a wise man once said: The further a society drifts from the truth the more it hates those who speak it

Traditional life placed men at the head of the family but Women were the centre of the family, different roles but extremely successful. Feminism broke this, and so the family has declined. Abortion figures are catastrophic, we are killing our children because they get in the way of a false choice: a career or motherhood. Motherhood is the most important thing there is, careers are mostly a waste of time. We need family and society, not more over paid professionals.

It’s not just “mens’s clubs” that no longer exist. There’s now no place left where men can support one another. Companies described as “mens’ clubs” now cannot exist. However, I’ve been to many companies and offices completely consisting of women. I had a dental office worker brag to me that the entire company was indeed all women - as though that was a selling point. The hypocrisy and lack of self-awareness among people who think this way is astonishing. Men no longer have a single space that’s theirs. Women even bulldozed their way into Boy Scouts - now just called “Scouts” - despite the fact that Girl Scouts exists. Young boys need other boys and men to learn how to be proper men. Women don’t like men today? They need to look in the mirror. They’re the ones who have made them.

On the Modern Wisdom interview with her a commenter said, and I paraphrase, 'Feminism was all well and good when it was only hurting men and children but now that it's hurting women they have a problem.' Gentlemen, trust NO woman who calls herself a feminist.

“The moment it became a woman’s choice, it also became a woman’s responsibility.” That one hit me hard!

I never realized how class consciousness has gotten buried by elite women in the twentieth century. Those women with careers rather than jobs have set the agenda for ALL women, often to the disadvantage of those with jobs. Great interview. Great insights.

Men and women are supposed to be partners, not adversaries. I was married for over 30 years, till she passed from cancer, and we were always equal partners, helpmates, friends, and lovers. We had each other's back, stood by each other in thick and thin, for better and worse. I miss that little, sweet, very funny woman. And since then, the women I've met had no notion of how to build a life with a man.

I did my final year in university in England, I came from Dublin with a group of friends to finish our degrees in Wolverhampton. This was about 1998/9. One of the things I noticed was although we thought that women's rights were more advanced in England, divorce, abortion ect, it felt much more unsafe. Walls of porno is every corner shop, peep shows, strip clubs, sex shops were everywhere. It felt very seedy. When we went out, we were dressed so modestly compared to the locals, who behaved like animals on a Saturday night tbh, I was pretty shocked. I remember thinking that this was wrong, and that the sexual revolution in the 60s may have been a mistake.

My wife was complaining about sexual equality. So I gave her a shovel and a bag of cement. 😲

I knew a woman who believed that men shouldn’t earn more then her. Even if they did a harder or higher skilled job. I asked her if that should include her husband and she said no. 😲

I have not seen or heard from my beloved son in 12 years because of the feminist run Family Law Courts! Now I am MGTOW!

My son is 34 I asked him if his friend had met a nice girl yet he said men are afraid to approach women any more in case its seen as creepy .

Left in a hell of their own making but don't worry, women have a plan: blame men

Women didn't have any (or many) rights simply because they didn't have any responsibility. Who gained from Feminism? Corporations who doubled the labour pool, and governments who doubled the tax base, and social engineers who wanted to destroy the family unit. Who lost? Men and women who now have to compete with one another instead of complementing each other; women who often spend their most fertile years building meaningless careers instead of marrying and raising children, both of which have real meaning; and decent men who are overlooked by women with an overinflated sense of themselves who all want the same 20% of men., but who themselves end up alone because the mathematics doesn't work (i.e. 80% of women wanting the 20% of men). If you wanted to destroy the family (and therefore society) then you could do a lot worse than unleash Feminism in that society.

Women are beginning to experience what men have for many years...and they are struggling to handle the stress. All the feminists who thought men had it easy and women were oppressed had no understanding of the weight men carried on their shoulders. Women are still not experiencing true equality of course as they are far less likely to be punched in the face when they overstep the mark, they are very unlikely to lose their children in divorce courts, they rarely pay alimony (although that is beginning to change) and society offers them disproportionate levels of support when things go wrong. As women start to experience true equality I expect they will become ever more depressed. It's quite interesting and also sad to see how women's self-reported levels of happiness have continually declined over the last 50 years despite gaining more and more equality. Correlation isn't causation of course but I think there is a clear causal link here and few feminists will touch it because it would rather undermine their ability to sell books about the evils of masculinity and patriarchal oppression.

