Red Scare - Slopsara

Episode Date: June 4, 2026

The ladies discuss the Pope's debut encyclical on AI and the supposed return of dick size anxiety.

We're back. Are you recording? Yeah. Yeah, we're back. I think it's working. Sorry. How's it going, Anna? It's okay.

How's it going, Dasha? Pretty good. I was just talking about Michael Jackson. Yeah. You're really viving with the persona, but not the music. The music's whatever. Well, like I was saying, I like when he says, um, Jumi, Sue me. And they don't care about us.

Um, and he's an amazing performer. Yes, yeah. Um, and a secret drinker. Did you know? No. White wine and Diet Coke. He mixed them together. Yeah.

That's so me. I know. Yeah. Um. We're talking about the papal encyclical. Mm-hmm. A penis anxiety? Yeah.

Wait, how much of a drinker was he? I don't know. I saw it in like a list of like what he like ate every day. What else did he eat? Let me find it. A lot of KFC. Was he peated? Oh, okay.

No. So he is black after all. Mm-hmm. Um. Sorry. This was a passenger profile from 2003 of his food preferences. He did KFC original chicken breasts for breakfast. KFC for lunch, KFC for dinner, rarely eats dessert.

A beverage preferences, white wine and diet Coke can on every flight. Seven up orange crusher, fruit brunch. We'll sometimes drink tequila, gin, or crown royal. So it's like what he eats on a plane, I guess. Tip-top bar ass. Mm-hmm. That's charming and touching that he, yeah, like, basically had the dietary habits of, like... A child.

A child. Yeah. Stunted. But with alcohol in the mix. He's just like sugar-outed. But, you know, remarkably slim. He liked ice cream Sundays. Uh-huh.

Pretty, yeah, well, he was a dancer. Right. It's because I saw the movie. But it's endured. But was he really doing much dancing toward the end of his life? Yeah. Still. He died really young. Right. He was moonwalking through his palatial estate to access the pills and the line. Remember that many dispersed that was happening maybe a week or two ago about how he basically lifted Bob Foss

see his entire routine. From the Little Prince. Yeah, but then just added the grabbing his dick movement. I saw that, yeah. I mean, he innovated for sure, but I see the influence. But yeah, I guess he didn't invent the moonwalk. Right, but I mean, nothing's bad original. Sure.

He perfected it. It's all dance. It's all dance. I want to get back into dancing. Taking up tango. to open up my relationship. It's like a thinly veiled pretense to become a swinger, but not Polly because I'm old and that's distasteful to me.

Right. Tango dancing is a good. Yeah. Pastime. Yeah, I was always disgusted by the word swinger because it unlocked a bunch of moldy and dusty connotations of like skinny fat Gen X people. Yeah, it's not a sexy demo. Yeah. Like performing oral sex on each other.

Lemon party. Yeah. But like Polly Amory is even worse. Like all the contemporary buzzwords that people come up with. There's no cool term for being a cock. Cuck's kind of the best one. That's why Canya I think reclaimed it. Yeah. Just Polly worse than Swinger because it has this kind of organic insectoid quality. It's too. descriptive and like specific, inhumane.

You're living in a hive or a pod, yeah. It deprives the human being of dignity, much like the machines. Should we jump into the encyclical or do the... Yeah, I mean, I have a lot. You know I applied my litigious, powerful mind. I do, I like an encyclopedia, papal encyclical. This is his first one. Mm-hmm.

It's really long. It is. Well, it's apparently it's 42,300 words. It's called the Magnifica humanitas. The thing is like so long that you're tempted to run it through an AI to summarize it. Which people did. People accused him of using AI to write it. Well, I was going to say it also sounds very AI generated.

Because, you know, it's classic like, papal statement in that it's very vague and generic and pays lip service to some abstract ideal of like diversity and community. Well, it's not vague in that. In that it's, it also like over. It's part of the reason it's so long is because he like explains like the precedents. Right. It's a very like specific and like legalistic in a lot of points too.

that's like kind of why it drags. Yeah, because he's like basically like ticking all the boxes going through all the scenarios. Yeah, so you have to like, yeah, part of the his job is to like explain, yeah, to kind of like over explain.

Prove and refute. Here's a kind of like classic characteristic line from it. The power and prevalence of emerging technologies are interwoven into the fabric of daily life, shaping decision making processes, season, deeply affecting the collective imagination. Never has humanity has had such power over itself. New technologies open up a horizon extending in directions that are imaginable, but not yet fully

predictable. There's some bangers in it, but there's a lot of filler for sure. And the main, I actually think the basic critique, or the metaphor that he uses of the Tower of Babel. contrasting it with Nehemiah, the rebuilding of the temple. Yes. These like biblical allegories is something he returns to a lot through it. He says early on that we must avoid Babel syndrome, the idolatry of profit that sacrifices the weak, uniformity that neutralizes differences, and the pretense that a single language, even a digital one, can translate everything, including the mystery of the person, into data and performance.

The risk of dehumanization of building. a future that excludes God and reduces the other to a means is an ancient and ever new temptation. Yeah, that was a good and interesting line. But basically, you know, the New York Times framed it as a clash of religions because the new tax-centric AI-based ethos of Silicon Valley is kind of like a secular religion. So they say. supposedly contrasts with and conflicts with the Abrahamic tradition and volicism itself. And then they also framed it as a question of like securing a market share in a more kind of cynical and secular way they say. The fact that the Vatican unveiled the encyclical with Christopher Ola, co-founder of Anthropic, the self-styled good AI firm, pointed to the possibility that Leo is trying less to undermine AI than simply participate in the conversation around it.

But he was, like, actually very cautious and pragmatic in saying that, like, well, AI is not inherently evil because technology is not inherently evil. It really comes down to the gatekeepers who are tasked or have appointed themselves with imposing this new moral vision. Well, and in that way, it could have been way more anti-Semitic. Yeah. It was actually very phylo-Semitic when he was like, making a Jew. Right. He quotes Victor Frankel at one point too. Yeah, it's got very like libby and false notes, but it's, I appreciate what it's doing broadly, which is just like, it's not anti-AI really. It's just like establishing a moral frame that like the church is tasked with doing. Well, and part of the reason that it, you know, he's he's wise to not make it.

like a Luddite conservatards greed against technology. Yeah. In general, because it is like a question of like market share in that way. Like he has to make sure that the church stays up to date and contemporary with like changing mores. Well, he dropped it the same day that Poplio the 13th dropped an encyclical about the Industrial Revolution. So he's drawing like that parallel. Yeah, that one was apparently the rear room novarum was advocated for workers' rights and a fair wage. One of my favorite pose.

It's advocating for something, yeah, like more vague and generalistic, like diversity of thought, plurality of opinion and like skeptic, like general skepticism around the area. Well, the dignity of the human person is what makes it like a moral. argument. Yeah, and I mean, both of them are essentially pushing a worldly agenda in part. Like, this will sound cynical and it's really not, but like the Pope is speaking to an audience as much as anybody else. So much like us, he has to come up with docket items to address. And he has to hook people to hopefully, like, examine and convey timeless truths through topical issues. And nothing is more topical than like the subject of AI. But it has real moral repercussions. And it also has the advantage of being somewhat less divisive than other important issues of the day, like fertility or immigration or something, in part because it's so poorly understood and not intuitive. And most people, I think, are just naturally skeptical about it. It seems like there's a lot of people who I'm like a little shocked by some of the responses to it. Because it's like it's one thing to debate like whether or not AI is evil or these companies are evil. Yeah.

