The Philip DeFranco Show - PDS 12.12 Lily Phillips' Disturbing "100 Guys" Scandal Has Divided The Internet, "HOT ONES" SOLD for $82.5M &

Episode Date: December 12, 2024

Let’s talk about Lily Phillips "100 Guys" Scandal, Hot Ones Selling, Hannah Kobayashi, Why global violence is really on the rise, & much more Go to https://ozlo.yt.link/1izP0ou or use my code PHILD and get $10 off Ozlo sleep buds to get the best sleep of your life!  Go to https://upliftdesk.com/phil use code PHIL to check out their holiday gift guide and make the most of UPLIFT’s holiday sales.   – We're talking serious customization - over 200,000 configurations. Their desk builder lets you design your dream workspace that's not just functional, but inspirational. Sleek, eco-friendly, built to last. Right now, hit upliftdesk.com/PHIL with code PHIL. You'll score their holiday deal: free shipping, free returns, and a crazy 15-year warranty. Upgrade your workspace. Upgrade your life. – ✩ TODAY’S STORIES ✩ – 00:00 - Lily Phillips Documentary Sparks Backlash & Concern  06:45 - Family Says Hannah Kobayashi Found Safe 09:13 - Buzzfeed Sells “Hot Ones” Production Company First We Feast 11:03 - Sponsored by Ozlo 12:07 - FBI Investigating Whether Criminal Group is Targeting Famous Athletes’ Homes 14:25 - Biden Breaks Record by Commuting 1,500 Sentences and Pardoning 39 in a Day  16:33 - UK and US Advance Bills Restricting Gender-Affirming Care  23:08 - Sponsored by Uplift 24:28 - South Korea’s Ruling Party Blocks Impeachment 26:15 - Global Conflict Fatalities Surged to Five Year High In 2024 31:01 - Comment Commentary ——————————   Produced by: Cory Ray Edited by: James Girardier, Maxwell Enright, Julie Goldberg, Christian Meeks, Matthew Henry Art Department: William Crespo Writing/Research: Philip DeFranco, Brian Espinoza, Lili Stenn, Maddie Crichton, Chris Tolve, Star Pralle, Jared Paolino ———————————— For more Philip DeFranco: Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-philip-defranco-show/id1278424954 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/6ESemquRbz6f8XLVywdZ2V Twitter:   https://x.com/PhillyD Instagram:   https://instagram.com/PhillyDeFranco Newsletter: https://www.dailydip.co TikTok:   https://www.tiktok.com/@philipdefranco?lang=en ———————————— #DeFranco #LilyPhillips #HotOnes ———————————— Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

What happens when you sleep with a hundred men in a single day? That is likely not a question you have ever asked yourself, but it is one that's driving a lot of online discourse after OnlyFans star Lily Phillips did just that, with now more and more people finding out about it because Josh Peters shared a documentary about it. Also, I will say there is a lot that people are talking about here, so where we're going to start is with showing some of the documentary for context.

Because it starts with Lily talking about starting her OnlyFans career, saying that it's something that she loves to do, and seemingly being excited to take on this 100 guy challenge. I've just always had quite like a sexual nature. As soon as I started on the platform, I kind of realized, I guess, how much money you can make and also just how much I loved it. I think other people in the industry definitely look down on me for doing this, but I think at the end of the day, people forget that it's also my fantasy. And this is also something that I'm really enjoying and want to do

and have wanted to do before I was even in the industry. Philip's saying she's not in this industry because she had no other choice and that she feels empowered making money off the idea that guys sexualize her because she feels men sexualize her no matter what. And it shows her setup, how comfortable she is being filmed, doing sexual acts. But even though she said many times that she likes her OnlyFans career in general and is looking forward to sleeping with 100 guys,

Josh kind of questioned some of it and had a lot of concerns. Right, like when the applications opened for men to apply to sleep with her, it was like floodgates opening. People from all over the world started flying in to do this. But it also seemed like there would be no criminal record check on these guys.

And while Lilly said they were prioritizing men who had STI checks, it seemed like they weren't going to go to any lanes to verify this or know for sure that all the men were STI-free. With there also being a moment where she seemed unsure of some of the risks. So you would let, like, these guys do that on your face? Yeah, yeah. And in your mouth? Yeah, yeah, yeah. What if they had HIV?

Is that where it comes from? With spunk in the mouth? It can. Also with that, just to get educational for a second, the risk to catch HIV is much lower orally than other kinds of intercourse, but it is still possible. But the main thing we're hitting on here, and the point still stood, that Josh was afraid that she was unprepared for what she was getting into and who these 100 men could be. There's a decent chance that one of them is going to be dangerous. One of them might have a weapon, have a criminal record. A few of them will have STIs. Just on a basic statistic,

you can know that a few of them are going to have STIs. Also in this doc, it seemed like she was putting a lot of pressure on herself saying that the thing she was most nervous about was that all 100 guys might not enjoy it. And she wanted all 100 to view it positively. But then by the time the day came, things went wrong. They were running late right off the bat.

