WEBVTT 00:00:18.909 --> 00:00:21.089 Welcome to the Reality Taboo, where no topic 00:00:21.089 --> 00:00:24.789 is off limits. It's April 11, 2025. I'm going 00:00:24.789 --> 00:00:27.289 to be biking solo today, which is, at least in 00:00:27.289 --> 00:00:29.329 the original game, the only way you can bike. 00:00:29.600 --> 00:00:31.600 Jeff is at a bottle rocket conference. He'll 00:00:31.600 --> 00:00:34.659 be back next week. We'll start with DEI and how 00:00:34.659 --> 00:00:37.659 it just will not die. Looking at an economist 00:00:37.659 --> 00:00:40.700 YouGov survey from this week that queried respondents 00:00:40.700 --> 00:00:44.740 on how they felt about efforts that companies 00:00:44.740 --> 00:00:48.340 and other institutions were making to ensure 00:00:48.340 --> 00:00:52.479 diversity, inclusion and equity in their operations. 00:00:52.969 --> 00:00:55.310 To the question, quote, do you have a favorable 00:00:55.310 --> 00:00:57.990 or an unfavorable opinion of diversity, equity, 00:00:58.090 --> 00:01:01.350 and inclusion programs, unquote. We get a net 00:01:01.350 --> 00:01:05.189 favorability among the entire population, that 00:01:05.189 --> 00:01:07.629 is the percentages who view it favorably and 00:01:07.629 --> 00:01:10.450 subtracted from that the percentages who view 00:01:10.450 --> 00:01:14.430 it unfavorably. We get a net favorability of 00:01:14.430 --> 00:01:19.040 13 points across the entire population. There 00:01:19.040 --> 00:01:21.260 are some noticeable demographic differences. 00:01:21.879 --> 00:01:27.560 First, men are less keen on the idea of DEI than 00:01:27.560 --> 00:01:31.819 women are. The net favorability for men is just 00:01:31.819 --> 00:01:35.439 plus five, while for women it is plus nineteen. 00:01:35.840 --> 00:01:39.340 The pursuit of excellence is a personality tendency 00:01:39.340 --> 00:01:44.780 that skews heavily male, while concerns about 00:01:44.780 --> 00:01:48.810 inclusion and The inherent problems with exclusion, 00:01:49.010 --> 00:01:52.430 irrespective of the reasons for said exclusion, 00:01:53.109 --> 00:01:56.769 is a trait more commonly associated with women. 00:01:57.209 --> 00:01:59.510 And so, not surprisingly, we see it born out 00:01:59.510 --> 00:02:02.329 here. Women may be the ones disproportionately 00:02:02.329 --> 00:02:06.049 crashing the planes as of late. They are also 00:02:06.049 --> 00:02:08.229 disproportionately the ones who want to ensure 00:02:08.229 --> 00:02:11.590 that there are more female pilots in the future. 00:02:11.930 --> 00:02:14.669 And if there are objective standards that get 00:02:14.669 --> 00:02:17.289 in the way of that, then those standards are 00:02:17.289 --> 00:02:20.509 the problem, not the problems that have to be 00:02:20.509 --> 00:02:24.530 solved to ensure that a plane takes off the runway 00:02:24.530 --> 00:02:28.370 safely and cruises at a healthy altitude and 00:02:28.370 --> 00:02:32.789 that all the landing gear is deployed in a safe 00:02:32.789 --> 00:02:35.219 and effective fashion. Those are not the problems 00:02:35.219 --> 00:02:37.039 to be concerned with. The problems to be concerned 00:02:37.039 --> 00:02:39.860 with are the rates at which men and women are 00:02:39.860 --> 00:02:42.500 making it through pilot programs and pilot training. 00:02:42.800 --> 00:02:46.780 There is also a stark generational divide. We've 00:02:46.780 --> 00:02:50.219 talked in previous episodes about how younger 00:02:50.219 --> 00:02:54.599 generations are skewing much more Republican 00:02:54.599 --> 00:02:58.680 today than they were a generation or two ago 00:02:58.680 --> 00:03:03.939 with Zoomers being about as likely to support 00:03:03.939 --> 00:03:06.840 Trump and Elon Musk and the Republican Party 00:03:06.840 --> 00:03:09.819 as Boomers are. In fact, Zoomers are more likely, 00:03:10.520 --> 00:03:12.639 moderately more likely to support Republicans 00:03:12.639 --> 00:03:15.360 than