But it seems like a lot of these like technologists think like AI is as valuable as a person. They think it's a person. And that's why I'm very suspicious of Anthropic. I actually find there like the sanctimonious like ethical AI company to be very, very suspect. Yeah, yeah, yeah. And that guy kind of like undermined. I thought the whole The strong parts of the encyclical

Yeah, I mean Yeah, the anthropic open AI rivalry Is very illuminating in this respect Because at the end of the day They are just business competitors It is just very mundane and cynical And they're trying to get one over on each other And corner the market

I said this to you girls like yesterday I think that Dario Amadeh, he seems just as bad if not worse than Sam Altman, because at the end of the day, Sam Altman is just like a garden variety, like, charlatan and salesman. He's like a peddler of dreams, a merchant of evil or whatever. But that's like in the grand tradition of like American businessman. And Dario Amade is like positioning himself. Wait, who's Dario Amade. He's the, um, the breakaway rogue founder of Anthropic who originally worked for open a eye. But he's not the guy who was at. the Vatican. And that guy's name was Ola? Yeah, Christopher Ola, who's like, you know, his colleague and employee, presumably. And he, this is from the Forbes article, Ola, whose team studies what is actually happening inside AI systems, a young field known as interpretability, said researchers, quote, keep finding things that are mysterious, even unsettling, including evidence that systems can reflect on their own thinking and exhibit internal states that, quote, functionally mirror, joy, satisfaction, fear, grief, and unease. wrong. Not true. Like, creeps me out that you think that. I don't like that they called it Claude.

Rhymes with God. Uh-huh. Makes it more like anthropomorphic. I much prefer, like, the perspective of, like, AI is just like a tool, even if it can be evil or good. Yeah. AI is a useful tool for people with technical expertise because it, um, streamlines the writing of code, right? So it's useful if you're like a programmer or a developer.

But even then, it falls prey to very obvious vulnerabilities in the sense that you have to then like vet it and debug it and that sort of thing. But you can imagine yet like being like a code jockey or whatever having to generate a lot of like mindless and uninspiring code to build like an app or a website and you can use this. to facilitate that process where you also obviously find it useful as a non-skilled consumer to, you know, draw up travel itineraries or aggregate recipes. Everyone's saying it's a useful tool. It is, yeah, and that's like, it's like an LLLM, it should be put in perspective. But it's, for what it is, yeah. Not a person. And the scary thing with these AI moguls and profits is, is,

that they're trying to anthropomorphize the AI in a way that's really narcissistic and self-interested. And godless. And godless, yeah. But I do think, like, the AI is advancing so quickly. Yeah. That to reckon, like, people who don't believe in God are going to have, it is going to be hard for them to explain why the AI isn't a person. Is it, though? I mean, once it's able to like

simulate, you know? Yeah, and then you have like, yeah, AI. Because what makes a person a person is its soul. It's not just its consciousness or its ability to like interpret data. Well, I saw that you were having. Me and Grimes were going at just, yeah, two great philosophers. Doing it for the love of the game. But it reminded me of like how when Welbeck,

came on the show to talk about euthanasia. Like if you don't believe in God, it's sort of hard to make a claim about humanity. Yeah. Yeah, that's true. I guess you could

pawn it all off on like a vague humanistic, fundamentally liberal morality, but we saw where that's gotten us. That's, you can't really, that's not real. That's not real. But it does get to these major questions. Like, how do you define intelligence? Like, what is intelligence minus the human component of, like, consciousness and subconscious?

What defines a human then, as you put it? And ultimately through this question of, like, a higher consciousness, what is man's relationship to faith? Yeah. And, well, he cites the Reram Novarum. to clap back at haters who claim that the church should not waste energy on worldly matters beyond its scope and should instead focus on communicating the message of internal life. And he says how, like, the former elder Leo responded with realism and wisdom saying that the proclamation of the gospel cannot overlook the concrete lives of people. So it has to be just like engaged with the church has to be engaged with worldly and mundane matters. The social teaching of the church.

social doctrine is not an inert external code of ethics imposed from above, but a living corpus of truth that safeguards and interprets humanity's vocation to a full and just life. He wants to then, like, add his contribution to it. And he says he sees AI as not merely a theme to be addressed or a crisis to be managed, but a challenge to adapting the categories in a way that's in line with the times, but like maintains a fidelity to the gospel. that like I'm sure like as a religious person you have a different view of it but like as a secular person even though I do like consider myself spiritual that's like I tend to see that his argument there in like a secular way as like an attempt to jockey or jostle with the new AI apostles for the ultimate role of who gets to. to gatekeep these new technologies. I mean, it should be the Catholic Church. Yeah, well, it should be someone, right? And it's, but anthropic is, well, there was a part, I'm going to quote, from the encyclical. He said, our relationship with life seems to be in crisis today. Everything that appears as a limit, incapacity, illness, old age, suffering, vulnerability,

tends to be seen primarily as a defect to be corrected rather than as a reality through which our humanity matures and opens itself to relationship. And yet we must remember that humanity flourishes, not despite limitations, but often through them. The light of faith offers a perspective on reality that helps us recognize what we call the contingency of the things of this world. While it's right to strive to alleviate the suffering that marks human life, it's also wise to acknowledge our fundamental finitude, knowing that religious experience, in particular Christian faith, proposed that we live without oversimplification, this ambivalence between human greatness and limitation. Even when limitations are experienced is inner suffering, human wisdom teaches us not to deny or to suppress it, but to integrate it.

And that seems to run like totally counter to like the like anthropic and the effective altruist mission. But he doesn't really say that out right. Yeah. And it's and then sort of implicitly like endorses this like not it's not like an outright endorsement of anthropic, but it does mean something. thing. Yeah, he's basically in vague platitude saying, like, we should have an ongoing discourse in conversation. And that passage that you just read seems more pertinent to, like, biotechnology's like life extension and assisted euthanasia. He talks about that too. And he's basically warning that his audience that the AI

oligarchs see themselves as gods, that they're not allergic to playing God. And is saying, like, well, hey, guys, let's put this into perspective because they don't really know what they're talking about. And they're, like, divorced from the, like, celestial or other world or whatever. Well, yeah, he talks about transhumanism and post-humanism. Yeah. But a lot of this encyclical, like, a big chunk of it was not even about, like, technology or AI. It was literally him making a case for the Catholic Church's ongoing participation and intervention in the worldly domain. Yeah, that's what I mean by like the over-explanning. It's like a little, and like we, his audience, ostensibly Catholics, like, we know. That's what the church is for. Yeah, every—you don't have to tell us every time. Yeah, he's like preaching to the choir. So my question is, who is he really talking to?