She was unable to take as many breaks as she intended to, and the day ran way longer than she anticipated, which was some context on the time each guy was given five minutes, but many went over. And so that alone puts you at well over eight hours plus she had to take breaks to shower. It also seems like not all the guys followed the rules, right? Some went past their time slot and she alluded to feeling pressured into letting them. She also told the men that they couldn't finish on her eyes, but some did anyway, even if it may have been accidental, which caused pain in her eyes. But really, the most viral part of this whole documentary

and situation was the aftermath, where she discussed how intense all of it felt. It's not for the weak, girls, if I'm honest. It was hard. I don't know if I'd recommend it. I don't know how to explain it. It's not like just having sex with someone? Yeah, yeah.

Just one in, one out. It feels intense. Like more intense than you thought it might? Definitely. Sorry. It's okay. Just take it. Yeah, one minute.

The awkward interaction of you feeling pressure to have to meet them. If like you haven't spent enough time with them and feeling like they didn't, like you didn't give them a good time. Sometimes you'd like disassociate and be like, you know, like it's not like normal things at all. And with all that, she may not have actually been the only one shaken up by the experience. The documentary even showing one of the guys barely able to hold and sip from a water bottle after sleeping with her. But this also is her team seem pretty supportive

in the aftermath saying she took it like a champ. However, online, the responses are a lot more complicated, right? Some just hating Lily for doing this at all, saying that she makes them ashamed to be a woman. Others saying they have no sympathy for her, saying she's disgusting. But then you had others feeling sorry for her,

thinking that she's dealing with more than she's letting on, that she's unwell or unhappy. Saying things like, she didn't think this through at all. This has to be some sort of self-harm. And no sane, right-minded woman would have done what she did and you guys aren't concerned for her at all? For her mental health, her wellbeing? Others also using this as a wider condemnation

of OnlyFans and the porn industry as a whole. Saying that watching and creating this kind of content is actively harming people and adding, hating on Lily Phillips is like hating symptoms of a virus, but not hating the virus itself. The sex industry is abusive and manipulative, and what is dressed up as empowerment is actually subjugation and disempowerment. As well as this actress is just one of the many victims of this industry, even if she willingly participated. With there being this argument that the industry has just gone too far now. And on that note, in the doc, you had Josh speaking to a different OnlyFans creator

who noted that people do keep pushing the envelope further and further, even if it's to their own detriment. People are starting to do the most outrageous things online. It just keeps being like leveled up and up and up of the expectations. And with all this, you also had people out there saying that even though this was Lily's decision,

she was still sexually assaulted by these men because some violated rules and boundaries, which also resulted in a number of people really mad at her team for having her go through all this with such little protection. And this also is then others out there were more disgusted with the men who slept with Lily than Lily herself.

With those in this group arguing that it's the men like them that create larger problems. Arguing, it's funny how men are quick to shame women in the sex industry, but refuse to acknowledge their role in keeping it alive. And saying this documentary about Lily Phillips is a perfect example. But then also you had others saying

this whole situation really isn't that big of a deal as it's being made out to be. And that this is one woman who made a choice, even if that choice is very questionable. With some saying things like, why is the internet making it seem like this is just some gal who got in over her head on OnlyFans? She is a porn star who makes porn. Everyone made the crying at the end sound intense, but it really is that

she's tired and upset that it didn't go as smoothly as she wanted versus the devastating toll this has on her. And then also some just kind of in the middle saying Lily Phillips is a grown woman who is aware of the consequences of it all and consented for it. She's most certainly not a victim, but I can't help but feel bad. Physically and mentally, she surely can't be okay. And so with all that, of course, I want to pass the question off to you here. Where do you stand on this? We've talked about a lot of people in different cams, different takes. So let me know what you're thinking in those comments. So I will say, no matter your opinion, it appears that Lily is moving forward. And I mean with this specific content, because she actually announced that next

year, she's going to be trying to sleep with a thousand men in a day in an attempt to break a world record. So this discourse, this debate, likely not going anywhere. And while you may or may not be leaving that comment, I want to say, hi, welcome back to the Philip DeFranco Show. You daily dive into the news. It is Thursday, December 12th, and we got a lot more we need to talk about today. So do me a favor and hit that like button and let YouTube know you like these big daily dives into the news, and let's keep this show going. This is a news show. So after weeks of headlines, public fixation, and even her father's suicide, Hannah Kobayashi has been found safe and sound.

We talked a little bit about Hannah last week. She's a 30-year-old woman from Hawaii that went missing after she missed a connecting flight in LA to New York last month. And this is there were some concerning messages to her family after she missed her flight, including saying that someone had wiped her identity and she had been scammed out of all her money. But then the news of her disappearance spreading like wildfire online, especially after her father, Ryan Kobayashi, was found dead after he traveled to LA to look for her.