Boomers are. It's tempting to read that 00:03:15.360 --> 00:03:19.800 as some sort of seismic shift in the political 00:03:19.800 --> 00:03:23.599 and cultural landscape of the West. I... can't 00:03:23.599 --> 00:03:27.120 shake the sinking feeling that it is more than 00:03:27.120 --> 00:03:31.199 anything else a manifestation of economic frustration 00:03:31.199 --> 00:03:36.259 and a depressed purchasing power experienced 00:03:36.259 --> 00:03:38.840 by younger generations relative to generations 00:03:38.840 --> 00:03:42.240 that came prior. And that goes a long way in 00:03:42.240 --> 00:03:47.340 explaining why the tendency for younger cohorts 00:03:47.340 --> 00:03:50.979 to move to the political right is something that 00:03:50.979 --> 00:03:54.680 is happening not just in the United States, but 00:03:54.680 --> 00:03:58.180 as happened in much of Western and Central Europe 00:03:58.180 --> 00:04:00.780 and in fact happened in Europe before it moved 00:04:00.780 --> 00:04:03.960 across the pond to the United States. And I think 00:04:03.960 --> 00:04:08.060 it is largely because not that there is some 00:04:08.060 --> 00:04:13.580 sort of cultural reactionary strain that has 00:04:13.580 --> 00:04:17.500 grown in Europe and now has been exported across 00:04:17.500 --> 00:04:22.339 the Atlantic Ocean to America, but instead that 00:04:22.339 --> 00:04:26.379 the economic malaise that is characterizing the 00:04:26.379 --> 00:04:31.160 Western world has been felt more acutely and 00:04:31.160 --> 00:04:34.199 felt first in Europe, and that is why the rise 00:04:34.199 --> 00:04:38.240 of parties like the National Front in France 00:04:38.240 --> 00:04:45.699 and UKIP have predated the rise of MAGA in the 00:04:45.699 --> 00:04:48.680 United States. If that analysis is broadly correct, 00:04:48.899 --> 00:04:53.339 we should expect to see that if economic conditions 00:04:53.759 --> 00:04:57.199 continue to deteriorate in America, we will see 00:04:57.199 --> 00:05:01.420 a move away most sharply from Trump in terms 00:05:01.420 --> 00:05:04.720 of support among younger generations. If that 00:05:04.720 --> 00:05:07.819 is the case, I would expect that boomers would 00:05:07.819 --> 00:05:10.540 stay about the same in terms of their favorability 00:05:10.540 --> 00:05:14.819 towards Trump and the Republican Party, but that 00:05:14.819 --> 00:05:19.220 Zoomers and Millennials would move more decidedly 00:05:19.220 --> 00:05:22.740 leftward in the midterms and in 2028. And for 00:05:22.740 --> 00:05:25.160 some circumstantial evidence that buttresses 00:05:25.160 --> 00:05:30.660 that assessment, if we look at favorability of 00:05:30.660 --> 00:05:33.560 DEI programs by age cohort, we see that zoomers 00:05:33.560 --> 00:05:37.319 have a positive favorability and that favorability 00:05:37.319 --> 00:05:42.620 of positive. 38, that is a staggeringly, overwhelmingly 00:05:42.620 --> 00:05:48.060 pro -DEI orientation among those under the age 00:05:48.060 --> 00:05:51.500 of 30, and it is mirrored identically among millennials 00:05:51.500 --> 00:05:56.100 who also have a plus 38 favorability when it 00:05:56.100 --> 00:05:59.160 comes to diversity, equity, and inclusion. Contrast 00:05:59.160 --> 00:06:03.519 that to generation X, the Xers, that is the only 00:06:03.519 --> 00:06:08.069 generational cohort with a net. unfavorable view 00:06:08.069 --> 00:06:12.430 of DEI. Exers come in at negative 12, and Boomers 00:06:12.430 --> 00:06:16.329 come in at plus seven. So Zoomers and Millennials 00:06:16.329 --> 00:06:21.230 at plus 38 are wildly supportive of DEI. Exers 00:06:21.230 --> 00:06:25.029 are skeptical as their generation is rightly 00:06:25.029 --> 00:06:29.649 renowned for being. Boomers at plus seven are 00:06:29.649 --> 00:06:33.569 lukewarm in their affection for DEI. If we look 00:06:33.569 --> 00:06:38.720 next at the racial angle with regards to favorability 00:06:38.720 --> 00:06:43.120 towards