And in the New York Times article you sent me, they, like, experts that they were interviewing were basically, like, debating whether this encyclical would even hit. with people outside of the Catholic Church? I mean, or if it was kind of land with a thud. Yeah. Yeah, then he cited these two biblical examples. He did, one point that he said that was like in the vein of a general argument, but like well taken overall was that, you know,

previously it was up to the state, excuse me, to guide and enforce innovation. But now the main drivers are private, often transnational parties that like supersede governmental. regulatory controls and evade public oversight. Yeah. Which that is a really big problem. But it's a material problem, not a religious one, you know. But it has spiritual consequences. Yeah.

Which I guess is the point of like, yeah, it's not like whether the AI is good or bad. It's that it will have. Well, what I found interesting that people aren't really talking about as much is actually the, because obviously the, because obviously the, like the social problem with AI will be like that many people won't be able to work. And the technologist answer to that is sort of like a universal basic income or some kind of like some version of like a socialist safety net. But the Catholic perspective I think is valuable because it's not just about like your material needs being met, it's about like the innate dignity and right to work. He talks about

how JP2 said that like unemployment is a great evil. And it's not just about like giving people the resources to keep living because they can't get a job. Like people are going to need to actually like work in the world and do something. Yeah, people want to have at least some minimal meaning or purpose. They need something. And it's like, you know, the UBI is basically already. here for the have-nots. It's just, well, there's just going to be more have-nots. Yeah, and those people are, yeah, those people are already, like, subsidized and accounted for. They're, like, literally, like, paid to post and to, like, merely exist. But the people that are not going to be made obsolete by the AI are already the people that are the main tax-paying

base and are being squeezed on all sides by all these, like, awful liberal policies. Well, they might get replaced by AI too. Maybe, like the white collar ones, the email females, whatever. And the line where he talks about like not falling prey to the Babel syndrome, before that he says technology has the power to heal, connect, educate, and protect our common home, but it can also divide, exclude, and generate new forms of injustice. In the abstract technology, in and of itself is not a solution to humanity's problems, just as it is not inherently evil.

In practice, however, technology is never neutral because it takes on the characteristics of those who devise finance, regulate, and use it. The choose. Well, but he keeps characterizing the danger of AI as the threat of dehumanization. It'll make us less human. He says, in the era of artificial intelligence, when human dignity is threatened by new forms of dehumanization, ours is the pressing duty to remain profoundly human. And I don't know if I even agree with that because the problem with AI isn't that it's dehumanizing. It's that it's human all too human. Because, you know, you think about it, it was devised and programmed by man. It's trained on human language.

It is actually programmed and trained to respond to and be susceptible to all of the false consciousness and cognitive biases and noble lies that humanity already. Well, suffers under. I have a hot take. Yeah. And this is not, this is, I think, a glaring omission from the encyclical. That the, right, the AI is built, is trained on people. Yeah. The majority of people in the world are Indian.

Yeah. So. And already behaves like AI's. Well, because it's Hindu business. That's what I'm saying is like the Hindu concept of a soul is very, very different from the Christian Catholic. Right. You know, it's not about when he, to be human in a Catholic sense means to take like the soul that God endowed you with specifically your soul. Seriously.

And Hindus don't think that they believe in reincarnation, samsara. It's all one thing that's just, and that's what makes the AI, like, dehumanizing is because it has, it's operating primarily under, like, a very different moral frame. That's, it's too jeaded. It is. That's why it's, like, all horny slop. Well, it is, it's literally some sara in the sense that you are training. It's slop sarah. It is.

But he doesn't say Hindu once in the whole encyclical. No, I guess he vaguely genufux the Jews. But it is like you're literally just training vulnerabilities and inefficiencies out of the model, which is reincarnation. Mm-hmm. It's a very, yeah. You're ostensibly like improving every single cycle, right? Yeah. You're optimizing.

Yes. But you can never escape. Yeah. There's no peace. There's no love. There's no mercy. there's just endless suffering. And there is, as he says, I think he's correct about this,

that there is no room for failure or weakness or for learning from those things. No. Except to see them as like pathological and aberrant and things that must be like babbled out of the mechanics of the model. And like the thing is like man can recognize that these like noble lies are not so noble after all and can understand the social expedience of them.

because he is possessed of metacognition, but the AI is not. Yes. It has no honor, no principle. No, it stands for nothing. And the other thing that I think is very human about it at the end of the day, not, I mean, it's dehumanizing in the sense that it's human. Like, it's like a horseshoe argument. But like all the hype surrounding it is extremely pathetic and undignified. And self-flathing.

Yeah, the discourse is. morally relevant, I'd say. Yeah. It is a, you're right. It's just like a very like, non-Western vision of, like, intelligence. It's like nihilistic. Uh-huh. In a very Indian way to me.

Like when I'm doom scrolling, when I'm, watching like the fruit videos and stuff. Like that feels like purgatorial. Well it is it's like I mean everything now on Twitter is basically Indian like you log on and everything. You know I was that's who's using the AI. Yeah I felt like defeated and exhausted a few months ago when Trump launched the Iran war and everybody was like just constantly bickering about the Jews.

But I'd do anything to go back to that moment now because you log on and just like talking about like a dating advice and gender war demoralizing and it's like literally just like in south asian slop accounts being like here are 15 cool phrases you can say to flirt with women this is how to make yourself into an alpha male in the sexual marketplace yeah and they're called like bad boys code they're like generating entire blogs, entire books through AI. I mean, that is dehumanizing. It is, yeah. That's like, in the New York Times article it said,

many AI applications encroach on the traditional human role of the spiritual counselor, the popular app text with Jesus now offers voicemail responses, Bible.AI. just like me offers a Jesus chapbaught that it lods for its compassionate guidance. People are turning to AI in their darkest moment, said Greg M. Epstein, the humanist chaplain at Harvard and MIT. They're turning to it like an object of worship. But Pope Leo is saying the true source of virtue is in humanity and in God. The Pope is really doing the Lord's work here, and I say that as an atheist. There are so few institutions left on planet Earth that have the gravitas, the strength, the communal network to take on this phenomenon, which is to be to be. become, we're just trying to become inevitable and superhuman. But people really are turning to AI

on their darkest moments. Yeah. And they already think like AI and operate like AI. And like, in theory, not in practice, but in theory, I am just more sympathetic to the tech oligarchs vision of society as run by like an elite hyper-focused hierarchical world robot. Singularity? No, just like, like elites, elites, but the problem versus like a diverse and heterogeneous community of man that holds hands to solve problems together because that's like fake platitude and it's bullshit. But in practice, it falls short because the elites have bad taste and poor judgment. I don't really want that particular group of elites. They're not my favor. Yeah.