The Los Angeles County Medical Examiner ruling his death a suicide. And so with this, we saw private investigators jumping on the case, Hannah's name becoming a popular hashtag and there was even a Reddit page dedicated to finding her. But then, like we talked about last week, the LAPD classified Hannah as a voluntary missing person, saying that video from the U.S.-Mexico border shows her leaving the country alone. Now with that, at the time, there was some pushback to the LAPD's decision,

with Hannah's family promising to continue looking for her. Which actually brings us to yesterday, when her family's attorney shared a statement saying that Hannah had been found, and adding, We are incredibly relieved and grateful that Hannah has been found, and this past month has been an unimaginable ordeal for our family, And we kindly ask for privacy as we take the time to heal and process everything we have been through. We want to express our heartfelt thanks to everyone who supported us during this difficult time. Your kindness and concern have meant the world to us.

But as many were relieved that she was found and that she was apparently safe, there was still also a lot of unanswered questions. For one, we don't know when or where she was found, but probably the biggest question people have is why? Like, why did this happen? And there I mean we've seen countless theories But the one that's probably gotten the most attention is this idea of a green card marriage scheme

For example reporting from Los Angeles magazine citing sources saying that Hannah was apparently scammed out of the proceeds of an immigration marriage scheme Possibly concocted by her ex who was on the same flight out of Maui as Hannah the magazine saying that she married an Argentinian man by the name of Alan Kakase whose girlfriend married Hannah's ex for similar reasons. With this report adding that their sources say that this whole scheme was actually uncovered by Hannah's mother, who reportedly found immigration documents in Hannah's house back in Hawaii. With this also saying this idea of a green card

marriage scheme being echoed around by other outlets, like the Daily Mail reporting that Hannah's coworkers knew about it and saying they were shown pictures of Hannah and Alan's ceremony. With them even going on to report that Alan gave Hannah $15,000 when they got married and promised a similar amount when his immigration documentation came through.

With then the New York Post also reporting that they talked to Hannah's coworkers regarding her alleged immigration scheme. But despite all that, it is important to note here that the family says they do not have any facts or information to confirm that any of that is true. Instead, saying in a statement before Hannah was found that this theory was one of many different leads

they were investigating and that any information they had was turned over to law enforcement. With the madding, we kindly ask everyone to avoid jumping to conclusions or spreading unverified claims. And then, hot ones, the YouTube staple interview show just got sold. With Buzzfeed announcing today

that they sold First We Feast, which is the studio behind the show that makes a bunch of other content. And the sale reportedly coming in with a price tag of $82.5 million. A price tag that was notably paid by a group of investors, including an affiliate of Soros Fund Management, First We Feast founder, Chris Schaunberger,

the host of Hot One, Sean Evans, and Rhett and Link's media company, Mythical Entertainment. Though I will say that's not everyone who invested in it. There are more names that will reportedly be dropped at a later date. But what we do know now is that First We Feast is gonna be operating as an independent multi-platform media company. With Sean Berger, who's the new CEO saying,

"'With new investment, we're poised to expand "'into exciting new areas, including new platforms, "'live events, and talent acquisition. "'Cementing First We Feast is the ultimate destination "'for pop culture obsessed audiences.'" And this is Sean Evans who will continue hosting the show, will also reportedly be the new chief creative officer. And as far as why the company was sold,

I mean, there's probably a number of reasons, but notably this deal pulls Buzzfeed out of some hot water. It's gonna allow it to pay down tens of millions of dollars in debt that was coming due this month, with them now reportedly planning on paying 88.8 million of their $124 million debt, partially with the proceeds of this sale, which reportedly will put them in a much better position

than they've been in with more cash on the books than debt, which also touches on what a BuzzFeed in the future may look like, because they have reportedly told investors they're pulling away from original content, and instead, they're focusing more on using AI to make and deliver content to their users, with BuzzFeed's founder and CEO specifically saying,

in the coming years, we will continue to invest in our most scalable and tech-enabled services, launching new AI-powered interactive experiences and delivering for our loyal audience and business partners. Well, I don't know about all that. I will say I am excited to see what happens with Hot Ones and First We Feast, especially with Sean Evans having an elevated role.