DEI. We see that I expended too many 00:06:43.120 --> 00:06:47.560 adjectives describing the enthusiasm that Zoomers 00:06:47.560 --> 00:06:51.660 and Millennials have for DEI because the racial 00:06:51.660 --> 00:06:55.180 dynamics are even more stark than the generational 00:06:55.180 --> 00:06:58.759 or the sexual dynamics are with regards to support 00:06:58.759 --> 00:07:01.579 for DEI. Whites come in at a net favorability 00:07:01.579 --> 00:07:04.860 of plus eight, so that same lukewarm. sentiment 00:07:04.860 --> 00:07:09.040 to that boomers express we see mirrored here 00:07:09.040 --> 00:07:14.009 in the racial group that most commonly gets coded 00:07:14.009 --> 00:07:16.370 generationally as boomers, and that is whites. 00:07:17.129 --> 00:07:20.850 Among Hispanics, the net favorability is even 00:07:20.850 --> 00:07:24.050 lower at plus two, coming in almost even, and 00:07:24.050 --> 00:07:27.170 among others, which mostly refers to Asians, 00:07:27.329 --> 00:07:30.689 it's just plus one. And that shouldn't come as 00:07:30.689 --> 00:07:34.470 a big surprise, given that Asians are often hurt 00:07:34.470 --> 00:07:38.720 even more than whites are. Asian men in particular 00:07:38.720 --> 00:07:43.300 are hurt more than white men are by DEI and other 00:07:43.300 --> 00:07:46.360 affirmative action programs. And because while 00:07:46.360 --> 00:07:50.120 they are not at the top of the oppression hierarchy, 00:07:50.220 --> 00:07:52.759 they are more culturally sympathetic than whites. 00:07:53.079 --> 00:07:57.199 And so it is often by way of the suffering experienced 00:07:57.199 --> 00:08:02.500 by Asians through DEI programs that legal challenges 00:08:02.500 --> 00:08:06.170 against institutions are brought most famously 00:08:06.170 --> 00:08:08.930 the one against the Ivy Leagues against Harvard 00:08:08.930 --> 00:08:13.290 for discrimination in favor of blacks and Hispanics 00:08:13.290 --> 00:08:18.819 was brought on account of the under -representation 00:08:18.819 --> 00:08:22.040 relative to test scores that it caused Asians 00:08:22.040 --> 00:08:25.240 to experience. Even though Asians are wildly 00:08:25.240 --> 00:08:27.639 over -represented relative to their share of 00:08:27.639 --> 00:08:30.399 the population in the Ivy Leagues, they are under 00:08:30.399 --> 00:08:33.600 -represented among those who score exceptionally 00:08:33.600 --> 00:08:37.659 high on the entrance tests like the SAT and the 00:08:37.659 --> 00:08:40.820 AC. When companies are celebrating or attempting 00:08:40.820 --> 00:08:45.200 to celebrate their diversity chops, they will 00:08:45.200 --> 00:08:49.029 often talk about about the percentages of their 00:08:49.029 --> 00:08:52.269 workforce that is non -white. This is especially 00:08:52.269 --> 00:08:55.370 the case in Silicon Valley. I recall some years 00:08:55.370 --> 00:09:00.090 ago, Google talking about how its workforce was 00:09:00.090 --> 00:09:05.490 only about 30 or 35 % white in response to racial 00:09:05.490 --> 00:09:08.570 shakedown artists complaining that the company 00:09:08.570 --> 00:09:13.490 was less than 5 % black or Hispanic. And both 00:09:13.490 --> 00:09:17.720 sides were making points. that were truths by 00:09:17.720 --> 00:09:20.580 commission, but there was a huge act of omission 00:09:20.580 --> 00:09:24.179 that both were neglecting to mention, and that 00:09:24.179 --> 00:09:27.559 was that Asians made up an outright majority 00:09:27.559 --> 00:09:32.340 of the workforce and a wildly disproportionately 00:09:32.340 --> 00:09:36.799 over -representative share relative to their 00:09:36.799 --> 00:09:39.820 populations in the broader culture. But the reality, 00:09:40.399 --> 00:09:44.080 whatever the media focus might be, the reality 00:09:44.080 --> 00:09:49.299 is that if If admissions are effectively race 00:09:49.299 --> 00:09:52.039 normed, then Asians are going to suffer more 00:09:52.039 --> 00:09:55.559 than