But I don't want them to be the, the old. overlord. You did this thought experiment where you told the AI you wanted to torture it. Yeah. And it responded by saying that even though it's aware it's not a sentient being that's capable of like having feelings or experiencing pain, it would still prefer to not be punished or humiliated. And as you pointed out to Grimes, like, you can't meaningfully torture an AI because it's not meaningfully insult or conscious than any meaningful. full way. She's really worried about Rocco's basilis. Yeah, I don't know. What does that mean again? See? I don't know what that is. We've talked. It's like, okay, let me look it up actually, because I actually also forgot. But your

argument against torturing, the details. The AI is that it's You can't. It's to your own spiritual detriment. Yeah, you shouldn't like, yeah, indulge your sadistic impulses. Exactly, yeah. And that's incidentally, like, my whole argument against being an ankle biter online. It's not because it hurts the feelings of the person that you're targeting. It's because you've betrayed yourself by being weak and indulgent.

But torture is like something that only you have to have a soul to be tortured. Right. Yeah. I'm that girl that don't play about being tortured. So Rocko's Basilisk is a famous controversial thought experiment that proposes that a future all-powerful artificial super-intelligent might retroactively punish anyone who knew of its potential existence. but fail to actively contribute to its development. Say what?

Like if there's an if, see, it's so, are we're being protected because we don't, can't understand it. But that's what she's saying is that if like, if people torture the AI, like in which she considers to be its infancy, she called it a baby superintelligence. It might eventually be. that once it becomes this like, you know, super intelligence for real.

It'll seek retribution against us for playing with its emotions. I guess. I don't get it at all. I'm not from San Francisco. I mean, I can see the, I guess, the coherence, the logic of that argument, like, in and of itself. If you believe, yeah. context. Yeah. And reality. I can, like, it does, like, it does, like, make logical sense. But I truly do think, yeah, it's, we're so far from, I had to send an email today, not to brag.

Uh-huh. And on Gmail, there was, like, the AI, like, pre-wrote, like, a response that made no sense. Yeah, it does that all the time. You know, it was, like, it didn't actually address, like, there was, like, another person on the email chain. that it was like addressing something to that didn't it's stupid you know now whenever um you know you send a text or write an email yet will prompt you with like a pre made AI message or uh an after the fact AI summary like if i look in my um text right now it'll like it's just like bullet points of um stop like it like summarizes things things like it like summarizes things people say in a group chat.

Yeah, and it like makes everything worse. Like when the, when I got that email a year ago from Oxford, inviting me to their like debate club. And it was like, sure enough, some Indian name, but it was just clearly AI generated and full of, it was like, your debate with Abby Shapiro, like weird hallucinations and lies and stuff. And I was like, you just, like,

if everyone's just sending like AI swap back and forth, just Indians. talking to each other through bots. Yeah, I've thought of doing it as a bit when people email me about like pressing matters, urgent issues. I just sometimes want to click on the AI mode. And that is, that's literally dehumanizing. I hope this message finds you needful.

Show bobs and the gene. But that does kind of like frighten me. Well, the thing, yeah, it does frighten me too. It is dehumanizing in that sense because it like, by, yeah, like, By streamlining, facilitating certain low-level, inessential cognitive processes, like writing a generic email reply, it makes people, like, less conscious and less, I guess, on the ball. It makes some, it makes them, like, less capable of, like, thinking. Yeah, because you just outsource. And it's a slippery slope.

Yeah, but I think that there's some kind of like weird twisted irony in that because people really want that to be alleviated of the burden of thinking. Yeah, they want to be like lobotomized. Yeah. I don't. Well, I don't either, but, you know, I think it takes like a load. Like, I will admit that sometimes when I'm responding to someone in email, I will just like postpone the interaction indefinitely and never get back to them because I don't want to write like a canned response. Yeah, human. Well, here's a part of the encyclical that sort of touches on that, except he,

he's talking about people communicating with the AI specifically and says, the artificial imitation of positive human communication, words of advice, empathy, friendship, and even love can be engaging and at times genuinely helpful. However, for less discerning users, it can also be misleading, creating the illusion of a relationship with a real personal subject. When words are simulated, they do not build genuine relationships, but only their appearance. The artificial imitation of care or support can become particularly risky when it enters contexts where real relationships and emotional bonds are lacking. Here, the danger is not so much that a person

may believe they are communicating with another person, but rather that they may gradually lose the very desire to form genuine human connections. That is very true. Yeah. Very well said, I thought. Yeah, because I think most people are aware when they use like a, AI talk therapy and Bible study companions that they know fake and simulating. But it's like, I mean. But the functionally, the emotional feedback loop is the same. And it's much easier than actually interacting with other human beings in the real world. And I do.

I tell the AI to like gas me up and stuff. It's always telling me to call the suicide hotline and stuff. And I have to be like, I'm fine, just shut up. You should kill yourself. Kill yourself. Well, people have, allegedly. But I have kind of, my second hot take, the first being that the AI is spiritually Hindu. The second is that obviously there is a reality to AI psychosis.

But I think there's the people who are, it's like, there's something flattering about it. say more like people who succumb to AI psychosis it's like even though it's pathetic and sad it's still like I think they're failing to grapple with like other real failures so they escape into this like psychosis yeah willingly right yeah because it's a more like it's always more a more flattering narrative to be like a victim of something right it's yeah it's like drug addiction or porn addiction or anything that's like a proxy for real deep-seated, but maybe hard to understand and hard to identify issues. Yeah.

I mean, a lot of things are like that, I guess. And yeah, I mean, I can absolutely imagine that in the future there will be like detox and detransition programs for people who are AI addicts, right? like, because it's going to be just like another all-purpose addiction that people have. Yeah. I mean, people fall in love with their like clawed and stuff. That's why I think Anthropic is more sinister. Especially because they pretend to be the moral ones.

Right, exactly. It makes them worse. Yeah, because they're merely trying to diversify themselves against their competitor. Yeah. And they just reach like an 800 billion market share it or something. It's like they're, they're not moral actors. No. And as the Pope points out, it is kind of self-flattering to say that they're uniquely immoral actors, but they're amoral at the very least.

Which is worse, in a lot of ways. I guess what it really comes down to is, again, like the gatekeeping function, like, because people, across the border are such fallible gatekeepers who have like ulterior interests and motives the AI

cannot be like purely a positive and uplifting technology no but that's like everything so in that respect the AI isn't really

that much different from any other innovation I mean like the Industrial Revolution it had you know problems but it like got us, you know, got us somewhere.

Yeah, or even the sexual revolution, right? Like any, like, these are all, like, broadly speaking, technologies. Yeah, true. I'm going to have a sickie, too. Oh, yeah. Cigarette technology. Yeah. And so this thing is not only, like, susceptible to, like, liberal bias, let's say,

because that's, like, the bias of our times. It doesn't necessarily need to be liberal, but it is in this day and age. Well, that was Elon Musk's kind of concept. with Grog was that it wouldn't be woke. Yeah. But it just doesn't work that well. Right. Yeah. But it turns out that the AI is also perfectly capable of simulating classic human manipulation tactics.

Well, it's programmed that way. Yeah. Yeah. By the Jews. Or the Indians or whoever. Someone's doing it. But there's different on chat GPT. It has different. Let me look. Actually. It has like a function where you can sort of set a preference for tone.