That is, of course, unless he ever gets involved in a scandal, in which case I don't know that guy and I've never supported him. There's no friends of the show here. I've been disappointed by too many people over the past two decades. But then, taking a quick break from the news, have you ever struggled to tune out city noise

or a snoring partner or your own racing thoughts at bedtime? Well, I do, possibly more than most, but thanks to today's sponsor, Oslo Sleepbuds, they have the ultimate sleep hack to a better night's sleep. Because unlike regular earbuds that can be uncomfortable and impractical for sleeping, Oslo Sleepbuds are designed specifically with your comfort in mind,

perfect even for the side sleepers out there like me. And their noise massing technology, it's a game changer. Instead of just tracking how poorly you slept like other wearables, Oslo Sleepbuds actively help you fall asleep faster and more importantly, stay asleep longer. And you can stream whatever helps you relax, soothing sounds, audio books, or even your favorite podcast. And then thanks to built-in biometric sensors, the Sleepbuds know when you've drifted off, automatically switching to calming sleep sound. So with a 10-hour battery life, you're covered all night. Plus, the in-ear personal alarm is a lifesaver,

waking you gently without disturbing anyone else. Plainly put, if you are serious about transforming your sleep, Oslo Sleepbuds are the way to go. Prioritize your wellbeing with better rest. You'll thank yourself for it. Just scan the QR code or click the link in my description and use code PHILD for $10 off your purchase.

Sweet dreams start here. But then the FBI right now is investigating if there is an organized crime group that's targeting some of the biggest professional athletes in America. With reports saying that since September, local police departments have reported a string of burglaries at the homes of NBA and NFL players in Kansas,

Missouri, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Ohio. And this is something that's ongoing. I mean, literally just this week, there was a break-in and robbery at the Ohio home of Cincinnati Bengals quarterback Joe Burrow. They're reportedly happening while he was playing Monday night football against the Dallas Cowboys in Texas. And he is in no way alone, right?

I mean, back in October, the homes of Kansas City Chiefs players, Patrick Mahomes and Travis Kelsey were robbed just one day apart. And those weren't the only back-to-back burglaries. In September, two players on the Minnesota Timberwolves were also hit a day apart, with burglars stealing hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of property from one and $100,000 worth from the other.

Though I will say, some of the players have lost even more financially. Last month, for example, a group of at least three men broke into the home of Milwaukee Bucks forward Bobby Portis while he was playing a game, and they stole more than a million dollars worth of items from his bedroom. And with all this, as far as the identity of the people or the groups behind these break-ins, you had the NBA providing some information in a memo last month that was obtained by the New York Times. And there, we saw the league saying that the FBI had quote,

"'connected many of the home burglaries "'to transnational South American theft groups,' "'also known as SatGs." With the memo going on to say that the groups tend to go after cash and items that can be resold on the black market, such as jewelry, watches, and luxury bags. Saying that in most cases, it appeared that the burglaries happened when the athletes' homes were not occupied,

mostly on game days and during times when alarm systems weren't activated. And specifically noting that the burglars mostly entered through back windows or sliding doors. And as far as how they've been able to target these famous athletes, according to the memo, right, it's not just, oh, they're playing a game.

You have the FBI saying these sat Gs are well-organized, sophisticated rings that incorporate advanced techniques and technologies, including pre-surveillance, drones, and signal jamming devices. So with that also adding, they may be gathering intel from social media and public records. But for example, ABC news also separately reporting that some of these groups, they've conducted extensive surveillance on targets, including attempted home deliveries and posing as ground maintenance or joggers in the neighborhood, which is why with this, both the NFL and NBA have reportedly put out security alerts to their teams, warning them to stay vigilant and make sure that their security systems are turned on.

We've also seen players being warned to avoid updating social media daily, posting check-ins, and sharing content of expensive items on their accounts. Though some, like Miami quarterback Tua, he went a different route. He just said, y'all, I have security and they have guns. Which honestly, that is probably gonna be

the most effective way to protect your shit. It's unfortunate, but it is the reality. And then, outgoing President Biden just granted clemency to nearly 1,500 Americans, which is the most any president has ever done in a single day. And he broke the record by a lot. It's like they handed him a list and they were like,

who do you think? And he was like, yes. Right, because just for comparison's sake, the previous record was held by Obama, who granted 330 people clemency at the end of his last term in 2017. And this is notably in the fact sheet for Biden's move. The White House said that of the 1500 people,

most are people who had been put on home confinement during the pandemic and quote, "'Have successfully reintegrated "'into their families and communities.'" And possibly explaining this move is that some of the Republicans are gonna be taking control of Congress next month with push forward legislation that would force some of those folks to return to prison.

Also delving into the specifics and the details, right? Biden is not pardoning most of these people. He's just commuting their sentences, which is a different thing. Well, a pardon totally erases a conviction. A commutation doesn't change the guilty verdict or exonerate the crime. It just reduces some or all of the punishment.

