Outro

Malcolm and Simone Collins break down Helen Andrews’ “Great Feminization Theory” — the idea that the rise of wokeness, institutional dysfunction, and cancel culture correlates with fields tipping majority-female and importing feminine sociological norms (empathy over rationality, safety over risk, cohesion over competition).

They explore law schools, medicine, media, management, conflict resolution styles, why organizations feminize and then decline, practical solutions, male-only spaces, and how this intersects with marriage, ambition, and building high-agency families in a declining culture.

Show Notes

The theory

* presented by journalist Helen Andrews at the National Conservatism conference in Washington, DC in September 2025

* Speech got over 175K views

* later published as an essay in Compact Magazine in October 2025

* Connects the rise of wokeness and institutional dysfunction to higher percentages of women in formerly male-dominated fields

* Because women bring feminine values that prioritize empathy over rationality, safety over risk, and cohesion over competition

* Notes that many key institutions tipped from majority male to majority female in roughly the same period that “wokeness” intensified:

* law schools (majority female since 2016)

* New York Times staff (majority female since 2018, now 55 percent women)

* Medical schools (majority female since 2019)

* College instructors (majority female since 2023)

* The college‑educated workforce (majority female since 2019).

* Women now 33% of judges (63 percent of those appointed by Joe Biden)

* Women now 46% of managers

* Cites writers like Noah Carl and Bo Winegard & Cory Clark, saying survey data show women more likely than men to prioritize social cohesion over free speech (one cited survey: 71 percent of men favor free speech over cohesion, while 59 percent of women favor cohesion)

* Draws on Joyce Benenson’s book Warriors and Worriers, she reports lab observations that male groups “jockey for talking time, disagree loudly,” then quickly converge on a solution, while female groups focus more on personal relations, eye contact, and turn‑taking, paying less attention to the assigned task

* Attributes the rise of cancellations to women’s conflict aversion

* That’s interesting—I hadn’t seen it as being that way but it is

* References research and primate observations claiming that males are quicker to reconcile after conflict, while females favor slow, covert, ongoing competition within a group, and generalizes this to say men tend toward open conflict and reconciliation, whereas women undermine or ostracize enemies

* Examples cited

* Larry Summers’ resignation from Harvard in 2006 (after his comments about women in science)

* Bari Weiss’ resignation from NYT (Weiss described colleagues calling her a racist and bigot in internal Slack, and shunning people friendly with her)

* Doctors wearing political pins, endorsing Black Lives Matter protests during Covid as “public health” despite lockdown rules, and generally importing political causes into professional settings as a “failure to compartmentalize” tied to feminization

* Causes cited

* Andrews claims feminization is not organic but engineered via anti‑discrimination law

* because under‑representation of women invites lawsuits and huge settlements (she cites large companies that paid nine‑figure or multi‑million settlements over gender bias or “frat boy culture”), firms are pressured to hire and promote women and to suppress “masculine” office culture

* THe creation of hostile-to-men environments

* women’s preferred norms drive men out rather than women simply “outcompeting” men

Is it backed up by actual evidence?

Support

* Medicine

* Momen comprised only 9.7% of doctors in 1970

* Reached 32.4% by 2010 and continue to increase

* Medical students are now over 50% female

* Law

* Women were just 4.9% of lawyers in 1970

* Rose to 33.4% by 2010

* Reached 41% by 2024

* Academia

* Women law faculty now constitute the majority among those with 20 years of experience or less

* Women are projected to become the majority of full-time faculty in ABA-accredited law schools by 2024-2025

* Government

* In the U.S. Senate, women held 0% of seats in 1973 and 1975, rising to just 2% through most of the 1980s, then accelerating to 25% by 2023.

* The House of Representatives showed similar patterns: women were 3.2% of representatives in 1973, 10.8% by 1993, and 28.5% by 2023.

* Women’s representation in presidential Cabinet positions has fluctuated more dramatically based on administration, ranging from 0% in the early 1970s to a historic high of 48% under President Biden starting in 2021.

* Re: General government employment: While women made substantial gains in government employment from the 1940s through the early 2000s—rising from less than one-third to nearly half of the federal workforce—their representation has largely plateaued around 45-46% since the 2000s and has begun declining in absolute numbers due to recent federal workforce reductions.

Mixed

* Journalism

* 1971: Women represented only 22% of daily newspaper journalists and 11% of television journalists

* 1982: women comprised 34% of daily newspaper staff and 33% of television journalists

* 2001: women had reached 37% of daily newspaper newsroom staff and 40% of television news staff

* 2022: 40.9% of US journalists are women

* television (44.1%) and radio (43.7%)

* weekly newspapers (41.7%)

* daily newspapers (37.2%)

* wire services (34.1%)

* News magazines (43.9%) (up by about 10% over the past decade)

* Online media (40.4%) (up by about 10% over the past decade)

* One 2023 survey found journalists nearly evenly split by gender, with 51% men and 46% women.

Contra

* Business

* Corporations in general

* Women represented about 47% of the U.S. labor force in 2000

* As of 2025, women STILL constitute approximately 47% of total U.S. employees.

* Women were just 35% of the workforce in 1970, rising to 47% by 1990. Between 1966 and 2013, women’s participation rates in the workforce increased from 31.5% to 48.7%

* Startups (down over time)

* For over a decade, only ~2% of venture-backed startups are exclusively female founded

* In 2024, female-only founding teams received just 2.3% of global VC funding ($6.7 billion out of $289 billion total), while all-male teams captured 83.6%.

* This 2% figure has remained largely unchanged since at least 2017, when female-only teams received 2.5% of funding. By 2026, some reports indicate this has declined to 1-2%

* Female workforce participation is below its peak

* Women’s labor force participation peaked at 60% in 1999-2000 and has since declined to 57.5% as of March 2025, remaining well below men’s rate of 67.5%

* Women still constitute only 47% of the total U.S. labor force, and projections suggest this will remain “slightly less than half” through 2032

* Women remain underrepresented in senior leadership positions where institutional power is concentrated

* Women hold only 27% of U.S. medical school dean positions and 25% of department chair roles despite representing 45% of faculty

* In law, men still “dominate the upper echelons of the legal profession through federal judgeships, state supreme courts, law firm partnerships and corporate counsel positions”

* Women represent only 33% of law faculty with over 30 years of experience and comprise just 38% of C-suite positions in corporate America (up from 31% in 2021) (See: National Jurist)

The Criticism

* Andrews presents no policy solutions

* Some push back on Andrews’ argument that women are emotional while men are rational

Helen Andrews’ Background

* American conservative political commentator and author

* Senior editor, The American Conservative

* Features editor, Commonplace Magazine

* Graduated from Yale University in 2008 (BA in Religious Studies)

* Lived in Sydney, Australia from 2012 to 2017 (worked as a policy analyst and think tank researcher)

* 2021 book: Boomers: The Men and Women Who Promised Freedom and Delivered Disaster

* Argues that the Baby Boomer generation harmed American culture

* Profiles six prominent Boomers: Steve Jobs, Aaron Sorkin, Jeffrey Sachs, Camille Paglia, Al Sharpton, and Sonia Sotomayor

Episode Transcript

Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. Today we are gonna be talking about The Great Feminization Theory by Helen Andrews. In summation, if you are not familiar with the theory, ‘cause it’s been doing the rounds recently, and it might have some explanatory power to society’s current state.

She specifically looks at when various fields began to become majority female, be that university professors, law school students, scientists, management in the United States, most of which at this point is majority female. And she pinpoints the dates that these transitions happened to the rise of wokeness as a social phenomenon.

Arguing that what wokeness really is is a female sociological approach, like what makes female minds different from male minds, applied at the civilizational management scale. And I find it very interesting. I told Simone to dig into it. I mean, [00:01:00] unfortunately she’s got a cold today, so you’re gonna have to have a, a, a, a weak voice Simone here.