This session has been like listening to the end result of what my mother predicted when the feminist movement went into top gear in the 1960’s.

What is hilarious is that she speaks of women having a choice whether to work, when men have NEVER had that choice.

You remind me of my great grandmother! The best person I remember in my life. She kept her vows till her death, never remarried, with several kids. GOD PLEASE BLESS HER SOUL!

Her term "Promethian fantasy" is exactly correct. Strikes me that the common thread of the religion of wokeism/progressivism/feminism is the inability to accept the basic conditions of being incarnated as a human being on a physical planet and all the limitations that implies. Of course, picking a fight with nature/reality rarely ends well.

One of the biggest lies today: "First you must be complete in yourself, and then if you CHOOSE to have a partner, you can. But you if you REALLY really want/need one, then you're doing it wrong." What absolute twaddle. We need people. Loving others can make us better people. Having relationships can help us to grow. It's just not true that first you must become sovereign of your world. There's no way to do that alone and be truly happy inside. Abandon the lie. Wanting good relationships is in itself a good thing. It doesn't make you "weak." Far from it.

Fertility rate has plummeted to 0.84 in South Korea corresponding to a 58% decline in population. Modernity is looking increasingly like a death cult.

The Home containing the family was a respected institution when I was small. Now its a non entity. The domestic sphere has been erased as a bastion to be reckoned with. I found among my Dad's old papers; a compensation advance paid for "disruption"; "disrupting his wife and family" by obliging him to move towns. Can you even imagine that now?

"Shotgun weddings went on to be long, happy marriages" As I understand it, many Roman comedies were based on this premise.

I appreciate that she has arrived at this perspective, and that she speaks about it publicly. It is telling that only women seem to have a voice on this issue, and seem to make the case for change based solely of the harmful effects on women and the quality of male partners available to them as result. Do our lives and our wellbeing mean nothing outside of what we can give to a woman? Are we no more than fodder for the comfort and quality of life of women? Feminists specifically, and Women in general now say over and over again that men have oppressed and subjugated them for thousands of years as if the traditional marital relationship is one where the woman sacrifices everything and the man sacrifices nothing; completely free. Many men are realizing that in the context of marriage, men choose to subjugate themselves to the will, happiness, and mood of their wives. Men have willingly made themselves slaves to the will of women for thousands of years, and women have ripped the mask off and exposed the rigged game for what it is. Women will always be physically attractive to us, but what have they left us to want that would make us willing to dedicate our lives to serving them like the men of the past served the women of the past? The ancient human evolutionary arrangement was that men strive to make something of themselves to have something to give to a woman in order to be selected, and women made themselves pleasant to be around and cooperative so that a man would chose to stick around and devote his life to supporting her. Now that they are free of us, we are free of them, and it's a hard sell to get either to give that freedom up in spite of societal consequences once we've gotten a taste of it. We are not afraid of commitment and responsibility, we are afraid to give our lives over to be hated and used. Do you think that after bludgeoning good men for decades based on a grossly false narrative and showing us who you really are, you can just flip a switch and we won't remember what you really think of us and what we mean to you? You will always have access to the desperate men, but you have lost many of the self respecting ones and you will lose many more as they continue to wake up from this dream they have been sold.

Back in the day my spouse was on the pill from 16- 20ish age. Due to the effects she stopped taking it. The cost to her health was huge. Her mental stability, weight gain, etc. The pill is not harmless.

Many men are rediscovering traditional family life as potential goal of a personal eden, but the supply chain for the essential components have broken down. There is an acute shortage of computer chips for women, a shortage made much worse by the modern tendency of women to delay delivery until late in the product cycle, resulting in the need for remanufacturing to improve functionality. Chip manufacturers have responded by creating chips that can calculate logical inconsistencies (such as women requiring equal pay and a husband who earns much more than they do) at staggering speeds. While there is hope that new technology such as AI will make the next generation of women better able to do essential tasks such as loading or unloading a dishwasher without a system breakdown, there is less confidence that the long list of demands made on system designers will be achieved. "The list of features demanded by modern consumers as almost endless," complained system engineer Hai Yu from Femfix Technologies, a leader in the field. "One example is the demand to look sexy while cleaning the oven. It is so hard to get the levels right, too low and it is hard to see any differencet, too high and the oven never gets cleaned."

