https://youtubetranscript.com/?v=3j-llZc9X70
Sneaky fuckers is actually not a term that I came up with to be profane. It’s actually a zoological term that captures in nature the idea of kleptogamy, where you’re trying to steal mating opportunities. So for example, let’s say you have a type of fish where there are two phenotypes of a male. There’s the dominant physically imposing male, and then there’s a whole bunch of other males that actually pretend to be females so that they can sneak by the dominant males and then have a surreptitious coupling opportunity with the females. And that became known as the sneaky fucker mating strategy. And so in the parasitic mind, I argue that male social justice warriors are instantiating a form of sneaky fucker strategy, right? Look, I’m very sensitive, I hug trees, I cry when I watch Bridget Jones’ diary. See, you don’t have anything to be afraid of, and then hopefully that can allow me to have access to some willing and available females. So do you know their literature on orangutans? So you know there’s two forms of male orangutan in any given eco, like what would you say, roughly tribal, local ecology. So there’s one form of male develops, he’s like the quarterback orangutan. He gets so big he can’t even really be arboreal. He has the huge fat pads around his face that make him round, makes his face round, and he’s very physically powerful. And the females come to him to mate. But then there are other male orangutans in the same area that for a long time anthropologists, primatologists thought were juveniles. But it turns out they’re not juveniles. They’re males who don’t undergo the complete transformation into the non-arboreal male. And they use exactly the mating strategy that you described. Right? So there’s… Exactly. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Well, that’s why I’m always amazed that people get so triggered by your lobster analogy. Because the whole field of comparative psychology operates on the premise that we could learn a lot about human cognition by studying our animal cousins. I mean, right? I mean, that’s the whole premise behind the tree of life. So I don’t really see why someone would be so triggered by the fact that you use the dominance hierarchies of lobsters to then make certain points about human society. There’s a whole field called comparative psychology that does that. So to me, the people who are coming after you for those kinds of analogies between us and other animals are simply displaying their ignorance. Right? Have you ever heard of data brokers? They’re the middlemen collecting and selling all those digital footprints you leave online. They can stitch together detailed profiles which include your browsing history, online searches, and location data. They then sell your profile to a company that delivers you a targeted ad. No biggie, right? Well, you might be surprised to learn that these same data brokers are also selling your information to the Department of Homeland Security and the IRS. So to mask my digital footprints, I protect myself with ExpressVPN. One of the easiest ways for brokers to aggregate data and tie it back to you is through your device’s unique IP address, which also reveals information about your location. When you’re connected to ExpressVPN, your IP address is hidden. That makes it much more difficult for data brokers to identify who you are. ExpressVPN also encrypts 100% of network traffic to keep your data safe from hackers on public Wi-Fi. That’s why I have the ExpressVPN app downloaded on all of my devices, phone, computer, and even my home Wi-Fi router. All I do is tap one button to turn it on and I’m protected. It’s that easy. Make sure your online activity and data is protected with the best VPN money can buy. Go to expressvpn.com slash jordanyt. That’s expressvpn.com slash jordanyt for three extra months free. Expressvpn.com slash jordanyt. If lobsters have hierarchies, it’s pretty hard to blame hierarchy on capitalism. Because we haven’t discovered a subgenus of capitalist lobster yet. And it strikes me as highly unlikely that we will. But let me ask you this. I mean, we’re going off sort of our… But I mean, conversations are organic. So this might be a good opportunity to talk about this. Why do you think that you trigger a lot more animus than I do? Because one could argue that I actually, on any given Tuesday morning, will tweet as many, if not more, things that are quite quote controversial. And yet somehow I… Now, obviously your platform is larger than mine. But even if we correct for that, even if we do it per capita, there seems to be something… And by the way, I’ve been asked that many times when I appear on shows because people know that we’re friends. And they’ll ask me, how come you don’t get… So let me turn to you since we’re now chatting. Do you have a theory as to why you are such a polarizing figure? Whereas, I might want to argue, I take positions… You know, I mean, I’ll criticize Islam a lot more forcefully than you do. And yet somehow I don’t trigger as much animus. What do you think is the driving force? Maybe I annoyed people on more fronts