But she is a woman, so she, on- only she can truly understand the horrors of the female brain.

Simone Collins: Yeah, I don’t know. Whenever I have some kind of throat problem, I just think of Gentleman Prefer Blondes when at one point a boy speaking from a trench coat that Marilyn Monroe’s hiding behind and she’s like, “Laryngitis,” and that’s all I think of when I have this voice. And that’s such a great, like, that home film is such a great study of gender roles and, and playing with them.

Anyway, though- ... i’m, I’m, I, I think there’s a lot of merit to this theory, but I also think that there’s some, I don’t know. I wanna, I wanna question it, and I even have one kind of, a- another theory about how maybe men are responsible for this too. So I wanna hear your thoughts.

Malcolm Collins: Okay, go into it.

Simone Collins: The, this [00:02:00] first emerged last year in September when Helen Andrews gave a speech about this great feminization theory at the National Conservatism Conference in Washington, DC, and the speech was super popular.

It got over 175,000 views. So then she decided to publish an essay about it in Combat magazine that October, and that was just when this dude was born. And yes, like you said, she connects the rise of wokeness and institutional dysfunction to higher percentages of women in formerly male-dominated fields.

And that’s really the key part here, because men still are the dominant people in employment now, I mean, at least formal employment. But her point is that women bring feminine values that prioritize empathy over rationality and safety over risk and cohesion over competition, and that many institutions that were really key in influencing how the rest of society works had this tipping point over, like, a series of maybe, [00:03:00] like, five to seven years.

And she cites specifically law schools, which became majority female since 2016, New York Times staff, which was majority female since 2018 and is now 55% women, and medical schools, which became majority female since 2019, and then also the college-educated workforce, which was majority female since 2019.

So these are really recent tipping points. Women are now 33% of judges additionally, and 63% of those were appointed by Joe Biden. Again, this is super recent. And women are also 46% of managers, as you pointed out. And in her more detailed article, she cites writers like Noah Carl and Bo Winegard and Corey Clark whose survey data show that women are more likely to prioritize social cohesion over free speech.

For example, one cited survey has 71% of men [00:04:00] favoring free speech over cohesion, while 59% of women favor cohesion. I think we might have even covered this in our podcast.

Malcolm Collins: Yeah. And

Simone Collins: then she also draws on Joyce Benenson’s book Warriors and Worriers. Like, isn’t worrying. And where she reports lab observations that male groups will jockey for taking time and disagree really loudly, but then converge on a solution.

Whereas female groups focus more on, like, personal relations and eye contact and turn-taking. Like, classic stuff that we think first really saw with the rise of Occupy Wall Street. And then they pay less attention to the actual assigned task. She also attributes the rise of cancellations to women’s conflict aversion.

And I think of that, that’s the first of her theories that I find to be really revelatory, because I hadn’t seen it as that way, but it really is. Like, the way that women deal with conflict is they just freeze people out and cold shoulder them. There’s all this, like, behind closed doors [00:05:00] talking about people behind their backs.

Whereas men just trash talk you to your face, and, like, you work it out in person.

Malcolm Collins: Yeah Which I think obviously is true I noticed this and we talked about it, with the conflict between Trump and Elon. Which was- Yeah ... really refreshing and I do not think damaged either of their reputations nearly as much as it would have had it been a standard woke fight.

Where they just, like, basically to each other’s faces on X, said a bunch of mean stuff for a week and then they got over it, and nobody cared anymore.

Simone Collins: Yeah ... and

Malcolm Collins: it, it felt so different from the types of political battles that we are used to out of, like, the Clintons and stuff like that. Where Hillary would never just go out there and say a bunch of mean things against another mainstream Democratic candidate.

Simone Collins: No, they like, they, they shadowban you to the point- Mm ... where, like, you don’t necessarily even know you’ve been frozen out, you just have been. It’s like, the, there’s no, there’s no due process. You don’t have a chance to even have your say. You just get uninvited at some point.

Malcolm Collins: Well,

Simone Collins: and that’s not even true.

And I heard in popular, like, [00:06:00] mainstream outlets-

Malcolm Collins: Yeah, mm-hmm ...

Simone Collins: that cancel culture was attributed to, well, they say it came out of, like, gay culture- Yeah ... specifically. Like, at least the, the, the linguistic origins of it came from gay culture apparently. But yeah, I mean, like the can- the, the, the, the act of cancellation-

Malcolm Collins: It didn’t, by the way

as a- And I have explained this to you before. You just refuse to believe it, because it’s, it’s very well documented. What do

Simone Collins: you mean?

Malcolm Collins: So cancel culture, the word cancel-

Simone Collins: Yeah ...

Malcolm Collins: came from the campaign #cancelcolbert- No, but- ... as in get his show- Canceled. Then people retroactively, as people do for many things, attempt to pin it to either Black or gay culture because this is just something progressive culture does.

It cannot admit that something had a random origin or a white origin, so it will always go back and try to find any historical incidents of [00:07:00] gay or Black people using a word in a specific way so it can say actually that everybody knows that they do this. It’s always like, “This came from Black culture.

This came from gay culture.” And you’re like, “Well, obviously not everything came from one of those two cultures.” And with cancellation, it’s one of the clearest examples because to cancel a television show is a normal thing to say. The very first major widespread campaign of cancellation, I just cannot deal with this historical lamp what is it?

L- lamp gassing? Light, light gassing?

Simone Collins: Gaslighting.

Malcolm Collins: Gaslighting.

Simone Collins: Yes.

Malcolm Collins: Gaslighting, yes. This, this historic gaslighting that this came literally from anything other than ca- #CancelColbert. That was, they, like no other incident was nearly that big, and she clearly had no connection to gay culture. She clearly didn’t get the term from gay, gay culture.

She wanted to cancel his television show.

Simone Collins: Well, anyway, it’s, it’s, it’s, I, I just never thought of it, I never realized the [00:08:00] extent to which it is a very deeply feminine way of conflict resolution.

Malcolm Collins: Just to say- It was a woman, by the way, who did this ...

Simone Collins: conf- it’s, it’s very, like, direct conflict adverse conflict resolution.

But one that is ultimately less just because it doesn’t give the aggrie- or the accused party a chance to defend themselves. It just ruins them

Malcolm Collins: without- And one study you

Simone Collins: haven’t studied,

Malcolm Collins: Which is obviously very important to all of this in terms of the rise of women-

Simone Collins: Yeah ...

Malcolm Collins: is the study that showed I, I hope our audience is familiar with this one by now because it is very big to my understanding of, of, of reality now where people played a game against other people for resources.

And some of these individuals were shown to be cheating, and some of these individuals were shown to not be cheating. And men and women were shown them being shocked while they were playing the game. And for men when somebody wasn’t cheating and they were shocked, it distressed men and, and, and made them upset.

But when they were cheating and they were shocked, it made [00:09:00] men satisfied. It gave them a dopamine hit. But for women, it made them equally upset whether they were cheating or whether they were playing fairly when

Simone Collins: they were shocked. Yeah, they didn’t care. They didn’t care about, like, punishment. They don’t, they don’t want any form of

Malcolm Collins: punishment on anyone

Simone Collins: Yeah, be it just or not.

Yeah. Which is a, a another key flashpoint in modern society. The, the, the key division being those who wish to enforce our laws and those who do not. Though at a recent dinner party it was Chatham House Rules, but someone that many of you will know well as a, a major, like, thought leader, pointed out that for a very long time, it is, it has been a debate in society about enforcing rules.

It was, like, uncool to enforce laws. So yeah- Wait, when was that? ... it’s not necessarily new, but it’s certainly-

Malcolm Collins: Sorry, when? When did they say this was true?

Simone Collins: Like, since the 1960s.

Malcolm Collins: Okay, that’s not a long time.