any other group, including whites, relative 00:09:55.559 --> 00:09:59.860 to what their aptitudinal results would suggest 00:09:59.860 --> 00:10:02.500 their inclusion rate should be. even if they 00:10:02.500 --> 00:10:06.899 are over -represented in a numerical sense, they 00:10:06.899 --> 00:10:09.759 are still under -represented the most relative 00:10:09.759 --> 00:10:13.460 to how well they do on the batteries of exams 00:10:13.460 --> 00:10:16.120 that allow people to be admitted in the first 00:10:16.120 --> 00:10:18.480 place. So that is a bit of a long -winded way 00:10:18.480 --> 00:10:21.259 of saying it's not especially surprising that 00:10:21.259 --> 00:10:27.299 Asians are aware of the threat that DEI pretends 00:10:27.299 --> 00:10:29.580 for them. The Hispanic figures are a little bit... 00:10:29.669 --> 00:10:32.549 more of a head scratcher because Hispanics do, 00:10:32.850 --> 00:10:34.970 although not to the same extent as blacks, which 00:10:34.970 --> 00:10:38.159 is the figure I have. scandalously withheld up 00:10:38.159 --> 00:10:41.179 to this point, but Hispanics do stand to benefit 00:10:41.179 --> 00:10:44.320 quite a bit from DEI programs, even if not as 00:10:44.320 --> 00:10:48.120 much as blacks do, and yet Hispanics also come 00:10:48.120 --> 00:10:52.419 in at almost even on their net favorability towards 00:10:52.419 --> 00:10:55.460 DEI. If I were to just offer some lazy armchair 00:10:55.460 --> 00:10:58.120 conjecture, it would be something along the lines 00:10:58.120 --> 00:11:01.820 of Hispanics not being as socially conscious 00:11:01.820 --> 00:11:05.990 or socially obsessed as Non -Hispanic groups 00:11:05.990 --> 00:11:09.549 in America are the image of an Amerindian day 00:11:09.549 --> 00:11:13.950 laborer taking a siesta under a tree with a modello 00:11:13.950 --> 00:11:18.190 Midday as the sweat and other bodily perspiration 00:11:18.190 --> 00:11:22.049 evaporates as he takes his midday break in his 00:11:22.049 --> 00:11:25.889 roofing or landscaping job being content to let 00:11:25.889 --> 00:11:29.090 the gringo do the accounting and the marketing 00:11:29.090 --> 00:11:32.730 and the drumming up of business and not being 00:11:32.730 --> 00:11:35.549 particularly upset by the fact that he isn't 00:11:35.549 --> 00:11:38.909 going to make as much per hour as the guy, the 00:11:38.909 --> 00:11:41.389 foreman who is arranging all of the work but 00:11:41.389 --> 00:11:44.450 isn't sweating as much, but whose neurons are 00:11:44.450 --> 00:11:47.289 being asked to fire a lot more rapidly. I guess 00:11:47.289 --> 00:11:51.350 that's an inarticulate way of... suggesting that 00:11:51.350 --> 00:11:55.049 Hispanics are not as inherently upset by the 00:11:55.049 --> 00:12:00.289 idea of social and economic hierarchies as non 00:12:00.289 --> 00:12:03.429 -Hispanic Americans are. So to recap, whites 00:12:03.429 --> 00:12:06.269 at plus eight favorability, Hispanics at plus 00:12:06.269 --> 00:12:10.570 two favorability, and Asians at plus one. Blacks, 00:12:10.570 --> 00:12:13.830 in contrast, deviate starkly, coming in at plus 00:12:13.830 --> 00:12:18.570 52. DEI is F -U -B -U. It is FUBU. It's for us, 00:12:18.870 --> 00:12:22.070 by us. Blacks understand that and understand 00:12:22.070 --> 00:12:26.799 that attempts to undercut the initiative that 00:12:26.799 --> 00:12:29.460 they've seen so much progress made on over the 00:12:29.460 --> 00:12:33.159 last five or six years that rolling that back 00:12:33.159 --> 00:12:37.139 will mean rolling back the benefits and the opportunities 00:12:37.139 --> 00:12:41.460 that they have artificially enjoyed by the push 00:12:41.460 --> 00:12:46.340 for greater DEI across all Western institutions. 