"When I say let men be, I don't mean we should make them go in a room and talk about their feelings. We should absolutely not do that. We should let them go sit on a riverside and NOT talk about their feelings." FINALLY SOMEONE SAYS IT!!! All these people trying to push guys to be all soft and vulnerable and talk about their feelings is so annoying, and it is killing male friendships.

You can’t avoid the universal law: For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.

I once saw a rest area bathroom that had a female bathroom and a gender neutral bathroom. I thought it perfectly encapsulated where we are as a society.

Traditions often exist simply because they work, and have worked for eons.

What I believe is: Women's statistics of happiness has declined as much as men 's. Now both are carrying the same amount of weight and responsibility. It's time to support eachother, let's not go back to ordering people around forcing them into roles. What we have to do it's stop competing with one another. We have to work together to gain proper life and work balance, and careers with a healthy life. No man boss, no girl boss, none of that shit. We can have leaders. But we shall not subjugate and we shall not oppress eachother.

After being with one for 30 years, I can say with confidence that they create their own hell every single day, and hate anyone that isn't as miserable as they are.

Wonderful interview I’m not crazy !!!! 65 and agree 100% Always knew things were going down hill fast ….. again Thank you 🕊🕊🕊

Finally, someone linking Feminism to class... Mothers had to work in WC Families, or we would starve! This is the truth borne out in history!

Mary Harrington quite obviously a very intelligent individual giving a very realistic appraisal of the modern woman in society today.

This lady is moving down the correct path, but still has a ways to go on her journey. First, the entire discussion, even when talking about men, was how to "make men better mates for women". Recovering feminists such as herself don't seem to ever want to ask men what it is that THEY want. Men now have no interest in marriage because they have no incentive to get married and the marriage state offers zero benefits to men. Not only does marriage not offer men any benefits, but it is the source of literally life destroying problems if the marriage fails. This idea that we are going to be able to create some new culture of secular contractual marriage where women and men engage in "transactional" marriages is pure fantasy if marriage offers men no benefits. The only possible way it would work is if all attractive women all jointly decided to stop having sex outside of marriage and forced men to get married in order to get sex with them. Right now I see a zero chance of anything like that happening within a purely secular context. As it is, I don't see any solution to these social problems or to the coming birthrate collapse outside of religion. The only way that men would ever agree to get married in the current climate is if there was a religious reason to do so. Religion is also the only way that women will voluntarily stay sexually monogamous and voluntarily go off the pill. Expecting secular worldly women to do any of those things voluntarily without a religious motivation is a pipe dream.

Harrington and her middle class ilk are not telling us working class women anything we don't already know.

I’m glad an elite woman can see how elite women have utterly destroyed life for women who work jobs and who aren’t university educated. I’m tempted to despise them all, but this woman is okay in my book. As a working class woman myself, I didn’t notice that the feminists of my upbringing and young adulthood (late 60s/mid 80s) were the highly educated daughters of powerful, doting parents with trust funds. Powermongers, all of them. I didn’t realize that I didn’t fit into the foolish Utopian narrative until I was in middle age and had squandered my opportunities for marriage and procreation and reasonable expectations from life. Thank you Mary Harrington. I hope more young women like you step forward to be heard and paid attention to.

Although may be possible to convince women that marriage is the way forward is it too late to convince men as they are turning their backs on marriage?

Most thought provoking conversation. Thanks Peter for introducing me to Mary Harrington.

Parts of this conversation were great, other parts had me shouting at the screen. The pill, women entering the workplace at child bearing age, encouraged the breakup of the family unit. Peter Hitchens has banged this drum for years, women have ruined young men, by their selfish actions, wanting it all. Have a child if you must, but if you must, stay home, nurture, and don't expect others to pick up the tab. If you choose to work, good for you, but don't try and have a child. Young men these days have no idea where their place in society is, hence the huge level of mental health, suicide and violent porn issues we now face.

Society has conned women and one cost is the mother baby bond an attachment that literally forms self regulation in the infant .