Simone Collins: Okay, fair enough.

Malcolm Collins: And- It’s, it’s a long time in- No, I mean, it is, it is relevant [00:10:00] because, you know, I pointed out that the the Quakers were incredibly against enforcing rules.

And, Well,

Simone Collins: they were all about... They were like, you didn’t visit the right person after you got married, you’d be, like, frozen out of your Quaker society. Well,

Malcolm Collins: they

Simone Collins: had a- They were all- ...

Malcolm Collins: 22-step process after you got married, and if you did any part of it wrong-

Simone Collins: It was more than two steps. Are you kidding me?

It was like 18 steps. I said 22. Okay. Thank you. 22.

Malcolm Collins: Yes. Continue.

Simone Collins: Anyway. Anyway so, in addition to the... Oh, sorry, additional research that she cites is primate stuff, like how males are quicker to reconcile after conflict, whereas female primates show a lot more of that, like, slow burn resentment that you get with women.

Yeah ... so she’s just trying to sort of generalize to say that men both as primates and as, as Homo sapiens, tend toward open and rapidly resolved conflict, whereas women tend to undermine and ostracize and make things a lot more long-term. [00:11:00] And then she cites three sort of salient examples in her argument.

She talks about Larry Summers’ resignation from Harvard in 2006 after he made comments about women in science. It feels like just yesterday, which is crazy. That was 20 years ago. And then Bari Weiss’ resignation from The New York Times in which she described colleagues calling her a racist and a bigot in an internal Slack, how people even who were just friendly with her were shunned.

And she also describes doctors wearing political pins and endorsing Black Lives Matter protests during- By

Malcolm Collins: the way, I love Bari Weiss’s story there. That, that, that turned around on those people’s faces.

Simone Collins: Yeah. I mean, seems to be working out pretty well for her.

Malcolm Collins: Yeah, right?

Simone Collins: But yeah, the, the doctors were endorsing going to protests even though it was a public health risk to the lockdown rules and, like, violating lockdown rules.

And- Could you explain

Malcolm Collins: how that works?

Simone Collins: Sorry ... integrating- You remember how during COVID-19 a [00:12:00] lot of doctors were- Yeah, I

Malcolm Collins: remember, but I don’t understand why that’s relevant to the woman thing. Explain the connection there.

Simone Collins: Oh, she’s, she’s describing how an increase in women in the medical profession led for a shift in emphasizing sort of emotion and sentiment and care, like concerns about social justice over like literally concerns about human health and chronic disease.

Malcolm Collins: Ah, so that’s when doctors became useless.

Simone Collins: Yeah, they’re like, “Who cares about transmitting COVID? Go out to the Black Lives Matter protest.” So, you know, that bothers me because, you know, they, they won’t, they won’t emphasize palliative care ‘cause they just wanna keep people alive even when they only have like terrible quality of life left.

But they’re like, “Yeah, go ahead, die as long as it’s going to a Black Lives Matter protest.” And in terms of the causes she cited for this, and some of the, the primary criticism that she actually gets for this is she doesn’t really get really into like how to fix the [00:13:00] problem. But she does point out that basically legalizing a lot of this was a big source of the issue.

That by making organizations more liable for discrimination- Mm-hmm ... and, and making anti-discrimination lawsuits a lot easier to do, workplaces had to become more female friendly places and they couldn’t really tell you to guess this weird female behavior. And then if, for example, in an, in an organization you have an under-representation of women and then you’re therefore exposed to lawsuits, you’re gonna get a lot more women.

And you’re gonna have people do anything they can to avoid the risk. Right. She also mentions that like, basically once you get this like tipping point of women in an organization, you just kind of create this de facto hostile to men environment.

Malcolm Collins: I’m so sorry, he’s just like screaming. Well, I mean, I think something that’s really important with all of this, and it’s something that I think [00:14:00] parts of our audience miss because they molder over the unfairness of all of this in terms of the life paths that they told were open to them when they were growing up and then going into the traditional workforce, is that a lot of these companies are failing at this point.

They are falling apart in terms of their ability to competently produce products. It is quite shocking actually that when we look at the cutting edge AIs right now, which are obviously the cutting edge of technology, require huge amounts of investment very competent teams, everything like that, right?

You would expect because unlike previous generations of transfer when you go from one generation of tech to the next, Typically, the, the, the history was is that the new tech required very little money to operate and could be done very inexpensively. And even though during this one particular technological revolution this is not as much the case, it is still the new [00:15:00] and young AI companies that are dominating.

It is not the Geminis, it is not whatever the hell Microsoft made, Copilot. It’s, it’s not the Facebook, it’s not the, I mean, Facebook is maybe... No, Llama is terrible. It’s, it’s not Apple. Apple AI is, like, an actual joke. It’s not Adobe. It’s not, you, you know, it’s not any of the mainstream players, right?

It’s, it’s, it’s the little guys. It’s your Groks and your Mistrals and your OpenAI’s and Anthropic’s and everything like that. And so the question is, is how is this even conceivable? And the answer is that the organizations that l- live for a long period of time feminize so quickly and adopt feminine institutional norms that they are no longer able to compete.

And this is why if you go to, like, our website, like rfab.ai, a lot of people are like, “Wow, your, like, super search feature is, like, really good in terms of, like, using AI to cross-check AI across multiple models. Like, why are none of the big companies using this?

Speaker: Note [00:16:00] this morning, , we are uploading the ability on rfab.ai to on SuperSearch upload things like documents and spreadsheets. So improving every day

Malcolm Collins: Oh, you have, like, a card game that uses AI.

That’s, I haven’t seen this implemented before. Oh, your chatbot system’s better than most of the other chatbot systems. Are you just, like, two people building this?” And it’s like, yeah, you know, um The, the reason we’ve been able to do this is because we are not bogged down by the giant self-referencing bureaucracy.

And a lot of people, I think, get mad at being frozen out of parts of the tech space right now, when the reality is, is the parts of the tech industry that are being monopolized are going to collapse. And the people who have invested in- Yeah,

Simone Collins: and I think you’re mentioning this, like in light of, of people talking about like immigrant groups, freezing them out.

Like- Yeah, they’re like incompetent immigrants ... if you’re in a, if you’re in a company that is like mass importing what you perceive to be incompetent immigrants, [00:17:00] that company’s not long for this world anyway.

Malcolm Collins: Exactly. You should be able to out-compete what that company is doing, right? Like, if they’re mass importing incompetent immigrants, then the presumably the quality of the product’s going to go down.

If the quality of the product doesn’t go down, then they didn’t need you anyway, or the immigrants weren’t as incompetent as you thought they were. And I think that that’s really a critical point, right? So the question is, is, is then people are like, “Well, you’ve got natural monopolies.” And yes, natural monopolies matter, but you can still break natural monopolies.

It has happened multiple... Sorry, for people who don’t understand what a natural monopoly is typically in industries that involve two-sided marketplaces search, social media, these are good examples of them. You typically get a case in which one and the largest company ends up being 85% of the market.

And we have seen these dominate for a long time in something like search or advertisement or, Those are really the only two where I know... amazon, Amazon [00:18:00] is the, the third one. But they’re not as stable as you would think. So if you look at something like social media, social media is a natural monopoly that’s undergone multiple disruptions throughout our lifetimes, where one brand was completely eradicated almost.

Another is online dating. Online dating is a two-sided marketplace that has undergone complete transformations multiple times in our lifetime. So you can disrupt this if you can create a better product. Oh, another one that’s undergone complete disruption is instant messaging systems. Instant messaging is a two-sided marketplace that has undergone multiple enormous disruptions.

Obviously the biggest one that we would want to see disrupted is video streaming. But it is incredibly expensive to do, which is one of the reasons it hasn’t been. And a lot of... Yeah, it’s, it’s, it’s difficult. What you would really need to do is have a site. Like if I was going to attempt to compete with YouTube, which Rumble is, I, not doing it the way I would do it is to essentially mirror [00:19:00] and host YouTube videos alongside the videos that my own site hosted that couldn’t easily be taken down.