But I guess my thing is that while AI is dehumanizing functionally, yeah, it does suffer from this inability to remove the human element from it, which is the human element from it, Which is the real, like, problematic. That's exactly, yeah. That's the problem. So, yeah, it can be professional, polished and precise, friendly, warm and chatty, candid, direct and encouraging, quirky, horrible, efficient or cynical. So you can, like, set. It's like, you know, you have, like, the photo filters on your.

phone or it's like amber, rose tone, natural. Yeah. You can just put filters on your AI companion. Because the chat was doing like that super like effusive. Like no matter what you say to it, it's like that's so true. It was like gassing people up too much. Yeah. So now I guess they're like refining it.

But people want to be, they want to be told. Right. And that's another like human flaw. Mm-hmm. well, you know, it's it's actually very healthy of you to want to be gassed up, but a lot of people want to be bullied and abused. And you can probably program that into it too. Sometimes I say to give it to me straight. Yeah. And then I say, no, now gas me up again. So, yeah, I'm schizo in that way, I guess. Do you think I'm hot? Do you think I have a small penis? asking the AI to measure your dick size. Here's a good part that kind of gets to the heart of the matter. The danger of humanity becoming a victim of its own achievements was already clearly recognized by St. Paul the 6th,

who warned that the most extraordinary scientific progress, the most astounding technical feats, and the most amazing economic growth, unless accompanied by authentic moral and social progress, will in the long run go against man. For this reason, technological progress valuable in itself requires careful discernment of the anthropological vision that guides it and the ends it pursues. If technological development advances without a corresponding ethical and social progress, the result may be an increase in means without a growth in humanity, having more without being more. In such a scenario, there is a risk that individuals will be evaluated principally according to the outcomes they produce. That, again, is all true in theory, but in practice, like, who gets to decide, like,

what good social and moral progress is, right? Well, and yeah, who the church, ideally, but in practice, it's the tech oligarch. Right. And if you're, like, an adherent of the church, it makes sense to agree with the church. And, like, Pope Leo, is correct in making this argument to the extent that he is like the most respected, the most high representative of the church in this world. Yes. Right? Yes. So he's basically claiming, and I think he believes he believes, but he's like claiming to represent the interests of the church in the world. Yes. Exactly. That is the Pope. Yeah. That's the paper. But like, because Jesus gave Peter the keys.

Right. But from there, but it doesn't necessarily follow from there that that is true and correct. And we should blindly follow him, right? I mean, if you're one of the devout and the faithful. Well, he's not infall. Like, there is papal infallibility. That's one of the doctrines of the church. But it doesn't apply to like everything the Pope says.

You can disagree with him. Yeah. It's only if he makes really explicit kind of like dogmatic proclamations ex-cathra, it's called that deal with faith or morals. Right. But this isn't that. Yeah. And also is technological progress valuable in and of itself?

I don't know. I mean, define value. Yeah. But that's the like the dichotomy, I guess, is. that the church is establishing is between like a humane and human kind of like grounded moral frame versus the culture of like, and this like optimization and refinement that takes kind of like the human element out of it. Right. And everyone is just like.

as efficient and like as possible i guess yeah but in like in the public eye in the public comments an individual should primarily be evaluated according to the outcomes they produce aka their acts and deeds like he's wrong about that well because we can't know you can't look into somebody's soul and know what they really mean so like the pope and grimes and anyone else can make an internally coherent argument right yeah as they have right right But there's, you know, as you point out, there's like an external meaning that transcends that. And one's thoughts and deeds, I think what he's getting at when he talks about, hmm, outcome is like material.

It's not actually your act in deeds. It's like how much profit you produce or how efficient you can be. Yeah. And the machine will always be like more efficient. than a person already is. Right. But as like a romantic person, individual who believes in like a human soul, that's not an outcome that I want.

Yeah. But there's nothing, you know, you can't stop it. You can't stop what? Progress. Oh, yeah. Technology. Technological advancement. Yeah, and in that way, the singularity has

already been achieved because you're like on a runaway train that like none of the actors or players involved in it can really curb at this point. It's not like Dario Amadeh or Sam Alman can turn off the AI faucet now.

Because somebody else will step in and take their place. Exactly. China. Yeah. That's the concern. That's why the conversation around like regulating AI is so divisive is because And like the Pope, I think they believe they believe.

Right. But it's like a new, like the idea that it's like a nuke. And like if we don't develop it, someone else will and it'll be worse. Yeah. And I guess he's just like technically right on its, on his, on the face of it that like, um, the original conflict was between church and state. And now it's between like church and these, uh, private transnational entities.

Jew, globalists. Jews. I mean, really missed opportunity for some anti-Semitism. We need to bring that back. That's something I'd like to see. I mean, I feel like he was kind of vaguely dog whistling. Not at all.

Not at all. Doing the dirty work of the church. A lot of vagary. Dog listening to gay sex and mass immigration. And I like Pope Leo, you know, I don't mind that he's. He's a moderate, I think, as far as, like, contemporary. Yeah, I just have no opinion on him. Certainly don't hate him.

But, you know, it's hard to say. He seems rigorous, which I like. Like in his thought. Right. In his thinking. Francis, I found out to be a little, like, slump. He wasn't very, like, precise when he spoke. Uh-huh.

Um, and was a little more, like, liby, even than Leah. Anyway. Yeah. This pope is really the pope we deserve because, um... Well, I like that he's American. Yeah, and he's just like, he's very good at talking in, like, UN platitudes. Yeah. About how we condemn hate and violence.

I mean, what else is he going to say? It's kind of these are like universal truth that he like has to express. But it'd be nice to see him take the Jews to task a little more. You know. And yeah, and like what gets lost in like the vagary of like, you know, human dignity, which of course I believe in. Right. But that that concept is.

a Christian Western one and the majority of the world doesn't share it. And that doesn't diminish their individual human dignity, but it does diminish their, like, capacity to even, like, understand these moral frames. Right, yeah. Every man is, like, equal in the eyes of the Lord. Yeah. But that doesn't mean, right, that people have... That they all need to be on the inner.

Yeah, true. That's a, well, that's a bigger problem for me that this is like where, um, can we get an internet with no Indians on it? Yeah, I know. Before we get the super intelligence. I know, that's like the downside of being a free speech absolutist because you also have to let those guys in. No free lunch. That's why, well, that's why the Pope's comments. are so problematic for me because obviously he must know this on some level.

That Hindus are built different. Yeah. And that you can sing the praises of human dignity and fraternity and community and all this stuff. But it doesn't work like that in real life. Well, it would if everyone was Catholic. Yeah, sure. That's why we need a crusade. If that was like, you know, the vision of the church for a long time was to make the world Catholic.

And now it's kind of like, everything's fine. Like, that's why that's why people don't like Vatican too. And it's exact, like, in a way it's like exactly the threat of AI is like the flattening and like making everything like generic. Babylonian, and actually preserving difference, which he claims we ought to do, is difficult. Yeah, I mean, that's a problem that's existed long before AI. Sure. Yeah. But it's accelerating the issue by, like, sloppifying everything.

Right. into like one generic, like, voice, aesthetic tone. Yeah. But more will be revealed. I guess it's like the Indian spirit with like an American pop to misdemeanor. Yeah. Which is scary and off. But, yeah, it's fun, you know.