A lovely point at the end there about how men socialise and interact :). It instantly reminded me of when I was visiting my friend in Finland. On my last day there we went out into the waters south of Helsinki to see a great old sea fort that is a living museum now. You might think that as I would be flying out in a few hours there would be constant chatter … but we hardly spoke, beyond the odd conversation about this or that feature of the fort and it’s history … … but we had a great time just being in each other’s company and enjoying our friendship.

Mary Harrington is fantastic.

Mrs Harrington is so right! Very well done.

Staying at home and raising your kids is a privilege

Thank you Peter for introducing this incredible thinker Mary Harrington. She was voicing all my concerns as a mother and now grandmother, she makes complete sense in my opinion. Again NCF at its best.

Everything we need to know to live a fruitful and upright life is found in the Gospel. It’s an unfashionable position to take but the Truth shall set you free. Great interview as ever Peter and the team.

So wise. As a Catholic I’m very familiar with these insights and arguments against contraception and liberal “feminism,” from Paul VI to JPII.

I have a theory on exploitation of women. It is based on the idea that the genders are exploited equally at all times in a society. Women for sex and serving men, men for their industry and security. It is very easy to determine how much men are exploited for their services. Just look at the life expectancy of men and women. Men pay for their exploitation in their lives and health, women don't. You will find (in a free market economy) that women statistically will pay for the amount by which they exploit men for what they provide society, by the same amount. No matter how hard governments try to prevent it. In the short term they can try, but eventually they will go broke. Eventually the laws of supply and demand will balance out. After WW1 there was no feminism. There were not enough men to exploit. Women would sleep with anyone for nothing, cook, clean, and do a full time job. After WW2, my father never lifted a finger in the house. He was given a job without an interview, and my mother never worked a day in her life. She lived to serve him. Was she exploited, totally. Was my father exploited for his 4 years of slavery in a Japanese POW camp, totally. He died Aged 78, my mother died aged 98. I'm not sure I can prove my theory, but thank you for reading it at least.

It appears that love actually matters.

I can remember women vigorously aggressively campaigning for homosexual rights which led to the trans movement and what thanks did the women receive no more safe spaces ouch a bit of an own goal for ladies

'Unplanned childlessness' seems to be a new buzzphrase.

The effects Harrington calls "counter intuitive" are not counter intuitive from the Christian perspective, but obviously she has my complete respect for honestly and clearly describing them as they were observed in reality.

What an interesting thinker is Mary Harrington!Thank you for this talk.

Modern feminism is Schrödinger feminism where they are both the victim and the empowered at the same time until something happens and they can choose which position yields the most benefit.

What a rich and inspiring talk 💛 Thankyou for this conversation and thankyou Mary, for being so brave as to address issues so very delicate in our day! God bless you! 🙏💛

To go through life alone is a very heavy burden to shoulder and one to which few outside the religious community, can bear well. You only get one chance in life to live life fully!

She only cares because now it effects women negatively .

Amazing. Thank you Mary. Spot on IMO. And thank you Peter for interviewing this guest.

I always thought it was weird at an electronics company I worked for, when there was talk of legally increasing the number of women on boards, how the working class women working in the wire-shop would benefit from having high earning, middle class women, but who knew nothing about engineering, parachuted onto the board.

This has been one super eye opening experience. Thank you for this. (From a man from Africa.)

It's game over for marriage and family in the West.

I LOVE Mary Harrington. Go Mary. What a great service you are doing for women. Definitely my kind of feminism.

Very interesting interview. I wonder if the difference between career and job is why the focus on equality always seems to be in careers rather than jobs as that is where elite women feel that they belong. I've often wondered if the focus on gender, sexuality, colour etc. is so that very privileged people (class) can use their perceived oppression to push their way into careers.

Feminists: "Let's smash the Patriarchy...by letting the Patriarchy smash us!" Men: "Oh, no. Please. Don't go down on me while expecting no commitment at all. Please stop."

We are screwed.

Bravo for having Mary Harrington on your show!!! She is truly brilliant.

So, Her Highness graciously thinks that it should be discussed to grant men, these inferior creatures, some space on their own, BUT: only if it benefits women, in this case so that older men show young men how to kowtow before the fair sex. But she doesn't think that men should have the right to socialize when and with whom they want, which, one would think, is a basic human right, but not in the eyes of this o so enlightened feminist.🤦🏻

It’s almost like the Catholic Church was right about everything as it has been for 2000 years and the feminist dream which was so enlightening only lasted two generations lmao

This is an extremely important conversation. This woman is extraordinary.