So there is no cost to somebody to switch over to my site in terms of the videos that they like on YouTube. And you could do this legally. Just use an embedding- But

Simone Collins: where would they get the money for all that hosting? I guess something disruptive could change that and make it more affordable.

Malcolm Collins: No, you don’t need to host the YouTube videos.

They’re hosted on YouTube’s backend. Oh. All the videos that you’re ho- They’re just basically embedded videos that are acting as if they’re videos on your platform.

Simone Collins: Oh, yeah. Okay, I get it. I get

Malcolm Collins: it. But again, this is just like, just think through this stuff, right? Like...

Simone Collins: Yeah. Anyway, what I think is interesting, I mean, like to her point, just in terms of talking through the, the, the argument she made and whether it has merit, I do think it’s interesting that she points out this tipping point, but one issue is that, like, if this is the problem, if the [00:20:00] problem is women entering these formerly male-dominated fields, what percentage of women is too many?

Because when you actually look at medicine okay, yes, over 50% of medical students are now female, but by 2010, only around like a third of women in medicine or, sorry, of people in medicine, professionals in medicine were female. So that’s not, that’s not that much. And women, I mean, that’s compared with only 9.7% in 1970.

But like, is 30% too much? Like, w- ‘cause 2006 is the first example of this cancellation being an issue. Like, presumably by 2010 that was already an issue. I’m not sure, like when is, when is too many women too many women? Also looking at law, so in 1970 only 4.9% of lawyers were women, and then by 2010 it was similar to medical [00:21:00] professions and women, about a third of women.

Or sorry, a third of lawyers were women. And then by 2024 it’s 41%, but it’s not that most women are, or sorry, most lawyers are women. It’s just that there’s more women than ever before. So part of me wonders like where is the tipping point, because they’re not necessarily female dominated. And also an important point is that all really.. M- most leadership positions still are overwhelmingly male dominated So if you actually look at, like, the, the leadership of every major company y- you’re not gonna, you’re not gonna see that many women. Women hold only 27% of US medical school dean positions and 25% of department chair roles, even though they rep- I think

Malcolm Collins: that’s really misleading and an illusion.

Really? ... specifically what creates this illusion is for the very most senior of roles most of them were fought over [00:22:00] a couple decades ago. So a lot of

Simone Collins: people- So you think there’s just a big delay when it comes to senior leadership?

Malcolm Collins: Well, yeah, a lot of people in these roles are in their 70s, right?

Like, of course they’re overwhelmingly male. The world was different back then. So I do not think it’s, it’s meaningful to point that out.

Simone Collins: Okay, ‘cause I mean, it’s also the same, like women are only 38% of C-suite positions in America.

Malcolm Collins: S- again what’s the average age of a C-suite position in America?

Simone Collins: Let’s just- Yeah, okay ... keep it that way. So you just think that there’s a delay there? ‘Cause part of me wonders if men are still dominant in these positions, is this kind of a comp- a competitive tactic to get rid of middle management that are men who could c- potentially supplant them, and just replace them with less competent, less engaged women who are also less likely to supplant them, thereby solidifying their position in leadership?

Like it’s a gerontocratic status maintenance strategy. You don’t think that that’s in [00:23:00] play?

Malcolm Collins: No. Th- it’s, it’s just that they’re old. Like, as, as the workforce ages up, it seems very obvious to me C-suites are gonna become increasingly female, as we’ve already seen. In fact, I would ar- go so far as to argue if you just look at the math of when women began to dominate management positions and then age it forwards you’re, you’re going to see C-suite positions changing at the same rate.

The only place where this really changes is outside of major companies, if you’re talking at companies that were still run by their original founder. And if you’re looking at companies still run by their original founder, of course they’ll be overwhelmingly male because th- you know, these are the, the competent people who are being frozen out of the workforce right now.

Not even like men are smart. It’s just like if you’re a competent woman, you’re going to get a job. If you’re a competent man, you’re less likely to get a job deserving of your competence.

Simone Collins: That’s fair. And also, when you look at younger people in, for example, like law school faculty women in law school faculty are now the majority among those [00:24:00] with 20 years of experience or less.

So I guess per what you’re saying, we can expect leadership to be Majority female in most fields going forward. At least, like medical, law, academia. And also- Yeah ... I mean, similar things are happening in government. I mean, even historically, government was, in terms of like federal jobs and stuff, there were a lot of women working in government.

But now it actually, it’s plateaued since the 2000s. It, it plateaued around 45 to 46%, which is more representative of just the number of, the percentage of women in the workforce. So I guess government isn’t that good at representing it. But now in terms of like House of Representatives, as of 2023, 28.5% of House of Representatives members were women, and in the Senate it was 25% in 2023.

So it’s still a minority, so I also wonder like how many, how, what [00:25:00] percentage of women is too many? I’m just not sure.

Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Well, I mean- In journalism- Again, keep in mind, congressmen and senators are enormously old. So again, it’s, it’s not as relevant, but continue. Yeah.

Simone Collins: I guess that’s fair.

Malcolm Collins: Well,

Simone Collins: and they don’t exercise that much

Malcolm Collins: control

Simone Collins: journalism personally I think, like the New York Times I think is an outlier in terms of being majority women because of, as of 2022- 20- ... only 40, 40% of journalists in the US were women. 44% in television, 43% in radio, 41% in newspapers, 37% of daily newspapers, 34% of wire services. So-

Malcolm Collins: But with a lot of newspaper media it’s, it’s really irrelevant.

And this is again what I’m talking about, right? Like, as these institutions feminize, they became irrelevant. As Hollywood feminized, it became irrelevant. As newspapers re- feminized, they became irrelevant. We are seeing a society where, yes, women, immigrants, [00:26:00] Indians may capture organizations, but often not long after they do, if they are not competent, those organizations begin to erode in terms of their ability to innovate and market dominance.

Simone Collins: Well, speaking of erosion, it could be that this feminization theory, while it has its merits also is a, it’s like a short-lived ph- phenomenon, and as you pointed out, it’s kind of toxic and, I mean, you point this out extensively in The Pragmatist’s Guide to Crafting Religion. Call it feminization, call it the woke mind virus, whatever you wanna call it, urban monoculture, it is parasitoidal, as you say.

Like it destroys the things that it takes over. And when you look at where you see the fewest women, I think that’s where we’re gonna see the greatest takeover over time. So if you look at, for example, startups Women just aren’t there. For over a decade, only about 2% of [00:27:00] venture-backed startups are exclusively female founded.

And that’s down actually, I think, from before. So- Well,

Malcolm Collins: yeah, I mean, I... There was a period where- I think around- ... it was like a point of pride to fund a female startup, and that’s not even a thing anymore. Like, the female- Yeah ... startup groups have mostly- Yeah ... dissolved because everybody realized it was stupid to give women money.

Simone Collins: Yeah, well, and there were some high-profile busts that scaled-

Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Uh-huh ... badly. Some high-profile busts. Yeah, I think so. So- Some with holdings,

Simone Collins: yeah ...

Malcolm Collins: it’s, it’s actually more than that. So both of us worked in venture capital, and if you have worked with all-female founding teams even when their companies are doing good, they’re often kind of delusional about like, how management should work, how their team should work, how they construct things, what they should actually be focused on.

So even where I’ve seen a female-founded company, you know, just serendipitously take off it is a nightmare wrangling female CEOs into not self-sabotaging because they [00:28:00] constantly want to focus on whatever sort of messaging is capturing them that day. I, I cannot imagine, and I bemoan our audience so much, having to marry women whereas I got to marry- Oh, I’m so sorry everyone

an autist like Simone. The, the... That’s her gender, by the way. Au- au- Yeah,

Simone Collins: I don’t count.