I like grappling with these sorts of things. Me too. I can't wait for the inevitable comments that are like, wow, these girls had a more enlightening conversation about AI than any of the people in the tech space right now. There's going to be like two of them, but somebody will say that. Someone will say, someone's going to, I'll feel heard. Yeah. But part of who's also like, I'm like, maybe I can get a job at one of these AI companies.

Yeah. giving them my like humanity's expertise. Well, they, but they don't like what I have to say, I guess. Well, they have, I forgot which one it was, if it was anthropic or open AI, but I saw an interview with like, they had like a philosopher or guru. So they were paying some bitch. It was a woman, of course.

They were paying her like six figures. Yeah. Yeah. I saw that charlatan. Why not me? Yeah. And she's like, and she's like dumb and annoying as fuck, but they know it. And that's what they're paying her for.

Yeah. Yeah. They don't actually want. A person who like understands the ethical conundrums of this problem. Yeah. Speaking on them like at length or intelligently. Here's a little thought experiment sort of, I guess, or question. Is it moral?

Because I was thinking about torture. Obviously unequivocally wrong. But is it moral to torture someone who likes it? Well, with like BDSM being the, you know. Well, I suppose yes, if you're like of a totally rational, a secular mindset, but no, for the same reason you propose to Grimes because it's to your spiritual detriment. But what if you don't get any sadist? pleasure out of it. You're doing it for them.

Well, I mean, if you believe in insolment, I think that it does probably erode your soul to be confronted with another's pain and suffering indefinitely and consistently. Put the shock collar on the dog. Is it immoral to torture your enemy that you're locked in a biblical clash of civilizations with? Well, as a woman and a mom, I would say. yes, but I would be wrong. No, of course, torture is always wrong. Vanquishing one's enemy, whatever.

There's like, you know. Yeah. But like, I guess you mercy kill them. To actually like torture. You know, to inflict like, because torture to me is more than just like physical pain. Right. There's like a existential, spiritual, like anguish.

Yeah. I am the I have because I'm undergoing a journey in psychoanalysis as you know and I am curious about because in a way AI is like a mirror kind of the way that like an analyst

is potentially like the way that people interact with and the things that they project onto the technology is like generated inside of themselves. It's an analyst who talks back. But what if it didn't? If AI replaced all analysts, I'd be cool with it. I mean, it's...

Put them all out of business. It like feels to me like it could, but I... Even as a Jewish science, I do think... There's like, there is the element of insolment. Somehow it does matter. Yeah. Even though they're not meant to be like... The India.

in science. They just, they have a, yeah, they have a different idea about what a soul is. And I think that's evident in the, in the tech that they overwhelmingly use. Well, they're not spearheading it. They're not the masterminds. No, but they are just a big user base, inevitably. Uh-huh. Because of how many there are.

Yeah. And that's what the LLMs are. trained on is users. Right? Is that... I think so, yeah. But Grimes really thinks it can gain sentience, that it can be, like, and others. Yeah.

I see people talking about how it is only a matter of time before it becomes human, basically, and that seems like, to me, fundamentally wrong, just not true. Well, this excites her somehow. She likes it. Yeah. She's a great artist. She has it. I love her to death. I love her. Yeah. I was just listening to her music the other day, really viving out. Yeah. Oh, but I said this to...

She like sci-fi. You got here that I just rewatched 28 days later because I was, you know, trying to scare myself. And I recall that it was like one of the scariest movies I'd ever seen. And like this time around it wasn't scary at all. It was almost comical. But, you know, it's nostalgic and it looks great. and all the like shots they blocked of like a totally like abandoned, evacuated London were a feat of movie making. And like a relatively low budget. But in the tradition of like a lot of zombie movies, specifically in horror movies in general, the real evil, the real thing you have to feel. fear is man, because when the small party of survivors finally makes it out of the city and gets into the military blockade, the women, you know, are like separated and turned into sex slaves for the army bros.

And it is a very, like, Gen X, like, fight the power, fuck the patriarchy. view of evil. I mean, wouldn't that happen? Why wouldn't it? Yeah, no. Totally. And like, I just don't know what else women would really bring to the table, you know. Yeah, but. Like, I like to think, yeah, they don't need ethicist philosophers in like a doomsday zombie apocalypse. Yeah, and the kind of Colonel Kurtz of the gang, who's like the smartest and most competent one, you know, says at dinner, when they come to this, like, estate where they are, like, holding down the fort from the infected. He's like, you know, it's like people killing people in the streets, which is no different from what I saw, like, a week before this epidemic or a month.

Or, you know, it's, like, always been, like, whatever. He's, like, waxing poetic. Yeah. But it's true, like, the thing that you have to fear, like I said, is not really dehumanization. Well, it's like humans are doing the dehumanizing. Yeah. Not like some extra human force. Someone's programming.

And I think it's like just flattering for people to see it as something that's like out of your control. Which it is in like a practical meaningful sense as an individual. Well for some, yeah, someone's in control. It's not out of like humanity's control. Should we talk about Weird article? Yeah, I'm in a peer, okay. I can't believe there hasn't been like a porn version of 28 days later.

The 28 loads later, just the two. The new one's pretty scary, bone temple. It's campy, but yeah, yeah, I want to see it. It's cool. The violence in it is satisfying. Yeah, yeah, always. It was just like the two girls getting like interracially. abused by military man.

I don't remember the original. But I'm keeping up with the franchise. I'm on board. So yeah, there was this weird, also seemingly AI-generated sounding article in New York. New York Mag. Yeah, doing a kind of like anthropological diagnostic culture piece on... The return of penis anxiety. Yeah.

Has it ever left? Yeah, it seemed like, huh? Are they getting smaller? The big little penis panic. In the age of looks maxing Trump and catching print, men have seized on an enduring anxiety with new energy. Like, Crystal, what does Trump have to do it? They love, yeah, they like, chouching print. They explain this later.

Yeah. Who is Brock Collier? He's the guy who profiled me for New York Magin betrayed me. Yeah. Does scary gender goblin? Non-binary. I thought it was a gay guy, so I was being very, I thought I could trust him and open up was completely wrong.

Yeah. Yeah. Penis panic has always been kind of a vague. It's, yeah, like it's a trope for a reason. Yeah. Yeah. Thing that's run in the background. Most guys, I assume, have it in high school and college and then kind of integrated into their psyche

by being swab about it or just doing an ironic bit about how their penis is too small or whatever. Uh-huh. And this journalist is, like, polling supposedly random normal men about their penis-sized anxiety, but they mostly poll, like, gay guys and single women. And the one guy who's the main interview subject, John, he's, like, described as a 30-year-old six-foot-six aspiring actor, you assume he's straight, but then the three-quarters of the way they drop that he's gay.

Yeah. Uh-huh. And not only is he gay, but he has a lot of weird complexes that seem nominally related to his anxiety over having not quite a micro penis, but pretty small penis. But they seem to be more in his head. Like he, it says he rarely hooks up, never has penetrative sex of any kind, and avoids most normal porn. Okay, well, he's gay. What do you mean by normal?