simultaneously than you did. Partly… Well, so what happened? This is a possible explanation. You know, when things first blew up around me in 2016, I already had 200 hours of lectures on YouTube. And so, you know, I was pilloried as a right-wing demon, essentially, by the sorts of people that we’re discussing who like to do that sort of thing to hide their own character, let’s say. And then people looked me up online and went to my YouTube channel and then found, you know, this extra hundreds of hours of content, which demonstrated rather incontrovertibly that I wasn’t the sort of person that I was being accused of being, but also touched on all sorts of other topics that people might not have expected, like in the religious and mythological domain, the psychoanalytic domain. And so I think the fact that I had that storehouse of lectures already stored up when the trouble emerged expanded out my reach in a very dramatic manner. And that’s probably, you know, as the first occupier of that position in some ways, because I was an early adopter of YouTube, I know you were too, but, you know, I think I got there a little faster than you did and a little broader. And so I think that’s probably a fair bit of it, you know? I wonder also if, so like in my latest book now, which I guess we’ll talk about in a second, I also engage in prescriptive remedies. You know, here are some steps by which you can increase your happiness. But historically, I’ve been much more of a descriptive psychologist. Right, right. I describe how things are. Now, in your case, by virtue of you also being, having been a clinician, by definition, you engage in the ecosystem of prescriptions a lot more. And that, I think, triggers people’s ire, because you’re telling them how to behave. And by doing that, you’re obviously going to alienate people. Whereas I come along and I say, here are the evolutionary reasons why there are differences between men and women. And I stop there. Whereas by you taking the prescriptive jump, that probably augments the amount of animus that you receive. What do you think of that? Yeah, yeah. Yeah, I think that’s a reasonable proposition as well. I also think that, I think we could develop that line of hypothesis a little further too. I think that many of the people who have an animus against me, and almost all those people are anonymous online trolls, by the way, because I never encountered that, or virtually never in my actual life. Quite the contrary. I think they’re very, very irritated that my simple-minded prescriptions, like take some responsibility for yourself and don’t play the victim because it’s not good for you or for anyone else. I think they’re very, very annoyed that, first of all, I’m calling them out on their hypothetically empathic virtue signaling attempts to escape from all possible responsibility, which is exactly what they’re doing. And second, they’re very annoyed that the simple ideas that I’ve been putting forward and the simple, somewhat conservative ideas and that they’re traditional, they’re very annoyed that those work. And then they’re also annoyed because I have this very deep interest in religious issues that also grates on people to some degree. And this is something you and I are going to talk about because it overlaps with our interest in mimetic ideas because religious ideas are mimetic ideas, for better or worse. And we can talk about that. So, you know, and then I’m also, I think I’m also probably enabling, to the degree that I’m enabling young men and speaking to them about the virtues of their ambition instead of dismissing them as pathological, you know, patriarchal oppressors. That’s also very annoying, especially to the types of men that you’re describing who want to sneak about in the background and pretend to be virtuous and harmless, which is a pretty damn pathetic way of comporting yourself, in my estimation. Like I’ve watched those kind of men operate in the protests against me, you know, and so I can be surrounded by a mob of pretty decent screaming harpies. And, you know, they’re annoying as can possibly be imagined. But when I look at the men that are with them, they just make my blood run cold. Like those are, and that’s with my clinical eye, those are not good people. You know, they’re hanging around those women who are doing the harpy thing and they’re there as exactly the kind of parasitical predator that you’re describing. And I can see that and they are not, they’re not the sort of person that you would want anyone you cared for to come to, to have any association with whatsoever. Plus, because they have to be sneaky fuckers in your terminology, you know, they’re bitter and resentful and they’re very likely to want to tear down anything that approximates true accomplishment because all those who have true accomplishment are their genuine competitors. And that’s partly why I think the radical left-wing authoritarians go after merit so assiduously is that, you know, they’re, they operate on a completely non-meritorious basis and it’s in their best interest to present merit itself as a falsehood to take out their sexual competitors.