Right, I identify as re, and those are my pronouns. Re ... really though, like I think the, the best thing about married couples is their pronouns become we and they , so.

Malcolm Collins: Is those- Yeah ...

Simone Collins: are those

Malcolm Collins: your neo-pronouns?

Simone Collins: Yeah, my neo-pronouns are we/they so , whatever. But also, another important thing I think to note, and I think this is only gonna become a lot more profound as AI rises, female workforce participation is actually below its peak.

So women’s labor force participation, it peaked at 60% in the [00:29:00] 1999-2000 range, which I didn’t know. I didn’t know that it got so high for women, and then declined to 57.5% as of March 2025. So it’s below the rate of men’s, which is 67.5%. And right now, women are 47% of the total US workforce, and that it’s gonna probably remain slightly less than half.

But-

Malcolm Collins: Well- ...

Simone Collins: that’s what projections say. I think as AI rises, I would not be at all surprised if in the 2030s we saw it dip well below 45, possibly even go to 44%, and then go even further below in the 2040s Like to 40

Malcolm Collins: Mm-hmm

Simone Collins: So we’ll see

Malcolm Collins: Well-

Simone Collins: But ...

Malcolm Collins: I mean, we already saw this in after DOGE, which we’ve talked about in our episode where like wokes abandoned Black women where we point out that there is a huge glut of Black female unemployment right now [00:30:00] because the organizations that were captured by DEI and over-employing them collapsed at the same time as government s- services, partially due to DOGE, stopped hiring people solely based on DEI.

And a lot of Black women had made that basically their entire career, and it’s caused a 50% explosion in Black female unemployment in just the last year.

Simone Collins: Yeah.

Malcolm Collins: So, so we’re actually already seeing the fallout of this. And the c- Yeah.

Simone Collins: Well, because it’s, it’s inherently unsustainable. And I think in the end, like if you resolve conflicts by not actually resolving them, by shadow banning and canceling people, you’re going to let problems fester.

And I shared with you on WhatsApp this graph that went a little bit viral on X this week that showed a trajectory of basically like the male response to conflict resolution versus the fem- res- female response to conflict resolution. It’s a graph- where, where

Malcolm Collins: did you send this? ... that goes

Simone Collins: from the functional system to dysfunctional system.

I’ll resend it to you on WhatsApp right now.

Malcolm Collins: Are you talking [00:31:00] about Elon’s?

Simone Collins: Elon retweeted it.

Malcolm Collins: Okay, that graph. Okay. Okay, yeah, I know what you’re talking about. Okay, continue.

I mean, this is, this is reflected in Leafly’s latest song is basically about this as a theory. You know, you’ve, you’ve

Simone Collins: got

Malcolm Collins: a- Yeah.

Simone Collins: It shows basically unkind truth to unkind truth to unkind truth makes a functional system become more functional, versus kind lie to kind lie to kind lie makes a dysfunctional system even more dysfunctional over time, or any system more dysfunctional over time. And that’s basically just the, the difference between male and female conflict resolution.

And also just general treatment of issues in general. Like women, as through various forms of intrasexual competition and mate guarding, will tell other women, “Oh, like eat that piece of cake,” or, “You do look great,” or, you know, “Dump him,” even when they really shouldn’t be told that. And it ultimately is to their detriment.

[00:32:00] Whereas men will be like, “Dude, you’re getting fat,” or like, “No, you know, she’s out of your league anyway. You should, you know-

Malcolm Collins: Yeah ...

Simone Collins: give up and be a better partner.” Like that, you, you, you see men telling each other the unkind truths and that’s, I think, why ultimately they’re kind of behind most of society’s major innovations because you’re not gonna get- I, I kinda don’t think

Malcolm Collins: that’s why or even the primary reason men innovate more than women.

I think-

Simone Collins: Just testosterone? Is that what you’re gonna

Malcolm Collins: reckon it’s? It’s neurological differences.

Simone Collins: And then what? Also being smarter on average?

Malcolm Collins: I didn’t say that. I just said neurological differences, sociological

Simone Collins: differences.

Malcolm Collins: Come on, Simone. We- we’re not, we’re not going for a channel ban here, okay?

Simone Collins: I wonder, would, would, would recognizing that men are on average smarter than women get us in trouble?

Malcolm Collins: Yeah, it would get us in trouble, Simone. So we don’t recognize that.

Simone Collins: So we never... Yeah, we, we, we’re speaking in hypotheticals, of course.

Malcolm Collins: Yeah, hypotheticals only. Come on, [00:33:00] Simone. Right. I’m not the smarter one in this relationship, it’s clearly you. This is why you’re doing all the analysis for us.

Simone Collins: Surely, surely you could hypothetically be the smarter one,

Malcolm Collins: right?

Hypothetically.

Simone Collins: Yeah.

Malcolm Collins: Yeah.

Simone Collins: So let’s just say hypothetically. But I mean, so the biggest criticism that Helen Andrews faced with is that she had no solution, and I guess the only solution we’ve proposed so far is, “Don’t worry, it solves itself.” Like, put women in charge- Well, no ... they’ll bring feminism to

Malcolm Collins: the ground It solves itself if you are diligent in guarding against it as we rebuild the economy ourselves with our own companies.

Simone Collins: Yeah, I mean, the, the most practical solution for the problems that she points out is don’t make companies liable for being male-friendly spaces or for being female hostile spaces. But how, like, how functionally do you do

Malcolm Collins: that? Hm.

Simone Collins: Repeal laws.

Malcolm Collins: Well, yeah [00:34:00] you know, I, I think you look at RFab and we don’t hire any women.

We don’t have any women. We got you working on it and that’s it, and like calling you a woman feels a little perverse within the current ecosystem.

Simone Collins: I think your larger solution is not hiring humans though, so I don’t know if that counts.

Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Well, I mean, humans are also pretty terrible though.

Simone Collins: I guess it’s...

Last time we checked. That’s

Malcolm Collins: the whole reason why my expertise is, is not working with people, because people are such a bunch of b******s.

Speaker 22: Yeah.

Speaker 23: I don’t like

Speaker 22: people.

Speaker 23: Oh, well, now that’s not fair, Roy. Have you met all of them?

Speaker 22: I’ve met enough of them. People. What a bunch of b******s.

Simone Collins: They really are, though. But I don’t know. I think, I think just removing legal liability is probably one of the biggest things, but I think there’s also a cultural element [00:35:00] of celebrating, to the point of Bronze Age Pervert actually, male-only spaces.

Malcolm Collins: Mm-hmm.

Simone Collins: Like a lot of, a lot of men online have celebrated this idea of a return to male only spaces, and I encountered some people, like when I was in Austin a couple weeks ago, who were really excited to start like men’s clubs like private invite-only men’s clubs and membership clubs. No domination will never

Malcolm Collins: work

Simone Collins: I don’t know, man.

Like even, I mean, they think men

Malcolm Collins: still want to interact

Simone Collins: in person. They do. They do ... Taylor Lorenz was talking about how now the high class and trendy thing to do. No, I’m telling you, even highly leftist Taylor Lorenz, I just watched her on a podcast today, was talking about how the high class thing to do now is to meet people in person and hang out in person.

And I could absolutely see it being very trendy to only do stuff in person going forward. Mark my words, I’m seeing it. There’s like a tipping point. So- Not

Malcolm Collins: among the high class people I know. Among the high class people I know, I’m seeing the [00:36:00] exact opposite. In person is increasingly seen

Simone Collins: as- Yeah. We’re terminally online, Seth

Malcolm Collins: No. It’s different I’m talking about the ones I know who used to be offline people, right? Like, the, the upper class people I know who used to socialize offline no longer do. Now I mean, here’s an example, Simone. Brian Chow, right? Like, he’s talked to us about the way he does socialization now.