Women entering the workforce over doubled the labor pool which in turn lowered demand for labor which in turn reduced wages for labor. Before the influx of so many additional workers, a man could support a family with one job. Now, it takes two parents working to achieve that. The sexual revolution made women more promiscuous. So women as a whole, now have had more lovers by the time they're 20 than men have in their entire lives. It is a psychological fact that this causes discontent with any man they eventually may want to settle down with. It is the choice overload paradox, where having too many options leaves people feeling dissatisfied with whatever choice they eventually make.

The idea that women have always played a productive role in the home's microeconomy even while being mothers needs to be propagated. Even a relatively prosperous women in the 1600s was head of production, not just a wet nurse. She knew how to make cheese and beer, some of which would be sold. She knew how to make bread, how to preserve fruit, how to make clothes, and so on. Changing the human body won't change the human mind. We will have the same human behaviors with augmented capabilities. Yikes.

49:50 Single Mothers are 70% more likely to produce drug addicted children, mentally disturbed children, homeless children and inmates. Children raised by single fathers have the same advantages as children raised by married couples. The root word of "Smother" is "mother", for a reason. Women have all the love and kindness a child needs, but many women lack the backbone to instill discipline, accountability, and pride into a child. They do not have a clue how to do it. Great at hugging, poor at accountability. Many of them just lose it, and scream, and think that is how to instill discipline into a child. And then their child moves out and becomes an entitled burden on society. And 37% (US) of children today are raised by single mothers.

This has been such an insightful conversation! I found myself nodding so many times. It is filled with gems. I am going to save it and listen repeatedly. Thank you for sharing your thoughts.

Listening to these types of conversations always makes me feel a little sad as I watch people - and all credit to them - working out for themselves what the catholic church predicted about the contraceptive pill. So it wasn't an unpredictable effect, even if it seems counterintuitive to most people.

Maybe we should all just get on with it, follow your instincts and live your life with respect for others.

I'm a very old lady - was married [ not particularly happy ] for 47 years. I always loved being a woman - had 2 beautiful daughters, and 5 grandsons, grown up now and always show me great love and respect. I've never felt inferior to a man, so don't want to join in the emasculating of them. God's word comes to mind " in thinking to become wise, they become fools" So round and round theses silly women go, like headless chickens.

What happens when you double the workforce? You halve the value of the workers.😊😢

What an interesting interview ! Thank you so much for inviting this woman onto SWYSI ! I think my main takeaway is the understanding that the pill was where big pharma took an initial step in the transhumanist agenda , and medicine was replaced by pharmaceuticals. Thanks again 🙏

Great discussion with lots of perception, wisdom and stuff to think about.

Mary Harrington, you are a wise woman!!

The women's liberation movement of the 1960's and 1970's did a lot of damage to women in general and to society as a whole. What was perhaps most damaging was that it promoted the false idea that women could sleep around with different men with no negative consequences. That is totally untrue. Men have told me that when women started sleeping around with men they started losing a lot of respect for women. There is a comment attributed to Elvis Presley, who famously said that "Why should men buy the cow when they can get the milk for free?" This sounds like a terrible thing to say, but it's true. There is a lot more men and women living together and even having children together, than there are couples getting married. Also, there are more men now who think that most, if not all, women make a habit of sleeping around with different men. Also, women liberationists propogated the false notion that "women could have it all" - that a woman could work full-time, manage a house, and raise children successfully. This is simply not true. I sincerely wish that a lot more women in the past would have stayed home and raised their children themselves, instead of leaving it in the hands of places like daycares. As an older women, I am forever grateful to my Mom for staying home and raising four young children, instead of working outside of the home. I have seen far too many badly raised children and young people, who were raised with only one parent or pretty well had to raise themselves while their mother worked outside of the home. Some of these kids are really out of control. In hindsight, I really wish that the Women's Liberation Movement had never taken place.😢☹️😮

Wow amazing discussion thank you. Everything I felt in my teens especially regarding industrialization and the contraceptive pill. Many friends were put on the pill for "heavy periods" in their teen years. I couldn't put in to words.

Mary Harrington so eloquent, intelligent and perceptive. If only women espoused a doctrine of loyal relationships and caring for their man long term instead of sleeping around and over rating themselves.