And while the commutations do make up the vast majority of the clemency that we're seeing here, Biden did also grant pardons to 39 people who were convicted of nonviolent crimes. With their fact sheet here noting that the people who were granted clemency today include nonviolent offenders, quote, "'who were sentenced under outdated laws,

"'policies, and practices that left them "'with longer sentences than if the individuals "'were sentenced today.'" Also with this, I'll say, you know, in addition to breaking the record for single day clemency, this move represents a big shift for Biden. And that, because until now, he had only issued just 26 pardons

and commuted sentences for around 140 people. With those notably including things like military vets being convicted of having gay sex, which used to be a crime under military law, and Biden also becoming the first president to pardon people with federal marijuana convictions. And very significantly here, it also appears that Biden is not done,

with the fact sheet explicitly saying that he would be reviewing and granting more clemency requests in the weeks to come. So it's gonna be very interesting to see what he actually does there, because, I mean, there's been growing pressure on him to commute the sentences of people on federal death row. I mean, federal executions have been paused under Biden,

who notably also failed to fulfill his campaign promise of ending the death penalty. But then also beyond that, it's been reported that Biden's team is considering the possibility of granting preemptive clemency for people who could be targeted by Trump's repeated vow to punish his perceived political enemies.

With that reportedly including Dr. Fauci, Senator-elect Adam Schiff, who led the first impeachment effort against Donald Trump, and former Congresswoman Liz Cheney, who has arguably become the number one GOP critic of Trump. So it's gonna be very interesting to see what happens from now till January 20th. But then we've gotta talk about this $895 billion

defense bill that just got passed by the House, except this story isn't actually about defense or national security or even military spending. Instead, it's about how this defense bill has actually become another battleground in the fight over transgender issues. And also with that, we're gonna go beyond the United States and take a look at recent news from the United Kingdom

to see how this debate compares on both sides of the pond. But let's start with the bill, because the bill does have stuff that you would normally expect to be in a piece of defense policy legislation. Like for example, there's considerable pay raises for enlisted and other service members. There's $3 billion for improving military housing. There's money for an initiative meant to bolster Taiwan's defense capabilities. And there's considerable pay raises for enlisted and other service members. There's $3 billion for improving military housing.

There's money for an initiative meant to bolster Taiwan's defense capabilities. And there's also controversial measures like increased military assistance at the US-Mexico border and the expansion of aid to Israel. But what ended up almost killing this bill was a provision that denied coverage for transgender healthcare

for the children of service members. And specifically, this provision would keep the military's healthcare plan from covering, quote, medical interventions for the treatment of gender dysphoria that could result in sterilization for children under 18. With that, a key thing is that some argue that Republicans have portrayed

almost all gender-affirming care, which could but doesn't necessarily include hormone therapy as possibly leading to sterilization, which notably is something that medical professionals say actually doesn't happen in most cases. With that, what we've seen are things like in a tweet, Mike Johnson himself describing the provision as a ban on transgender treatment in general.

And this is Democrats say that the language in the bill might be used to deny minors treatment to deal with the anxiety, depression, and suicidal ideation that many transgender children experience. With Adam Smith of Washington, for example, saying that the provision quote, "'Taints an otherwise excellent piece of legislation'

and adding, "'Blanketly denying healthcare to people who need it just because of a biased notion against transgender people is wrong. This inclusion of this harmful provision puts the lives of children at risk and may force thousands of service members to make the choice of continuing their military service

or leaving to ensure their child can get the healthcare they need. But the big thing there also being Smith expressing openness to debate, saying there is a reasonable question about what care minors should receive in this area. Then also with that, claiming the Republican leadership

actually rejected Democrats' offer to study this issue and look at the expertise of medical professionals. Claiming instead, they insisted on an outright ban because of their quote, "'ignorant, bigoted views about transgender people." Though also with that, a big thing is that Republicans originally pressed for a far more expansive ban, seeking to deny gender affirming treatment for anyone

covered under the military's insurance plan. Though seemingly, Democrats ended up talking them out of provisions limiting access to abortion services and restricting the Pentagon's DEI programs. And this is Republicans insisted on dropping a provision to expand access to IVF in the military. Currently, it's only available to service members if their infertility issues were caused by illnesses

or injuries sustained while on active duty. Some lawmakers wanted coverage for IVF treatments regardless of why they were needed. And also with this, part of the reason I'll say we're talking about it is even what's happening here, this is a big change from years past. Republicans and Democrats have historically tried to actually keep contentious social issues

out of the defense bill altogether. But with all that said, right, this specific bill, it ended up passing the House easily with 81 Democrats and 200 Republicans voting in favor. Now the Senate expected to take it up and pass the measure in the coming days. Then also as this is happening, we are seeing battles take place at the state level.

We're seeing things like just this week, Montana Supreme Court temporarily blocking a state ban on gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors. With that, Montana is now just one of roughly two dozen states that have introduced similar bans, and this is as the Supreme Court is now weighing the constitutionality of the one in Tennessee. While a decision there is not expected for several months, the court's conservative majority reportedly seems inclined to uphold the ban. But there's also seeing Republican politicians citing the restriction on gender-affirming care in Europe, including the United Kingdom,

to justify laws against youth gender medicine. But this is people saying European policies are notably different from the outright bans that are passed in US states, some of which end up threatening doctors with prison time or investigate parents for child abuse. With a number of people noting that the few European countries with restrictions

still allow gender treatments for certain adolescents and they're requiring new clinical trials to study and better understand their effects. Specifically, we're seeing a focus on hot button issues like hormonal therapies and puberty blockers. But the key thing being that gender affirming care encompasses a range of social, psychological, behavioral, and medical interventions such as counseling.