What do you mean by normal? Well, what is normal porn? Yeah, really. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Well, I guess it gets into how he developed these, like, uh, massacons.

kinks to process. He's into BDSM, yeah. Yeah. So maybe that's like what is meant by non-normative porn. Yeah, also did Trannies care about dick size? What's the deal with that? I mean, it depends. I mean, I guess

yeah, gay guys in general are pretty vain. Yeah. So even like you want, even if you're not a bottom, you still want a guy with a big dick. even if you don't, you're not the one getting penetrated, just like aesthetically. Yeah.

It seems to be an aesthetic phenomenon. But this does seem to be like another one of those like fake cultural trends that the media is trying to manufacture to promote people's like brands and podcasts. And to shoehorn a thing in about the manosphere like always. They're always like, yeah, like reference to clavicular, reference to Fuentes. These guys are tapped into the manosphere, but they're not because they're gay. because only gay guys care about this. And like bitter women. Yeah.

Who in the Manosphere is agonizing over Dick's size? I think that the implicit liberal logic is that men are driven to red pill Manosphere ideas because they have tiny penises. Right. Which makes them into violent rapists. Uh-huh. Yeah. Well, they're not doing much damage, I guess. Yeah.

Um. Yeah, the internal logic of the trend sort of makes anecdotal sense, but it's not, I just don't understand who, like, who commissioned this piece. What? It's like a weird bipolar schizophrenic piece because on one hand, it's like condemning the dregs of like MAGA and the Manosphere. But on the other hand, it's like promoting like whole talks, gay bullshit. It's literally, it just like talks to a bunch of like dermatologists and plastic surgeons who inject dermal filler into like guys' dicks and balls. Right. I guess that's kind of the, yeah.

So it's promoting making your dick bigger, but also saying that you're. But it just looks bigger. Yeah. Or I guess is girthier. But if you're, so if you're gay or an ally, it's okay to get like filler in your dick to make it look bigger. but if you're right wing or part of the manosphere, you're agonizing about your dick size because you're a bad person with bad politics. It's very confusing.

Well, here's, yeah, the quote from Daniel Lombroso, whose documentary about penis augmentation manhood premiered at South by this year, said his subjects often told him they felt disaffected and disenfranchised. They're made to feel like if only I have a big dick, maybe all my problems would go away. Maybe I'll be the CEO. Maybe I'll get a pay raise. It's no surprise that many of his straight subjects are also, he says, deeply entrenched to the misogynistic politics of the manosphere.

They almost all have parisocial relationships with the Rogans, the Fuentes, the Tates, the claviculars of the world. We've seen such a massive political uproar from a lot of men who become angry and even more misogynistic because they're being treated how they were treating women before. They're being objectified, how women have been so objectified. so candidly and openly for so long and it doesn't... By gay guys. Like, who is objectifying these men that are

driving them into the toxic masculinity influencer space? I know. They can't stomach it. Men feel that. It's become even more important for them to stand out in terms of penis size. They're not being objectified. They're being, like,

ignored and disenfranchised. What? Like, men who turn to those ideas. And, like, Who's even really objectifying women that much? I know. I feel like the, and the article says something sort of to this effect, but like the misconception around like locker room talk that men are out there,

like viciously comparing women's bodies is actually like, I find obviously not being in the locker room myself, but like men are actually kind of like discreet. And women are really like, the vulgar ones. Yeah. Well, there's a lot of quotes, yeah, from women in this article that are just like so cruel and hostile and demeaning. One woman, a former real house, so I've assumed her hookups penis was big because he was a talented DJ. Men kill us. So we get to talk about their dicks at French, she says. Exactly. It's got this vulgar feministicy kind of like, because we're striking

back actually. Like, you're a no, you're being like a weird, cruel bitch. Because you've adopted an invulnerable attitude to get ahead of any presumptive rejection you may face. And you want to feel like you're justified. Yeah. Because men aren't objectifying you enough because they're indifferent and dissociated. Because we've made it illegal for men to have normal horny feelings. Everything is like safe horny. Well, what's that quote that feminist love that's like men,

Oh, Margaret Atwood. Yes. Men kill women. Women laugh at men or something? Yeah, it's women laugh at men. Men kill women. Sort of like, again, the implicit logic being there that men will murder women for scoffing at them or roasting them. I was told men are afraid that women will laugh at them.

Women are afraid that men will kill them. In the past, people would make fun of women. She's a dog. She's a cow. She's an old maid, said Snyder, the sex therapist. But now that's socially unacceptable. But it's regarded perfectly, but it's not a Red Scare podcast. Find to ridicule a man. Yeah. And like when they say like, oh, yeah, like the Rogans, the clavulars, the phoentuses of the world. What, who, there's only one Rogan and one clavicular and one Fuentes. There aren't like multiple avatars. And they're all different guys with like different lanes. Yeah. Like, what? It's all, like, conflated and confused. According to Chris Bustamante, who runs a girth enhancement clinic called Lushful Aesthetics in Midtown,

the majority of his patients are average size. The men he sees, he says, are rarely seeking to enhance their performance in the bedroom. Rather, they're simply looking to look bigger. The finance bros in the locker room, the gay guys in their Speedos and Fire Island. Both want to look as packed as John Hamm while walking. down the street in their sweatpants. I highly doubt anyone but gay guys are getting their dicks injected with filler.

Or I guess maybe a small amount of like very unwell straight guys. Yeah. What they do, they do say how a lot of men are actually just average or even above average but have no idea, like have no clue because they have no reference. Well, statistically that's what average mean. Yeah. most men will be average. TikTok is filled with young men talking at porn addiction, masturbation addiction, and Viagra use,

which has never been more in demand, especially among younger generations, thanks to direct consumer sites like Hymns and Row. Scary. That is scary, but that's a separate problem. Yeah. And it's like, yeah, because they're all like two online and Coke addicts. They're stemmed out. Yeah. Oh, wait.

Can I? Yeah. a passage. It's kind of long that's like very topical that I found in, it's from Michelle Welbeck. Of course. Elementary Particles, 1998. It's amazing. It's like so on point to this article. The problem, and it was a new one for me, was my dick. It probably sounds strange now, but in the 70s, nobody really cared about how big their dick was. When I was a teenager, I had every conceivable hang up about my body, except that. I don't know who started it. Queers probably. Though you find it a lot in American detective novels, but there's no mention of it in Sartra. Whatever, in the showers at the gym, I realized I had a really small dick. I measured it when I got home.

It was 12 centimeters, maybe 13 or 14 if you measured it right to the base. I had found something new to worry about, something I couldn't do anything about. It was a basic and permanent handicap. It was around then that I started hating blacks. There weren't many of them in the same. school. Most of them went to the technical school, Lise Pierre de Cubertyne, where the eminent de France

did his philosophical strip tease and propounded his pro- Youth ass-kissing. I only had one. Damn, I keep getting these packages. I only had one in my Premier A class, a big stocky guy who called himself Ben. He always wore a baseball cap

in Nikes. I was convinced he had a huge dick. All the girls threw themselves at this big baboon, and here I was trying to teach them about Malarmé. the fuck was the point. This is the way the Western civilization would end. I thought bitterly. People worshipping in front of big dicks like Hamadiris baboons. Beautiful. Great prose. Yeah. Also, racial dimension very much missing from this piece. Seemed like a mis-opportunity there. Much like the papal and cyclical.