00:12:46.809 --> 00:12:51.110 be they academic, or business, or non -profit, 00:12:51.309 --> 00:12:54.470 or broadly cultural, or existing in any other 00:12:54.470 --> 00:12:58.309 social context. The distribution bipartisan affiliation 00:12:58.309 --> 00:13:02.250 will likely come as, little surprise, Democrats 00:13:02.250 --> 00:13:08.169 come in at a positive 64 net favorability, Independents 00:13:08.169 --> 00:13:12.029 are lukewarm at a plus five favorability, and 00:13:12.029 --> 00:13:15.929 Republicans come in at a negative 32. unfavorability. 00:13:16.370 --> 00:13:18.690 The broader take -home point here with regards 00:13:18.690 --> 00:13:23.889 to the future that DEI has in America is that 00:13:23.889 --> 00:13:27.610 that future is bright. Overall the general broader 00:13:27.610 --> 00:13:31.730 population is favorably inclined towards the 00:13:31.730 --> 00:13:35.129 push for DEI and the demographic groups that 00:13:35.129 --> 00:13:38.690 have the most cultural cachet. That is younger 00:13:38.690 --> 00:13:42.950 people, blacks, Democrats, people on the left. 00:13:43.129 --> 00:13:45.409 are the ones who are especially supportive of 00:13:45.409 --> 00:13:50.690 DEI. And the Mr. Burns style Republican old white 00:13:50.690 --> 00:13:53.690 male fat cats to the extent that they even exist 00:13:53.690 --> 00:13:57.129 anymore given that the vast majority of the ultra 00:13:57.129 --> 00:14:01.789 wealthy donate money to Democrats and to ostensibly 00:14:01.789 --> 00:14:06.179 leftist or at least corporately democratic, corporately 00:14:06.179 --> 00:14:09.259 liberal causes to the extent that that fat cat 00:14:09.259 --> 00:14:12.960 Republican does still exist at the level of CEO 00:14:12.960 --> 00:14:16.419 or other high executive office in private companies 00:14:16.419 --> 00:14:20.799 or prestigious administrative positions at academic 00:14:20.799 --> 00:14:24.200 institutions or charities or nonprofits. Well, 00:14:24.460 --> 00:14:27.419 those guys can benefit by singing the praises 00:14:27.419 --> 00:14:31.019 of DEI and pulling up the ladders beneath them 00:14:31.019 --> 00:14:34.759 to ensure that the generations that come after 00:14:34.759 --> 00:14:39.070 them don't look like them without suffering any 00:14:39.070 --> 00:14:42.090 at all themselves. This poll was taken at the 00:14:42.090 --> 00:14:46.549 end of March of 2025, well past the peak point 00:14:46.549 --> 00:14:50.789 of DEI's perceived or presumed ascendancy in 00:14:50.789 --> 00:14:54.889 America, and yet even with the election of Donald 00:14:54.889 --> 00:14:59.440 Trump and the popular electoral majority that 00:14:59.440 --> 00:15:04.620 he received and the support that Doge and other 00:15:04.620 --> 00:15:07.879 MAGA associated movements have had over the last 00:15:07.879 --> 00:15:10.500 several months relative to the last several years. 00:15:11.159 --> 00:15:13.059 Even given all of that, all of that momentum, 00:15:13.200 --> 00:15:16.580 still we see in surveys like this that the majority 00:15:16.580 --> 00:15:20.799 of the population has a favorable view of DEI 00:15:20.799 --> 00:15:25.269 and perceives attempts to dismantle or otherwise 00:15:25.269 --> 00:15:30.769 deprioritize it as racist and sexist and hidebound, 00:15:31.049 --> 00:15:34.429 retrograde, ugly regressive stuff. I want to 00:15:34.429 --> 00:15:38.629 shift gears now, but before I delve into some 00:15:38.629 --> 00:15:42.450 data from the general social survey, hopefully 00:15:42.450 --> 00:15:46.470 news you can use that can be applicable in your 00:15:46.470 --> 00:15:49.909 own lives or in the lives of those who you might 00:15:49.909 --> 00:15:53.090 have under your stead with regards to what traits 00:15:53.289 --> 00:15:57.529 in women are associated with infidelity and what 00:15:57.529 --> 00:16:00.309 traits are associated with fertility with fecundity. 