Simone Collins: And- Oh my God, though.

No, no, y- no, that’s the problem, is he has shifted to being literally someone who is employed and working for network state.

Malcolm Collins: No, I know he’s working for network state. Network school. Sorry But the communities that he is most proud of being a member of and associates most with are things like Signal groups and stuff like that.

They are not personal networking events or anything like that. Because the reality is, is that if you are engaging with these people- He

Simone Collins: literally, his life now

Malcolm Collins: pivots

Simone Collins: around- I

Malcolm Collins: understand, but that doesn’t mean that’s his social life ... an in, like only

Simone Collins: in person city

Malcolm Collins: state. Right. And the point I’m making is despite that, that is [00:37:00] not his social life, and that shows how severe this thing is- Yes,

Simone Collins: it is

Malcolm Collins: among c- you have, you, you haven’t talked with him recently about his social life. If you look at an insider- I

Simone Collins: read all of his Substack posts. Do you?

Malcolm Collins: Okay, I haven’t read his recent Substack posts. So you’re saying he’s regularly- Then, then you need to- ... socializing in person?

Simone Collins: Yes. That’s what you do at network school.

Malcolm Collins: No, no, no, no, no. It, it includes your week- No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no ...

Simone Collins: it

Malcolm Collins: includes your week at network school I don’t mean your... Simone, I am not talking about your subjective guess around what happens in network states. You read posts about him going to- Network school ... in person parties and events. Or-

Simone Collins: Yeah, he’s alluded to them

Malcolm Collins: Alluded to them.

‘Cause the last time I talked to him, he talked about Signal groups being the core source of power in his society, and it makes a lot of sense. That was a long

Simone Collins: time ago. No, no, no.

Malcolm Collins: Even if you’re in a network state. So just think about this rationally. Okay. Suppose you’re a man and you’re rational, Simone. So I know this is gonna take a lot of work, so try to- Oh my God

get there with me, okay? You care about [00:38:00] moving up in the world, about associating with people who are in positions of power. Within your industry, right? Or within some industry tangential enough to yours, or within an intellectual space tangential to yours. Okay? What is the probability that the leaders, the intellectual leaders or the economic leaders of those communities are going to happen to be in your network state, even if your network state is highly selective?

Virtually zero. This is also true if you’re asking in your city, in your area, in your state. And so if you’re actually being like a man and efficient, you don’t bother with that. You instead focus on gaining access to the digital isolated environments, because this is where you can interact with the actual world leaders within a field regularly, instead of the social masturbation that happens in something like a network state.[00:39:00]

Simone Collins: I don’t know. We’ll have to ask him. Okay. But I, I hear you. Still, I guess, what, do you have any other proposed solutions to the great feminization- You just replace them.

Malcolm Collins: That’s the point. You replace them, and the people who are so indulgent that they wanted to meet up in person, the, the wussy men who thought that that was their solution, their smoking clubs and stuff, you replace them, too.

Because you’re gonna be in the clubs with the people who are actually running the world, and they’re in the clubs with the people who like to socially signal to other men, which is kind of fay. Okay? It’s like watching football or something. I understand that, like, we’re supposed to pretend it’s masculine as a society, but, like, as an autistic external objective observer, it appears pretty fay to me.

I, I, I just... It does. And it is indulgent, and so it doesn’t lead to these [00:40:00] sorts of positive outcomes. So it’s easy to outmaneuver these people, be they men or... Sorry, be they women or feminized men.

Simone Collins: Ugh. Well, I think, yeah, what, by this definition you think anyone who engages in leisure activity is

Malcolm Collins: a feminized man?

No, I think that there are efficient ways to engage in leisure, leisure activities, and there are inefficient ways to engage in leisure activities. For example, if I want to... Let’s talk about efficient versus inefficient, okay? Let’s look at a hobby like gaming Which is fairly efficient, versus a hobby like, let’s say, tennis or scuba diving, which are fairly inefficient.

Okay? So I wanna go- Does

Simone Collins: it include commutes or what? ...

Malcolm Collins: scuba diving, now I need to commute. I need to get my tank ready. I need to sit on the dock. I need to go out early in the morning. So irrespective of when I might be efficient at working during that time of day, I then have to get everything ready, everything prepped, go out.

I cannot [00:41:00] multitask. With gaming, I can have a game open in one tab and a vibe coding session open in another tab. I then lose, like, an entire day on a weekend. I then come back, and I’ve just lost a day. Same with, let’s say, tennis. So I get all my stuff together. I have to then go out and organize with somebody else so we’re both free at the same time.

We then get to a tennis ranch or whatever they call them. Tennis ranch. And y- s- sorry, I actually used to play varsity tennis, so I’m, I’m, I’m fairly familiar with it. So you, you get to your tennis court, and you you, you need to sign up for a time, by the way, so, you know, you gotta get the, the right timing.

You get there. You play a few rounds when you’re also not able to multitask. You then have to come home, shower, which is, again, another waste of time that you wouldn’t have need to do if you were gaming. Now, contrast all of this with something like gaming, okay? It’s the end of the day. You don’t need to drive out somewhere.

It’s at a time period where you’re already, your brain’s already fried, which for some people’s early [00:42:00] morning, some people that’s late night. And so you’re like, “Okay, I’m going to do this while I’m tying up the last of whatever, X, Y, or Z.” And that’s, that’s very, very efficient, right? Like, this is why the, if, if you’re playing tennis on your computer versus going to a tennis court. Also, it’s fairly inexpensive. It’s one of the least expensive hobbies there is- It’s very inexpensive ... as long as you’re not engaged in the gambling aspect of it, like loot boxes and stuff like that. If you’re just playing a video game, contrast that with owning a country club or you know, subscription, or maintaining your scuba equipment, or you know, just buying a new Nike tennis racket.

Simone Collins: All the certifications and the travel.

Malcolm Collins: Yeah. And the specialized clothing and the gas and the- Oh,

Simone Collins: and don’t forget your tennis club membership Yeah

Malcolm Collins: Oh, and the potential parking, and the, you know, all of this is so expensive. Such a waste. I mean, this is true of so, so, so many hobbies. There are a few other efficient hobbies: [00:43:00] walking, hiking, biking.

And these are efficient because while you cannot multitask while you can do them, they at least give you exercise and can be done right from your front porch.

Simone Collins: Yeah ...

Malcolm Collins: depending on where you, you live. I mean, there are ways- Yeah ... to do these hobbies that are incredibly inefficient, and there’s ways to do gaming that’s incredibly inefficient.

But there’s some hobbies that there’s just virtually no efficient way to do them. And this is what I’m talking about here, right? Like, that people pretend like these things are the same, and they’re not the same. And I, I just like... And this, this is where people get, get mad at us at the channel or whatever so much, they’re like, “Oh, you guys are so, I, I don’t know, puritanical about recreation and about doing recreation efficiently.”

And I think that the latest Leaflet song goes into this, by the way is not, not overdoing recreation and, and staying healthy and everything.

Speaker 3: 社会はそのままがいいって言うけど、そんなのつまんないよ。変えちゃおうよ。大切な人にちょっとしたプッシュ。[00:44:00] 理想の自分に変えちゃお。 液に溺れてる時は愛情たっぷりでほどほどにって教えてあげよ。全部肯定するだけじゃダメだよね。優しい気持ちで批判するのも最高の愛だよ。 , groom, groom your wife.Pick her up dive and keep growing.Groom, groom, groom your husband.Get us stronger, faster.

Malcolm Collins: But you’ve, you’ve done a good job of keeping me healthy ish. I mean, I’m, I’m healthy again now. That’s

Simone Collins: how we have. Yeah. Now that your blood work is in.

Malcolm Collins: We just got our blood work back. Yeah, so, last year I had gotten to a point where I was drinking more again to the point where my, my levels of a few things, ‘cause I get this measured regularly, went up. And I just got my blood work back and they all went back to normal. Because diligence, right?