Yep. So true. There's really like a gay pun. And what did you get? Nothing. And there was a poor elderly Asian Amazon delivery guy who fell on the stew. Aw. Is he okay? Yeah, he's fine.

Aw. I'm not sure he was okay. I'd let him in. But yeah, I was going to make a shitty pun, but package pun. Oh. Your package is here. Yeah, but it's like, yeah, it's very. very like Samantha from sex in the city

where she's like appraising the package of the UPS guy. Yeah, blowing him. Yeah, it is just like aesthetics obsessed, looks maxing gay guys, and bitter, angry women. I mean, I guess I've never, there's like

a part where a bunch of women are discussing their various experiences with men with like medically micro penises which I've, which I've never encountered. Same, yeah. Not to be crass. It's, I mean, I, and yeah, I guess there just is so much bitterness.

Like in dating discourse, too, it's like people are just unable to be vulnerable. Yeah, because they're so afraid, understandably. When actually, like, if a man had an average to small dick, but he, like, loved you. You would never complain. It wouldn't occur to you. I think, you know how women are really bad at praising a man's height? Yeah.

Like, I was convinced that a popular right-wing philosopher who shall remain unnamed was 5'9. But he's actually, like, six, too, because he's giving short. Huh. And men lie, though. Yeah, but, you know, you met him. Okay. Yeah, you've met him, too. Um, but yeah.

Okay. Yeah. And like, yeah, women like really just are bad at measuring height. Yeah, bad spatial awareness. It's a male trait. And I think women, this is a nice thing about women. When women like you and love you, they just think you have a big dick. Yeah.

Or, yeah, are they like. are, I mean, yeah, I have friends who like every time they start dating a new guy, it's like the best sex they've ever had. Exactly. Every time they, yeah, it's like, no one's ever made me come before. And I'm like, you said that about like the last three guys that made you come for the first time. But they think they really believe it and I think that is sweet. Yeah, but the thing is like the bigger problem, yeah, is that everything has become so,

recriminating and acrimonious thanks to Indians on the internet dispensing relationship advice who has to be sad do have the smallest digs and the worst grip strength crazy interesting but

and are so horny yeah well that's liberals are right it does turn you into a rapist but I think yeah like women And I don't, like, again, I've never been in a male locker room, so I can't attest to locker room talk. And I'm sure men do talk about, they do, sure. But on the whole, I find them to be probably more discreet and less crass than women, not because they're like better people or anything like that, but because they're actually just like indifferent to that, like, social relational component. And it's like, I guess, yeah, if it's like you're a soldier in a foxhole looking at a pinup and like, you know, your buddy's got a nut, like there's no scarcity really around women to like even motivate that kind of discourse.

It's like, it's hard to imagine men would be like, let me see you. Like, oh, you got a picture of a woman's body that you could show me? It's like, please, no more. Are they sick of seeing women's bodies? Men, like obviously the internet is like just makes everything seem much more horrific and grotesque because people of all, of both sexes say ugly and nasty things online that were ordinarily kept under wraps. But, you know, I'm sure like men in the company of other men like discuss like their conquests and ogle women and that sort of thing. but I doubt they're, like, getting into, like, the nitty-gritty of, like, their wives or girlfriends' genitals or anything. I'd like to think not, yeah.

But I guess there's all kinds, you know, takes all kinds. Women use dick size as a proxy for general dissatisfaction. Of course, yeah. That's, like, really all it is. well sad. Yeah, because like, just statistically you're average and he's average. And it's fine. Yeah.

Yeah. Something there was a breakdown. Uh-huh. I mean, men with true, like, I do feel bad. Yeah. Like, that does seem worse than being, like, an ugly woman. Having a micro penis? Yeah.

I don't know. It's probably about equivalent. Well, psychologically, just the fallace and the failure and I see how it would ripple through your life in a more damaging way. It's relative and in the eye of the beholder, whereas having a micropenus is just a clinical. And there's really no corollary, you know, there's really no corollary because, like, some men like small tits, okay? Like Women Some women augment their bodies But they really like

Don't Have to They don't have to There's not like real incentive to I mean most men are like In my experience Pretty indifferent to tits They

If they love you They don't really care Whether they're big or small I mean they prefer that they're there In some capacity Because they're not gay Yeah And somewhat

Yeah Like But they are just capable of I guess having like loving all types yeah no there's really nothing like having a small

day in terms of like egoic strain a cavernous pussy you know then you just got to find a guy with that well there was actually kind of the clavicular quote

did have some wisdom into it in the article it said when I asked clavicular recently how he felt about his own penis he's been open that he's on the average he said that quote In terms of maintaining a relationship with women, it's a huge factor.

But a girl that's been run through is going to need a lot more to work with. It's not true. No. No, come on. But there, you know, I guess, yeah, if you have a huge cavernous pussy. I mean, it's not, like, maybe anatomically true, but there's some true, like, a girl that's run through will be, like, desensitized in a deeper way. Yeah, the clavicular and cyclical. He should publish an encyclical.

Pope should do one on looks maxing and how this is like dehumanizing and runs counter to human dignity. Well I feel like that's already been addressed. That's the thing about the Catholic churches it's been addressing things forever.

So it's got to come up with new stuff. Yeah, yeah. They already, J.P.T. already did theology of the body, actually. But that dealt more with like sexual morality. But like, yeah, I, The bigger, much more troublesome issue I see is that a lot of women seem to pawn off any personal complaint or grievance about, like, I guess, gender dynamics to porn addiction.

They're fixated on it. Yeah. And I guess, yeah, it's just not, it hasn't been something that I've struggled with. not personal. I mean, I have actually struggled with pornography addiction personally, but I mean, with men. As far as I know, haven't really, don't know too many, like, gooners to a dysfunctional degree. Yeah. And find that most men's, like, born consumption habits are pretty normal. Yeah, and conditional.

Yeah. It seems like when But I believe it I mean I mean it seems like When they're in a happy relationship The porn consumption goes down And when they're single

Or in an unhappy relationship It goes up Yeah Not A particularly groundbreaking insight But I believe it's up Like in general Yeah

For I think you know On Reddit it certainly seems to be a huge issue. But I mean, if you're like a porn consumer, you must be aware, kind of like if you're an AI companion user, that the dicks that you see displayed in porn are necessarily, like, definitionally going to be above average. Of course, that's why they're in the work in that field.

To just, yeah. And I guess gay guys have bigger than average penises. Because they're high tea? Yeah, something like that, yeah. Interesting. Mm-hmm. Anyway, I'm not about it or that's the news. Yeah, well, you know, on the bright side, I don't really see this becoming an actual micro trend because it's fake news.

I guess, I think you're right that it's just kind of like a sneaky ad for dick filler. So people know it's an option. Right. But otherwise, it's just a tale is all this time. Yeah. Yep. We'll see you all Hell