusphere was picker artists, it was mystery and Neil Strauss, it was the game, it was negging, it was day game and pulling and stuff like that. Me too comes along, that could no longer survive.

There needed to be a sanitized version of sort of men's mostly dating, but kind of also started to creep into masculinity advice. That rose up for the second wave, which was red pill, it was alphas and beaters and cooks and soy boys, it was andru-tate, it was fresh and fit. It was like that world, right? Yeah. Now, my belief is that we have the opportunity

to do a third wave manasphere. And the third wave manasphere would be, not seeing women as the enemy, it would be not adversarial, it would not be antagonistic to the other sex, it would be trying to integrate the positive elements of masculinity, allowing men to be masculine, but to transcend and include their emotions that are difficult to be able to talk about them, but not just talk about them in a surface level to be able to act off the back of them. And that, for me, is what I'm most excited about at the moment. I'm really, really excited about the conception of a third wave manuscript or call it what you want, holistic masculinity,

integrated manhood. Like, it doesn't matter about what we call it, right? Yeah. I'm talking about content creators like Hamza, who I think is a really good influence for young boys. He's telling that they need to train more. He's telling they need to look after themselves. They need to have a good

Society and support group around them people like David bus people like Richard Reeves people like yourself people like John Barry It's not from male psychology like all of these people are putting forward a positive non-adversarial positive some not zero some not negative some positive sum, not zero sum, not negative sum, positive sum relationship and way that men can show up in the world. And again, for the guys that are listening, there is a trend on the internet for men to start to point the finger and make these big fucking

sweeping generalizations about all women are and all men are. There are averages on average. Everybody that's listening to this is not part of the average. They're not part of the average. They're not part of the average because you're listening to one and a half hour conversation about the in depth nuances of what masculinity means in the modern world. You don't show up or expect average from yourself in pretty much anywhere else in life.

So why start throwing these massive broad stroke generalizations around that accuse another group of being the ones that are in the wrong? I don't think that I think that we can do better. I'm positive that we can do better when it comes to this conversation. And I'm very, very glad that you, George, Attenman are a part of this. You are an un-as-yet, unalied but soon future member of the Third Wave Manusphere. Well, I'm happy to be a member. maybe we can consult about some sort of renaming. Yeah, it's the brand new problem again. Yeah, yeah, well that's my job.

Like I I love this, what you said, excellent. I am fully on board about. I think we need to identify both the good and bad at masculinity. I mean, one of the, like you said, like one of the things I hate is generalizations. I often point out in the comments, a lot of people make a broad stroke for generalizations about feminists in my comments and I'm just like, listen, if you're asking women not to make generalizations

about men and what right do you have to make generalizations about feminism? And yeah, I wish we would listen a little bit more. I wish we would see masculinity as something that can be good or bad I wish we'd saw it as something that is in a lot of ways immutable in the same way that sexuality is immutable We've come to terms the fact that someone at scale that is an immutable part of who they are that's how they were born And like why can't we look at masculinity and femininity the same way like sure you can change and bend your masculinity But that's just who you are and And there's nothing wrong with that.

Also, you need to just get over these dramatic world views. Really good book, he should read Chris, it's called Fact from The Spy, Hands Razzling, I don't know if you read it. I've heard of it a million times. It's so good. He talks about overlapping distribution and on average. Also, Richard Rees talks about it.

And he's just like, distributions overlap. And we're talking on average. When I say women are one way and men are the other way, it's not this, it's like this, like men and women are overlap. The distributions are overlap and we're talking in general terms about these different groups. It's not very sexy. It doesn't fit into a tweet, unfortunately, but if you're not willing to engage in these discussions in a more extensive manner, then perhaps you shouldn't be part of it at all. It's like, it's difficult. It requires listening, it requires nuance, it requires putting aside your personal differences and many ways possible, even like your own experiences

and trying to actually listen and like better understand. And I just think the fact for the thing is very interesting because it talks, hands-riding as like a world leading, was a world leading professor of global health and he talks about how we have an overly dramatic world view because we only see the very worst things. Like a million men and women go to work, eat a sandwich, come home, go to bed, boring.

But one of those people will get stabbed to death on the way. Certainly it's everywhere and we're looking at that and we're like, oh my God, it's so dangerous, so scary, knife crime, violence, da da da da da, but in reality it's actually not like that. If you look at global trends, things are getting better, things are getting safer, we live in the safest time in human history. He did a thing called the gap mind attest where he took, I think he took 12 answers, yeah,