You, you don’t let the thing control you. You don’t need to focus, you don’t need to design your entire life around avoiding a thing. [00:45:00] Just stay within the measured variables.

Simone Collins: Glad it worked out, and I’m glad you’re okay.

Malcolm Collins: But yeah. And I, the, the, the, these sorts of ideas that we’re talking about I think are, are difficult like if you even begin to bring this up with a woman, like, well, I mean, you don’t wanna be friends with somebody who is of zero utility to you.

You know, they’d be confused and angry, right? Like, they’d, they’d hurt you in their,

Simone Collins: Well, here’s... Yeah, I mean, here’s the struggle then with the great feminization theory is, like, how can we reconcile acknowledging this theory and still encourage men to get married?

Malcolm Collins: Well, women- Like, I don’t know ... become very efficient when they are subservient to a man.

This is the difference, right? And I’ve, I’ve pointed this out in similar ways- Yeah, but I

Simone Collins: mean, like, in modern culture, women are strongly discouraged from-

Malcolm Collins: Women want- Like- ... to do it ... any- They want a man to work for. They do. They want to do it. They want to [00:46:00] be inspired by who you are and what your goals are.

Simone Collins: They do wanna be inspired by... Yeah. They, they wanna be inspired by it, but are there enough inspirational men, right? Like, I mean, I- There can be ... I sometimes feel very

Malcolm Collins: I

Simone Collins: feel hypocritical ...

Malcolm Collins: No, this idea, I, I don’t, I don’t buy this, and some people in our comments have argued this, and I just, they’re like, “Well, not every man can have, like, sky-high ambitions for how he wants to change the world.”

And I’m like, “Yes, they can. They absolutely can.” You don’t need to succeed in your ambitions. Simone doesn’t value me because I succeed in all my ambitions. She values me because I have them and I earnestly strive for them. I haven’t

Simone Collins: succeeded in- Yeah, yeah, and I, I mean, to, also I think we know there’s some people have pushed back on us in comments saying, like, “Look, I’m happy enough to just raise a successful next generation, like, to just raise good kids who are gonna make, you know, the world a better place and make the next generation good,” which is totally in line with our mission and our interest in promoting human [00:47:00] flourishing.

Like, Malcolm has really, really big ambitions, but not everyone has to be like, “I’m gonna change the world.” Just raising good kids is huge and very impactful. I think the, the key thing is we’re not saying that for a man to be attractive, he has to plan on, like, world domination. We’re saying for a man to be attractive, he has to know who he is, be extremely confident in who he is, and know what he’s all about.

Like, “Hey, I am going to raise a successful family, provide for that family, like, build a good, you know, future generation, create a great childhood for my kids, and make the world better by doing that. And I hear my beliefs, and I know what I’m all about.” Well, this,

Malcolm Collins: this comes

Simone Collins: to something- Women find that really attractive.

Like, you don’t have to take over the world. You don’t have to be delusional

Malcolm Collins: Yes, you do. So this, this comes to what we were talking about earlier today. When I was trying to understand how Nick Fuentes had gotten so one-shotted by society that now his stated goals are not at all served by his actual actions.

And I’d say this as somebody who [00:48:00] can sympathize with him, because I think we have a lot of similar motivations. But he’s basically crashed out. Like, as I, I, I pointed out in the recent video, just

Simone Collins: simply- By similar motivations, like, what? The, the fame w***e-ish-ness or something else?

Malcolm Collins: Well, no. I mean, yes, we, we both are narcissistic fame w****s who come off as a bit fay to people, but it, it, it’s- You’re

Simone Collins: not, no, you’re not a narcissist.

You, you like, you like fame. I think he does, too. And you like attention, and I think he does, too. But you are not a narcissist.

Malcolm Collins: But it’s, it’s not just that. I mean, we both realize many of the same problems with society. People downplaying cultural and ethno differences people thinking you can just import anyone forever into the country.

Like many of the problems that we diagnose about society today are very similar, but the way that he has gone about it is completely unlikely to have any sort of efficacious result. Not, not unlikely, it’s, it’s virtual impossibility from his actions, and anyone who is thinking clearly could see that.

And so I began to think, how did he f- [00:49:00] so bad in terms of his logic? And what occurred to me because he began to... I began to think of him as, like, one of those, in anime there’s this common trope of somebody gets, like, a, an evil bug on their back or something like that that turns them into an evil version of themselves that, like, fuels, like, one, like, negative character trait they have until that character trait defines everything that they’re doing and then they turn into some sort of, like, big bad putty or something.

Shugochara is an anime where this happens, as an example. But, but it’s a very common trope in, in animes and shows for, for children. And he sort of, he, he doesn’t come across as, like, a bad guy to me. He comes across as somebody who’s been sort of infected by, like, an hate, a hate bug that has ended up g- making him unable to see that he’s destroying the very thing that he claims to want to save.

Speaker 4: Nick, you’re the man. With three white girls. That’s the dream lol.

Speaker 5: That’s the dream? Like be- living the dream, three daughters. [00:50:00] What dream? You’re the gayest guy ever.

You’re gayer than gay guys. That’s crazy. I’m living the dream. Daughters, wow, a lot of manis and pedis, a lot of, uh, tea parties and, uh, drama. Dude, I just can’t even. I literally can’t even. Women talk to me, and my eyes just glaze over.

So I can’t imagine being in a house with four of them. You’re like a prisoner. You’re like a prisoner of war. I’d rather be a prisoner of war in Vietnam how can you live like that? I would need a lot of vacations and a lot of w****s or something.

Just like you would need some kind of extramarital affair to keep it going. I feel like that is the only way I could stay sane in a life like that.

Why’d you have to lead with that? He said, uh, “Hey, I got three white girls living the dream, but the girl dad rightism s**t was gay.”

Speaker 6: First, , for people who cannot tell or do not know people who’ve done cocaine, he’s clearly out of his mind on cocaine in this. Y-you can tell because of [00:51:00] the way he’s talking and he keeps rubbing his nose, which is not a normal human behavior, , to be doing that as, as frequently as he’s doing that.

But, , I, I... So, so I, I, I do, you know, give him some leniency on the things he’s saying here, ... Like, as time has gone on, Nick has clearly been captured by his demons. And so, , there’s no way he can achieve what he says he wants to achieve in life or motivate his fans to do this when he’s, like, being mean to somebody who’s reaching out to him and expressing admiration , to him for doing the very thing that he’s telling his fans to do.

, It-- I-I’m not even mean to my fans when, they have different opinions. Like, just to be mean like this to, to a stranger For doing what you’re telling them to do, like,, the deep evil that has to have taken root in your heart. And not just that, , but the people who are like, “Well, Nick Fuentes shows so much self-control.”

Here he’s literally saying, “Oh, if I had a bunch of daughters, I would cheat on my wife.”

Speaker 11: Like even if I had a perfect wife who was wholly dedicated to me and due to something completely outside of her control, having [00:52:00] boys instead of girls, , I’d just end up cheating on her,

Speaker 6: , And, , yeah, I guess, just, like, as time has gone on, I feel more pity for Nick, because in a different world, maybe I could have gone down his pathway if I had less self-control, if I was raised in a different religious background, if I... You know, who knows? , It, it’s, it’s very, very sad to see this happen and to see him admonish people who look up to him, , when they do do what he presumably wants people to do.

But it-- I mean, it’s clear, again, revealed preferences versus, , claimed preferences. It’s clear that that is not his revealed preference to actually start a family and have kids and everything like that. , And I just wish he could better communicate to people that, like, allowing his ideology to spread within you will eventually destroy you as a human being. , There, there is no positive end to this. Like, contrast this with, like, Leafly’s song, right? Like, that’s, that’s positivity. That’s future. , His is just [00:53:00] destructivity at this point. And it’s really, really sad to see. And I do not think that him and I are particularly different in the problems that we see in society. It’s just that his, again, like one of those hate bugs has been so corrupted that it’s all he can see anymore.