What an incredibly intelligent amazing woman and conversation I shall look forward to reading her book asap!

its ironic that there seems to be a greater patriarchy inside Feminism than in society at large. I know more single mothers (or former single mothers) than mothers who live with the father of all of their children. Feminism required women to take a greater responsibility, but an enormous amount of young women didn't understand this until they were already suffering the consequences of behaving irresponsibly. A friend of mines daughter has PTSD from having an abortion, she tried to take her own life after having the abortion, she was only 19 or 20 ish at the time.

1989 Kathleen barnlett and rose Kennedy ,the 2 founders of 3rd wave feminism, wrote quite definetly about gender and fluidity, intersectionality and identity. The very foundation of what we see today and the consequences (ie: transgenders in female sports). Ultimately, feminism has turned on the very people it was meant to cater for. The ultimate irony.

At last we find a woman who thought things through! This is marvelous!

Let's not confuse things, what is so called "first wave Feminism", that is, the right to vote, reduced working hours, etc., that is not Feminism. That was the logical progression of our Western civilization to extend its responsibilities (and its counterpart, the rights) to all its human participants. To call this Feminism is like calling Masculinism to the wage earners who demanded an 8-hour working day, or to call Masculinism the independence movement started by the Founding Fathers in the USA, or to call Masculinism obtaining the Magna Carta in the UK, etc., etc. Then, in the 60's Feminism appeared, and to cover itself up with a certain "aura of legitimacy", they, in retrospect, labeled as Feminism the above progression. But the truth is that those people that participated in that progression, men and women, did not call themselves Feminist, or anything like that. The real things is that Feminism is an ideological perversion resulting from applying Marxist logic, and some other ideological frameworks, into the context of the relations between the sexes (weaponizing sex differences and relationships), with the intention of subverting those relations, and thus causing real chaos in society and bring it to a "tabula rasa" situation, in order to have the possibility of rebuilding society from scratch to reach their Utopia mirage. Of course, to hide that purpose, Feminism continued to cover itself with an "aura of legitimacy" by using beautiful words like "equality", "rights", "justice", and other beautiful and "catchy" expressions. And what is more ironic, is that Feminism can do that with impunity, not only because they disguise themselves by dressing with that "aura of legitimacy", but also because Feminism abuse precisely the rights (the counterpart of the obligations) acquired in this progression of our Western society. That is, Feminism could not exist if it were not for Masculinism (in the case that we decided to call the whole progression that way). I would recommend reading / listening to Yuri Bezmenov about the concept of "Ideological Subversion", I'm not sure if what that gentleman says is all true, but given the time when he said that (1984), and what happened next, the coincidence is interesting. We, as a society, should be very suspicious and watch very carefully those movements that advocates only for a "select" part of our society, that is, any movement that selects a group of our society using criteria based on some identifiable attribute of the individuals (sex, skin color, intelligence, whatever), and then starts advocating for the rights of those "selected" ones. That movement, is one based on division, not union, and the logical question is, when does that movement stop? and where does it stop? according to history, probably this movement never stops by itself, and becomes more, and more extremist with time, because it becomes a lobbying-based machine for status and power. And it is the survival of this very machine itself, that becomes the movement's main goal, and for it to survive, the best thing to do it's not solving the problem they preached to solve, but to maintain the problem and possibly aggravate it. Let's remember that movements at the end of the day are not managed by ordinary people, the ordinary people are busy living their lives and trying to make ends meet, the movements at their core are managed by "ideologues" and "fanatics" (they are the "life force" behind the movement, not ordinary people). And those are the ones, mainly the ideologues (but also the "fanatics" through "the end justifies the means"), that are corrupted by the previously described machine. If we really want a more just society, then we must fight so that everyone has the same obligations (and therefore the same rights, they are sides of the same coin). A few and fundamental obligations (it is not necessary to restrict our freedom with unnecessary obligations); the obligation to respect the life of others, the obligation to respect the property of others, the obligation to respect the privacy of others, the obligation to respect the merits of others (the counterpart would be equal access to opportunities), and the obligation to faithfully and sincerely comply with the laws that enforce those obligations. With regard to these laws, we should also have the minimum number of laws so as not to unnecessarily restrict our freedoms, so those laws must take care of breaches to the lowest common denominator of those obligations. And we should have a legal framework where we are all equal before those laws, and where innocence is assumed until proven otherwise in a fair trial. Achieving a