Which ends up bringing us to the big news today from the UK. Because we're now seeing the country indefinitely banning new prescriptions of puberty blockers to treat minors for gender dysphoria. And this actually goes back to last spring when the National Health Service, or NHS, stopped prescribing puberty blockers as routine treatment

to children and young people with gender dysphoria back in March. With that decision also making it the fifth European country to limit the medications because of a lack of evidence of their benefits and concern about long-term harm. And at around the same time, an independent NHS commission study found that the medical evidence around transition-related care for minors was remarkably weak and that more research was needed. With that then leading to May,

when the then-conservative government temporarily banned the private prescription of puberty blockers as well, a decision that was also upheld by the country's high court over the summer. So now what we're seeing is this new Labour Party government basically extending the ban until more evidence is available. And with that, you had Health and Social Care Secretary Wes Streeting saying, children's healthcare must always be evidence is available. And with that, you had Health and Social Care Secretary Wes Streeting saying, "'Children's healthcare must always be evidence-led.' The Independent Expert Commission on Human Medicines found that the current prescribing and care pathway

for gender dysphoria and incongruence presents an unacceptable safety risk for children and young people." With Streeting also saying decisions were being taken based on the evidence and advice of clinicians, not politics or political pressure, and adding, "'I know it won't feel like it based on the decisions I'm taking today, "'but I really do care about this,

"'and so does this government. "'I am determined to improve the quality of care "'and access to healthcare for all trans people.'" With him then finally speaking from his experience as a gay man saying, "'I can't pretend to know what that's like, "'but I do know what it's like to feel "'you have to bury a secret about yourself,

"'to be afraid of who you are, to be bullied for it, "'and then to experience the liberating experience "'of coming out.'" And so with all that, you have a number of people saying that the big thing here is that the government is for it and then to experience the liberating experience of coming out. And so with all that, you have a number of people saying that the big thing here is that the government is actually taking the steps to collect the evidence that says that it's lacking.

There are plans to set up a clinical trial into the use of puberty blockers next year and recruit the first patients by spring. Streeting saying that the study would help establish a clear evidence base for the use of this medicine. And with that, the ban will reportedly be revisited in 2027.

And this is in the meantime, an important thing to note is that the transgender youth already taking the medication, they can continue doing so. And minors there who experienced puberty at an abnormally early age, they'll still be able to receive new prescriptions for the medication.

Of course, with this, you have people saying they're concerned that there are kids out there who could benefit from the treatment, but they're not gonna be able to get it now. With them pointing to, for example, more than 6,000 children and young people who are reportedly on waiting lists for gender services in the UK.

So unsurprisingly, transgender activists around the world have still condemned the UK ban. With, for example, the head of one UK-based group saying, the government is entirely disregarding the voices of trans youth who made clear their deep opposition to the restriction of private prescriptions for puberty blockers during consultation.

This also adds, I mean, we're even seeing the medical establishment divide. In the US, where the ban's been way more aggressive, the American Academy of Pediatrics, for example, has been way more vocal in endorsing youth gender-affirming care, including hormonal treatments. But then we see its European counterpart openly acknowledging the concerns,

writing in February, for example. The fundamental question about whether biomedical treatments for gender dysphoria are effective remains contested. And so with all that, as we wait to see how all this plays out in both the UK and the United States, I'd love to know your thoughts here. And I extend that both to everyone as well, as if you personally have any experience

with anything like this, whether it be you, someone you know, anyone. Then in a quick break from the news, let's talk about workspace revolution. Sitting all day, that's a productivity killer. So enter today's sponsor, Uplift Desk, the game changer that's transformed how I work. Because like for me, this isn't just a desk,

this is a health pack. By switching between sitting and standing, you can supercharge your energy, focus, and creativity. I think of it as better circulation, zero strain, total win. I mean, my uplift desk has been a game changer. Being able to change up standing and sitting while I work, it boosts my creativity and productivity and more so than I even thought. I found myself more focused, more alert, and just having more energy throughout the day. Also, I mean, we're talking about serious customization options with over 200,000 configurations.