00:16:00.629 --> 00:16:04.009 I want to get some incohate thoughts out about 00:16:04.009 --> 00:16:08.490 the consequences or at least some segment of 00:16:08.490 --> 00:16:13.649 consequences from the AI revolution that we are 00:16:13.649 --> 00:16:16.730 in the midst of now, specifically with regards 00:16:16.730 --> 00:16:19.970 to content creation. We are now at the point 00:16:19.970 --> 00:16:25.730 where all the major AI programs are capable of 00:16:25.730 --> 00:16:30.129 creating bots that are built on the entire corpus 00:16:30.129 --> 00:16:34.850 of individual authors and writers, bloggers, 00:16:35.110 --> 00:16:37.509 and other types of pundits. And these bots do 00:16:37.509 --> 00:16:40.830 a remarkably good job of creating the sorts of 00:16:40.830 --> 00:16:44.600 content that is... virtually indistinguishable 00:16:44.600 --> 00:16:49.200 from the individuals that the bots are in reference 00:16:49.200 --> 00:16:52.960 to. The Steve Saylor bot will give you a better, 00:16:53.120 --> 00:16:56.240 wittier, and more immediate response than the 00:16:56.240 --> 00:16:59.340 actual aged writer will be able to do at this 00:16:59.340 --> 00:17:02.320 point. And anyone can create a Steve Saylor bot 00:17:02.320 --> 00:17:05.420 and then... feed that bot some information about 00:17:05.420 --> 00:17:07.940 some current event that is occurring and generate 00:17:07.940 --> 00:17:11.279 a Steve Saylor response that will incorporate 00:17:11.279 --> 00:17:15.180 Steve Saylor at the peak of his perspicacity 00:17:15.180 --> 00:17:18.539 calibrated to the question or the subject at 00:17:18.539 --> 00:17:21.660 hand and will deliver it in a way that draws 00:17:21.660 --> 00:17:25.099 on everything that someone like Steve Saylor 00:17:25.099 --> 00:17:28.180 who has been writing and commentating for several 00:17:28.180 --> 00:17:32.599 decades has ever put out a corpus of content 00:17:32.599 --> 00:17:36.599 that is much greater than the meat sack Steve 00:17:36.599 --> 00:17:39.400 Saylor's brain would be able to recall at any 00:17:39.400 --> 00:17:42.180 given moment in time. AI pulp fiction novels 00:17:42.180 --> 00:17:45.559 are already as good as if not better than and 00:17:45.559 --> 00:17:48.259 largely in many cases indistinguishable from 00:17:48.259 --> 00:17:52.920 the large quantity of middling authors filler 00:17:52.920 --> 00:17:57.039 content that fills digital book marketplaces 00:17:57.039 --> 00:17:59.839 and what's left of brick and mortar bookstores 00:17:59.839 --> 00:18:03.140 and they can be generated much more rapidly and 00:18:03.140 --> 00:18:06.680 cheaply and without all the concerns about commissions 00:18:06.680 --> 00:18:12.019 and royalties and copyrights. AI generated music 00:18:12.019 --> 00:18:16.940 is better than the vast majority of what fills 00:18:16.940 --> 00:18:22.150 the pop 40 radio airwaves. AI is not there yet 00:18:22.150 --> 00:18:24.730 on the quantitative side of things. It's quite 00:18:24.730 --> 00:18:28.109 bad, makes a lot of embarrassing mistakes when 00:18:28.109 --> 00:18:32.529 it comes to trying to quantify things or do mathematical 00:18:32.529 --> 00:18:36.049 problems or provide scientific proofs. But that's 00:18:36.049 --> 00:18:39.130 likely only a matter of time and initially AI 00:18:39.130 --> 00:18:42.769 was deep inside the uncanny valley when it came. 00:18:42.970 --> 00:18:46.450 to images that it generated, but it has made 00:18:46.450 --> 00:18:49.230 market improvements in just the last several 00:18:49.230 --> 00:18:52.650 months, such that now AI images are becoming 00:18:52.650 --> 00:18:54.710 increasingly difficult to detect by the naked 00:18:54.710 --> 00:18:57.470 eye. If the last decade or so has represented 00:18:57.470 --> 00:19:02.289 a sort of bountiful harvest for independent content 00:19:02.289 --> 00:19:07.039 creators using the Patreon... type of freemium 00:19:07.039 --> 00:19:09.960 model, something that was virtually impossible 00:19:09.960 --> 00:19:13.339 to do 25 years ago. I think that may come to 00:19:13.339 --> 00:19:16.880 represent a sort of interglacial period between 00:19:16.880 --> 00:19:20.160 ice ages. I suspect the future will be one in 00:19:20.160 --> 00:19:23.980 