12. 12 questions about like vaccines, education, poverty, disaster zones, things that people think they know a lot about. One of the questions was what percentage of the world is vaccinated. The answer is 80%. But no one got it right. You found that of the quiz, which is multiple choice. If you just guessed every single answer of 12, you would get four. four of, sorry, it's, no, 16. Basically, found that if you guessed you would do better than the people actually took the test because we have a systemically negative view of the world. You only see the world, it's very, very worst. And he said that if I took this quiz to the zoo and wrote the answers on bananas and threw the bananas into the cage. The monkeys would do better on

current affairs than human beings because the monkeys haven't been subjected to this preposterous dramatic worldview. I call, I came up with a meme for that. Two memes actually. One is self-reinforcing antagonism, which is where one group fills my line to the other group, it doesn't feel like they're listening. Therefore, I feel like I'm more aligned. Therefore, I doesn't feel like they're listening. Therefore, so the gap between the understanding of both sides, the failure of cross-sex mind reading, and the other which really relates to what you're talking about, although I only

spoke about it in the dating space, was recursive red pill learning. So recursive red pill learning talks about how chat GPT is now being trained on chat GPT data. So presuming that there is an error rate within the data, it is creating an error rate on top of an error rate, and it's going to create this recursive problem. The issue you have with a lot of conversations on the internet generally, the most egregious stories are the ones that rise to the top because they're the most egregious. You know, if a guy leaves for work and comes back

and finds that his wife's cheated on him with like three men and now he's got a gluten intolerance and lives under a bridge and she took him for all that he's worth, quite rightly that's going to get 100,000 up for it's on Reddit because it's fundamental. But that because most people live most of their lives through the internet and because the stories that get the most attention are the most egregious stories. People who don't have any counter

Actuals who see these extreme examples believe that that's the way that the world is And then it gets propagated by other people who are part of that same content machine So that's the recursive red pill learning side of it. But it's the same for everything. You could have recursive feminist learning as well. But as soon as you retract yourself away from the world, as soon as you don't spend all that much time day to day in IRL around normal people, most of whom,

want to get up and go to work, have a family, get a nice dog, and just fucking watch Netflix and chill out and maybe go to the gym in the morning. That's most people, right? Yeah, I've, what you see on the internet is not real. It's not real guys, it's just the internet. Like I noticed that, one of the best things to do when you're stressed out on the internet, just go outside for like 20 minutes, like it's really not as exciting as dramatic.

It's actually kind of boring real life in the best possible way. But you're right in that in terms of what the way we perceive reality, we see people winning the lottery and quite literally, or people being killed. And there's very little in terms of narrative forming in between. No, no, no, no, no, no, someone that goes to work and does nothing comes home. It's like, what is sort of headline is that? Boring. And I mean, in men and boys advocacy, that's called Apex fantasy. So, and that's

what hurts men because we see all these rich men, Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, white men, especially it's, oh, look at rich they are. And they're the tiny little Apex at the top of the pyramid. But also, we forget the fact that the very bottom of the pyramid, if you look at homeless people, also disproportionately men, like men are over at the centre of the very bottom and the very top. And yet we only say ever seem to want to point a finger at the top, which is very enough. But again, it's a lot more nuanced than we like to pretend. And the world isn't as exciting as dramatic or scary as it seems. And I feel like we should go outside a little bit more and remind ourselves of that I think.

Touch some grass George, look dude, I think this one home, I love the work that you do, everybody should go and check out at the Tin Men on Instagram, where else should they go, do you do other stuff too? I think it's only one person, people keep being like, oh, do a TikTok, do a YouTube, do this, do that and I'm like, and one person, this is just keep being like, oh, do a TikTok, do a YouTube, do this, do that. And I'm like, and one person, this is just a part time thing. I've actually also got a job. So yes, it is just Instagram at the minute at the Tin Men.

I'm on Twitter, not that active, but I've put in all my effort into Instagram. I want to absolutely nail that. And really what it is, is my Instagram is more about research and development for what I hope one day will be a documentary. I want to sort of learn about how do I have, how do I navigate these very treacherous issues, issues, how do I walk this tight rope. That's phenomenally difficult. But the world of boys and men advocacy is often compared to literally the alt-right white supremacy and being in Nazi.

So that's the bedfellow I'm starting up with. I'm trying to find a way of having these discussions that hopefully progress to the conversation and eventually I can build into some sort of documentary. I want to work out what issues work, what sort of language is effective, what sort of creative strategy resonates most with an audience. Then I'm going to sort of try and adapt that into a documentary, but that's down the line. For now it's just at the 10, 9 Instagram. And you can find me there looking forward to a menu. See you in the comments.

There's lots of comments, lots of debate going on, like huge, long, big, paragraph of text. The best comment I ever got, maybe laugh, and I still think about it. Some guy was like, holy shit, every comments and essay. And I was just laughing so hard. I was like, thank you, that's such a compliment. Like normally on Instagram it's just like, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass,

yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, yass, If you say something, don't like me or want to call me out, I'll pin your comment and hopefully we'll have a good discussion. So I hope it's a rich and interesting space. And if you like it, can follow, if you don't like it, also can follow and we'll chat about it. So yeah.

I appreciate you. Thank you, George. Thank you. Thanks for having me on. Offends, get offends