society that works under that framework, and does not "go off the rails", it is already a "task of titans". It is not necessary to corrupt that task advocating for "select" groups, the latter is a sure recipe for division, resentment, tyranny and finally, the inevitable destruction coming from inside .. ------------- Now, going in particular to Mary's argument, she is right in saying that women have special interests. But, and what I'm going to say must not be considered an attack to her, by saying "special interests", she is inadvertently camouflaging that both sexes have their differences, those differences generate special needs, and those special needs generate special interests, I think we always have to be clear in what we talk about, because what we are looking for, is to reach a coexistence agreement where each party can give the best of themselves to live in the best possible way. So, it is true that women have special interests, just as men have special interests, but the assumption that is always used to discuss those special interests is that society already takes care of these special interests of men, and only those of women are not covered, and therefore it is necessary to continue "fighting" for them. But just as Mary explains that Feminism is imposed by some elite women, society was not structured for the benefit of all men, because only a tiny percentage of men were in charge of society (and although it seems unfair now that that tiny percentage of men were in charge of society, later we can discuss the reason for that situation, since it was not arbitrary as it seems now from the comfort of our couches, without the threat of another tribe or kingdom that wants to turn us into slaves). And this very small elite established policies that mostly benefited them and the functionality of the society as a whole, not the special interests of the population, neither men nor women, unless that was strictly necessary for the functioning of society as a whole (as a machine). Then, throughout history, in a tortuous and very slow progression, our Western society began to extend the responsibilities and their corresponding rights to the rest of the population, but always with politics being dominated by a very small elite, even in democratic systems. An elite that was isolated from the day-to-day problems of ordinary people, men and women. And just as it is true that along that progression there were women's special interests left uncovered, there were also a lot of men's special interests left uncovered. And those are not empty words, that situation is what the statistics reflect, they show that it is men who have some of the worst outcomes in society, a lower life expectancy, much more more probability of suffering aggression and violent death (the reality is different from the perception of danger), much more isolation, much less attention to their health, more working hours, the most dangerous jobs and with a higher rate of accidents and deaths, a much higher suicide rate, a much higher rate of homeless and addictions, worse results in the educational system, etc. In addition, men do not have the privilege of choosing between staying at home or working, on the contrary, women do, and they have a whole legal framework that protects them if they make that decision, precisely because of the potential economic inequality that decision causes. So, instead of talking about Feminism, or Masculinism, or any other special group, and creating lobby-based machines that advocate for a certain group, and invariably end up corrupt. What we should do is analyze the situation of our society from a holistic perspective, taking into account the special interests of each party. Review the current situation, review the situation in more traditional times, because although not everything was perfect, not everything was bad either, many things can be learned, because precisely thanks to those traditions we manage to survive and prosper. And at the end of the day, try to come up with a reasonable solution (because perfection and Utopia doesn't exist), where each party can give the best of themselves while living the best possible life, but the cooperation of each party is indispensable for that, both parties are equally valuable, and it is not possible to have any viable humanity without both cooperating in harmony and love. And of course, none of that is really going to work, because nothing works well by force, not at least in the medium-long term, if our society does not re-examine its moral values and re-establish its foundations on strong moral values.​

I want this book. This woman created probably 10 excellent 1 min clips with profound magnificent knowledge and understanding.

She is a breathe of fresh air in the middle of the general pestilence. Thank you so much!

For years literally 100% of the comments on red pill content have been from men. For the first time I am beginning to see women commenting. Women are actually beginning to listen to what men are saying and that is a wonderful thing.

You don't have to remake yourself every day!. Remarkably liberating. Very good interview with a principled lady.

Thanks! I could listen to this intelligent and logical women speak probably an entire 24 hrs straight. Lovely podcast, 10/10

I could listen to this intelligent and logical women speak probably an entire 24 hrs straight. Lovely podcast, 10/10

She makes so many excellent points. What is missing here is anyone being to articulate the benefits for a man to get married. She describes marriage as “phenomenally freeing”. Marriage for men is the exact opposite of that.

Wow. So much to think about! Thanks.

Great interview! Thanks

Oh Mary, it’s so lovely to listen to your thoughts.