Speaker 7: Or another good analogy would be like the orcs from Warhammer who drink the demonic ichor to, , enhance their worst qualities but make them stronger. You know, it makes him stronger in the algorithm, but it leads all those who follow him to ruin this sort of demonic pact that he has made. He’s still an orc.

He’s still at least in his own way trying to be on our side, but he is so corrupted that he fundamentally is as big a threat to us as those who oppose us

Speaker 8: Drink, . Claim your destiny. You will all be conquerors. And what, Gul’dan, [00:54:00] must we give in return? Everything.

You would reject this gift?

We will never be slaves!

But we will be conquerors.

Simone Collins: agree. I mean, what we talked about also is that, a key difference is that you and other people who we really like and admire, like Leaflet, have a very clear vision of the future-

Malcolm Collins: Well, no, that’s what I was going to say ... toward which to mourn ... is, is that the reason why the hate bug has gotten him and it hasn’t easily gotten some of the other influencers I watch, I was trying to think of, like, what creates this differentiation?

And [00:55:00] looking at Leaflet’s recent content because I’ve been working with her. She’s actually really helped me in developing the VTuber thing on RFAB that’s gonna be coming out soon. Saved me a significant amount of work was one of the leads she gave me today. But anyway, th- th- so that’s the reason she comes up a lot, is ‘cause I’m working with her and I’m talking with her daily, so, v- very top of mind.

But anyway so, she has a very clear vision, and we have a very clear vision of where we want human civilization to be in 50 years, in 100 years, in 200 years, right? And I don’t think he has one of those. And because he doesn’t have a clear vision of where society’s going to be, it’s just like society’s gonna be where society’s going to be, it’s very easy for the grievances of the current culture war to overwhelm his sort of psychology to the point where he can no longer think, “What are the long-term actions if I attempt to blow up this alliance or this alliance, or you know, do not care about this encroaching group or [00:56:00] that encroaching group?”

And I think that the, the, the hate bug can get you if all you care about is being a good family man. Because if all you care about is being a good family man, you can accidentally lean into performing the trope of the family man, in the same way a woman can perform the trope of the mom, instead of focusing on a concrete outcome.

“I want to raise kids to have this effect on society because I see this future civilizational state as ideal.” Now both can be part of the same action, it’s just how are you framing it, which is why- Well,

Simone Collins: this goes also, it’s connected to your deontology versus consequentialism argument that always comes

Malcolm Collins: into our episodes Well, yeah, but I, I, I realize that, that arguing about it on a deontology versus con-

That can be a little hard for people to grok. But the idea of just either you have a vision for where you want society to be in 100 years or you don’t.

Simone Collins: Yeah. Basically, is your ship just blowing wherever the winds blow, or are you actively navigating [00:57:00] in a specific direction towards some kind of true north, and are you shifting your sails in response to the wind blowing you where you may not wanna go?

You, you, you do want-

Malcolm Collins: I, I actually think a better way to word this is not just is your ship going where the wind goes, but there’s sort of three categories of people. Like, there’s the truly lazy person who is allowing their ship to just blow wherever the wind blows, but then there’s the other person who might be incredibly hardworking, but they spend all of the time just trying to make sure their ship is the prettiest ship there is, without particular care for where it’s going, right?

And these are the people who strive to have the perfect family that follows all the rules, or the perfect deontological life that follows every rule and every command and everything like that. And th- they’ll often be like, “Well, God’ll just take me in the right direction if I do all of that.” And that leads to really negative externalities.

And it, and it’s not biblically... I mean, I, I always go through the the, the sermon of, um Um, a boat and two helicopters, so I’m not gonna go over that again Oh You can go over our Trek series if you’re [00:58:00] interested. But the point I’m being i-i-here is I think that it is sometimes easy to confuse trying to make sure your boat is the prettiest boat in the world without caring about where the boat’s going.

Anyway.

Simone Collins: Fair.

Malcolm Collins: Love you, Simone.

Simone Collins: I love you too.

Malcolm Collins: And I don’t think I want dinner tonight. I’m full.

Simone Collins: Are you sure? I have some lo mein left over, just a little bit.

Malcolm Collins: Oh, you do have lo mein left over? I can

Simone Collins: bring it to your room. Yeah, if you want, I could just walk it up to your room. I can- Mm ...

Malcolm Collins: I can stir-fry it- Can I have it, can I have it the next day?

Simone Collins: Yeah. ‘

Malcolm Collins: Cause you gave me eggs today, and I had chips and salsa today, and I had whole milk today. So that’s a lot.

Simone Collins: Are you gonna get scurvy? I’m

Malcolm Collins: not... Yeah, Simone, that is not how scurvy works.

Simone Collins: I guess- One

Malcolm Collins: of our- ... I

Simone Collins: knew you had salsa.

Malcolm Collins: Right, so- Salsa, I had salsa, Simone. That was a lot of tomatoes and juices.

Simone Collins: Okay.

Malcolm Collins: I also had jelly beans. You had salsa. Okay. I had some orange jelly beans, [00:59:00] which are basically- I hate you

Simone Collins: so much. You are going to die. I t- I try to help you by serving you eggs, and then... Anyway, it’s fine. It’s fine. You can have lo mein tomorrow. It’s fine. But are you sure you’re not hungry?

Malcolm Collins: I’m sure. Okay.

I’m sure I’m not hungry.

Simone Collins: Well, I love you.

Malcolm Collins: I love you too, ish. I find you a little, you know, you’ve da, da, da, da.

Simone Collins: I am a woman. I’m sorry. I’m very sorry.

Malcolm Collins: Joking, by the way. I love you. All right, have a good one.

Simone Collins: Bye. Old Titan thing. No I

Malcolm Collins: sent it on WhatsApp.

Simone Collins: Oh yeah, the old dinosaur Titan

Malcolm Collins: Yeah, doesn’t it look a lot like her today?

Simone Collins: Looks just like her today

Malcolm Collins: Very, very similar- Early on here ... attitude to modern Titan

Simone Collins: This morning though she decided she was a cat, and every time I asked her questions, you know, I said, [01:00:00] “Titan, do you want this or can you do that?”

She’s like, “No, I’m a cat. Meow.” She did a lot of meowing, so.

Malcolm Collins: Meow. She’s, Yeah ... you really, you did that as a kid too, right? It, it was pretty cute You pretended to be a cat?

Simone Collins: I 100% did that. I wonder if there’s some, it’s just a little girl thing. I don’t think it’s like a genetic thing, but who knows? Well,

Malcolm Collins: I mean, you know, fortunately we’re not into all that, yeah, trans furry stuff or we’d be like, “Oh, we’ve got a-”

Simone Collins: You got her furry tail and her furry ears.

Malcolm Collins: You got her a therian kid, right? We’re gonna have to transition her.

Simone Collins: That was you, dude. You bought that stuff on Amazon, J’Accuse.

Malcolm Collins: Have you, have you given it back to her now that she thinks she’s a cat so she can dress up like a cat?

Simone Collins: Yeah, I need to. No, I’ll g- I’ll get it out this weekend. Yeah, I’m 100% getting that out.

Okay.

Malcolm Collins: That’s

Simone Collins: fantastic. I will kick us off. And unless you, do you wanna kick this one off ‘cause you were the kind of impetus for doing this.

Malcolm Collins: All right, sure.

Speaker 10: [01:01:00] that movie. A

is he, is he a her or

Speaker 9: a him?

Speaker 10: He/him. I bet they, I bet they left my birds at our house.

Speaker 9: Yeah, they are.

This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit basedcamppodcast.substack.com/subscribe