And their desk builder, it lets you easily design your dream workspace that's not just functional, but inspirational, sleek, eco-friendly, built to last. Also, I was specifically asked to show you their wire organizing pieces. And to be honest, I wasn't thrilled to take this on. When it comes to wires, I'm kind of a messy person,

but actually the desk made it shockingly easy to organize. The main thing, are you ready to upgrade your workspace? Because if you are, visit upliftdesk.com slash fill and use code fill to unlock Uplift's holiday sales, including free same day shipping, free returns, and an industry leading 15 year warranty. That's upliftdesk.com slash fill for a special offer only available when you use code fill. Live healthier with Uplift Desk.com slash phil for a special offer only available when you use code phil. Live healthier with Uplift Desk. Upgrade your workspace, upgrade your life. But then, we've got some big but quick news

out of South Korea. Remember how after the failed coup, President Yoon's party did not vote to impeach him? Well, it now looks like ahead of the next vote, the party's flipped. With the head of the People Power Party telling members that the party would officially support an impeachment, albeit with members voting based on their belief

and conscience, saying in a statement, "'We tried to find a better way than impeachment, but that other way is invalid. Suspending the president from his duties through impeachment is the only way for now, to defend democracy and the Republic.'" Right in that, as the other way he seems to be referring to is the hope that there would be enough pressure

for Yoon to resign. Though as we've seen, he has resisted those calls and actually had a speech yesterday where he was defiant and justified his call for martial law. With Yoon saying that the opposition are still North Korean sympathizers and quote, "'The opposition is now doing a knife dance of chaos, "'claiming that the declaration of martial law

"'constitutes an act of rebellion.'" With him then going on to say that they are actually the ones causing problems by making him a lame duck president and adding, "'I don't know which country the party belongs to "'and which country the National Assembly belongs to. With him then adding that he didn't actually mean to stop the National Assembly from doing their duties,

despite the fact that that is explicitly what martial law does in South Korea. With him saying, if I were to paralyze the functions of the National Assembly, I would have enforced martial law on the weekend, not on a weekday, and cut power and water at the parliament building first and restrict broadcasting, but I didn't do any of that.

So essentially his defense is, guys, didn't do any of that." Right, so essentially his defense is, "'Guys, didn't you see what a bad job I did? Obviously, if I was serious about it, I would have done a better one.'" But regardless of the words that he's saying now, it is very likely he is on his way out. Right, members of the People Power Party have been given permission to do so.

Even the leader of the party is behind the move. The Democrats, they're already drawing up another article of impeachment as I speak, which means that in the very near future, the people of South Korea will very the move. The Democrats, they're already drawing up another article of impeachment as I speak, which means that in the very near future, the people of South Korea will very likely say to President Yoon, That means goodbye in Korean. I'm very cultured. I speak Korean now.

Just trust me on that. And please do not ask me to say any other words in Korean. But then 233,597 people were wiped off the face of the planet this year by violent conflicts. A huge number on its own, but also exceptional because that's up from 180,000 last year. With notably most of this happening now in Ukraine,

followed by Palestine, and then a long list of other countries, including Myanmar, Lebanon, Sudan, Yemen, Mexico, Syria, and Haiti. And we're getting this information thanks to the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data, or ACLED, a group that tracks this kind of stuff. With them now just publishing a report

showing that the level of conflict in the world, it's doubled over the past five years. Right, in 2020, we were seeing just over 100,000 recorded conflict events. And this year we witnessed nearly 200,000. And this is the proportion of the world engulfed by conflict is apparently grown by 65% equivalent to nearly double the size of India over the past three years.

But with that, I think it is important to note that while these numbers give us a sense of the quantitative scale of violence around the world, if we leave it at just that, it tends to flatten the qualitative differences between the conflicts. So for example, bombing campaigns in the Middle East, mob violence in India, cartels, civil wars in Mexico,

attacks on shipping in the Red Sea, trench warfare in Ukraine, and the humanitarian crisis in Sudan are all very different phenomena. Yet there are also certain trends that prove generally true across the board. Like for example, violence becoming more urbanized and tightly concentrated,

hitting the same locations over and over again, which is particularly bad for civilians. And sure enough, we've seen more of them getting sucked into the vortex. With for example, Eikled finding that this year, one in eight people worldwide were exposed to conflict, meaning that they lived within five kilometers or less of it. With Palestinians facing the highest levels of violence

in the world with 81% being exposed to it. And all of this is if we take a step back and we look at all the conflict zones in a historical perspective, I mean, we get a really grim picture. Right back in the summer, the Institute for Economics and Peace identified a total of 56 active global conflicts

around the globe. That is the highest number reached since the end of World War II. So that can kind of give you an idea of where we're at, but also it's still up for debate on how to interpret these trends. Where one perspective and take is that the world may be entering a new normal of conflict

as international relations scholar, Paul Post put it to the Washington Post. And Eichled certainly thinks that the violence is only gonna get worse next year. Predicting the conflict event rates will grow by 15% at the beginning and likely 20% by the end of 2025. But the group's founder pointing to possible violence surges in Iran, Chad, Ecuador, and Pakistan.

