Bret Weinstein just said something that won’t leave my head:
For the first time in 300,000 years of human evolution, we removed the cost from the single biggest reward nature ever invented — sex and pair-bonding.
Reliable birth control + abortion = you can now cash the evolutionary lottery ticket without paying the 20-year mortgage of pregnancy, diapers, sleepless nights, and college funds.
Result? An entire generation of 18–35-year-olds walking around with the energy, libido, hormones, and protective instincts that evolution spent millions of years calibrating for child-rearing… but with zero actual children. That energy didn’t disappear. It got redirected.
Heather Heying’s observation is brutal: young women especially began treating ideologies the exact way evolution wired them to treat babies. Climate change, social justice, whatever the cause of the month is — it gets defended with literal mama-bear ferocity, the same neurochemistry that once guarded a toddler from predators now guards an abstract idea from wrong think.
And now Elon is promising the second shoe is about to drop: AI-driven abundance will make money as “free” as sex became in the 1970s. Both of evolution’s primary carrots — mating and resource acquisition suddenly cost almost nothing.
Weinstein’s ice-cold question: When producing and protecting actual children is no longer the central organizing principle of adult life… and when creating wealth is no longer required for status, security, or attracting a mate…What is left to give a human life direction, meaning, and structure?
Are we about to become a species that invents bigger and bigger dragons to slay just to feel alive? Or do we drift into total listlessness? This 3:52 clip is genuinely haunting.
Watch it all the way through, then tell me — honestly — does this explain the absolute intensity we’re seeing in culture right now, or is Bret completely missing something?
Real answers only. Quote-post if it hits you in the chest like it hit me.
Helen Andrews drops a bombshell: The 2020 "woke explosion" wasn't random hysteria — it was feminization hitting critical mass in institutions.
Her thesis: Wokeness = feminine patterns of behavior (consensus, relationships, making everyone happy) applied to places that flipped majority female around the same time.
Law schools tipped majority female in 2016, NYT staff ~55% female by 2018, managers now ~46% women.
Coincidence? Or cause?
Andrews contrasts:
Men ask: "What are the facts? What are the rules?" → justice by logic.
Women ask: "What are the relationships? How do we make everyone happy?" → consensus & caring.
Wokeness weaponizes the "caring" instinct: Frame your cause as protecting "helpless" groups → unstoppable moral leverage.
Timing fits perfectly: Institutions demographically feminized right as "woke" norms surged.
Her big claim: This isn't ideology or Marxism — it's demographic shift reshaping how power works.
"The rule of law may not survive the legal profession becoming majority female."
Controversial? Absolutely. But the stats & timing are hard to ignore.
Do you buy the "Great Feminization" thesis as the root of modern wokeness?
Brutally honest takes — reading every reply.
No comments:
Post a Comment