Of course, one of the big wild cards that could throw everyone for a loop is Taiwan. But then another perspective and argument is that we've actually already reached the peak or are very close to it. And there are reasons to believe some of the current wars will soon wind down. With some here pointing to Ukraine, for example,

especially with Donald Trump in the White House. So there, Eichled disagrees, writing that despite the potential loss of Western support, Russia's maximal demands and Ukraine's existential dilemma mean that negotiation terms will be extremely difficult to reconcile. Saying conflict is very likely to continue at present or even higher levels.

And then regarding the Middle East, right? Could we see things cooling down there? Well, obviously the war in Gaza has expanded to Lebanon and the Red Sea, not to mention Israel's latest incursions into Syrian territory. But then at the same time, the fall of the Assad regime and the crippling of Hezbollah suggests that the strategic balance of power

may be tilting away from Iran and toward Israel, which may or may not bode well for regional stability, but that is a question for future historians. But then finally, there's also another perspective that regardless of the trends, 2024 was an outlier for one surprisingly simple reason. Roughly 80 countries, home to more than half the world's population, held national elections this year.

And so the argument here goes that when power is up for grabs, incumbent governments feel insecure and opposition groups spot an opportunity. Saying both sides pick up arms and mobilize supporters either to hold on to power or to seize. And actually, according to Eichled, the data seems to back this theory up. Countries with elections this year saw a 63% increase

in national political violence. That's compared to just over 21% increases for countries without elections. So some argue that the simple fact that so many places happen to have elections at the same time could explain at least some of the numbers, which notably contradicts a lot of the unexamined assumptions that people typically have about the kinds of places

where violence occurs. Right, because as Eklad notes, most conflict is not occurring in poor or isolated autocratic states, but in partially free countries. And that's in addition to middle-income countries and increasingly even high-income ones as well, which has led the group to state,

in short, more development and democracy do not constrain violence.'" But of course, like if we look at everything and we consider everything, we can know that two things can be true at once, right? It is possible that elections may have made this year especially bad, and it is possible that at the same time, there are still longer-term trends making things even worse.

But then with all that, it's why you have the International Rescue Committee laying out four global imbalances that it says are responsible for the deterioration in world affairs. One, hard power overwhelming diplomacy. Two, civilians bearing the brunt of war. Three, the climate crisis adding to humanitarian need. And four, economic inequality adding to the burdens.

You know, super easy things to handle and fix, and I'm sure everything is gonna be fine. That is the lie I increasingly tell myself every morning. I just look in the mirror and I go, well, what if everything I'm seeing and hearing isn't real? Yeah, that's how I'm gonna end this semi deep dive into global conflict, recommending a life hack and the hack is to lie to yourself when you wake up.

It'll make your day better, I promise. But then finally today, let's end this thing by talking about yesterday with a little comment commentary. Starting with the fact that a lot of the comments were about that whole Subaru crash situation. Some of the most popular takes yesterday, including as someone who's been scammed hard by a used car dealership, I won't believe for one second that they told him one, it needed work, and two, that they ever offered to refund him before he drove through the front door without actual evidence. Bet five bucks those parasites out of those bits

to make themselves look innocent. As well as, I have a hard time believing the car dealership really offered all those things before he drove the car through the front door. No one has offered solutions like your money back or a different car and decide, you know what? I'm gonna drive this car through their front door instead. To which I will say, I do not like to call anyone a liar

without evidence, but here's what I will say. My father, Papa DeFranco, among the jobs that he had for a while, he was a car salesman. And what it taught me is one, I am not a good salesman. Even though I speak for a living, I can't convince anyone of anything ever. And two, it taught me to never trust a car salesman. In my experience, you can usually tell a car salesman

or a GM is lying because their mouth is moving. That said, in this particular instance, I have not seen evidence that shows that they were lying and just the nature of things, it is very hard to prove a thing did not happen. And also, because I always feel a need to over-explain myself, I think it is an understood

that this is not me endorsing someone driving through a dealership. I just feel like I need to throw that out there because there are a number of people that will take someone going, I understand why people are feeling a certain way as a condoning of a scary thing, which also actually ended up getting exemplified in the comment section with someone writing, right or wrong, dude driving his car through the front of that dealership is just another example of people saying enough is enough when they feel like they're getting bent over. Dealerships are notorious for selling used vehicles with mechanical issues that they try to hide. With that person then having to add an edit, at no point did I say

I condone that behavior. I'm just pointing out that people's frustrations are boiling over, so get a grip and don't put words in my mouth. But yeah, that is where today's show is going to end. We have four more scheduled shows on the book till the end of the year, right next Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and after that, well, we'll talk about it next week. And until then, I hope you have a fantastic end of your week and weekend. And as always, remember, my name's Philip DeFranco. You've just been filled in.

I love your faces, and I'll see you right back here on Monday.