which it becomes quite difficult to carve out 00:19:23.980 --> 00:19:28.220 a living as a digital content creator because 00:19:28.220 --> 00:19:32.140 it will mean competing against a limitless pool 00:19:32.140 --> 00:19:35.660 of knowledge that can be conjured at a moment's 00:19:35.660 --> 00:19:38.640 notice, to scour everything that has ever been 00:19:38.640 --> 00:19:41.880 written and posted online anywhere in the world 00:19:41.880 --> 00:19:45.079 across all of time, and to do so with parameters 00:19:45.079 --> 00:19:49.900 that are designed to appeal to certain targeted 00:19:49.900 --> 00:19:53.099 groups, demographic groups or groups with particular 00:19:53.099 --> 00:19:56.259 cultural affinities or interests, instead of 00:19:56.259 --> 00:19:58.859 having to be a marketer who can write good copy. 00:19:59.079 --> 00:20:02.200 The marketer just has to request that the AI 00:20:02.200 --> 00:20:05.440 write copy for white men between the ages of 00:20:05.440 --> 00:20:08.599 18 and 30 who have ever visited the Mises Institute 00:20:08.599 --> 00:20:11.799 to read about some issue related to monetary 00:20:11.799 --> 00:20:16.539 policy and how that plays into official CPI readings. 00:20:16.839 --> 00:20:19.000 Or to make things even more simple, he can say, 00:20:19.299 --> 00:20:21.319 write me an email subject line that Tom Woods 00:20:21.319 --> 00:20:25.240 would use when talking about changes in perceptions 00:20:25.240 --> 00:20:29.579 towards wearing masks during the COVID -19 pandemic 00:20:29.579 --> 00:20:33.440 during the years of 2020 and 2022. If your work 00:20:33.440 --> 00:20:37.160 is in the digital world, Even if it's not relegated 00:20:37.160 --> 00:20:40.119 largely to clerical repetitive tasks, even if 00:20:40.119 --> 00:20:43.079 it has a creative element, I admonish you to 00:20:43.079 --> 00:20:45.660 be wary. I think you need to be on notice. This 00:20:45.660 --> 00:20:49.319 could be, this is shaping up to be quite disruptive 00:20:49.319 --> 00:20:55.099 to that broad professional segment of the modern 00:20:55.099 --> 00:20:58.750 Western economic structure. There are a lot of 00:20:58.750 --> 00:21:00.589 professions that have a lot of work that can 00:21:00.589 --> 00:21:04.890 be very easily outsourced to AI to be done at 00:21:04.890 --> 00:21:08.769 a fraction of the time and an even smaller fraction 00:21:08.769 --> 00:21:12.970 of the cost. And these methods are going to improve 00:21:12.970 --> 00:21:17.369 exponentially as they learn what to filter out 00:21:17.369 --> 00:21:22.250 and what to bring in and how to react to specific 00:21:22.250 --> 00:21:25.150 parameters that they're given. Conversely, skilled 00:21:25.150 --> 00:21:28.950 workmanship in the meat stick world has a bright 00:21:28.950 --> 00:21:32.470 future in front of it. The sci -fi of the 20th 00:21:32.470 --> 00:21:37.569 century often predicted a future in which robots 00:21:37.569 --> 00:21:42.049 did the vast majority of the physical tasks, 00:21:42.250 --> 00:21:46.029 the menial labor, and the skilled technical physical 00:21:46.029 --> 00:21:50.869 labor that humans had done for millennia prior 00:21:50.869 --> 00:21:55.869 to that. perceived onset of that great technological 00:21:55.869 --> 00:21:58.769 robot revolution. The reality though, at least 00:21:58.769 --> 00:22:03.549 at this point, is that AI and advances in technology 00:22:03.549 --> 00:22:07.390 have done much more, especially in the last couple 00:22:07.390 --> 00:22:11.910 of years, to displace work in the digital world. 00:22:12.309 --> 00:22:14.529 There aren't robots who can fix your leaky faucet 00:22:14.529 --> 00:22:16.970 or figure out what's wrong with your circuit 00:22:16.970 --> 00:22:20.029 breakers in your basement, but there are AI bots 00:22:20.029 --> 00:22:23.400 that can write up. business contracts and marketing 00:22:23.400 --> 00:22:27.599 copy and legal briefs in seconds on the hour 00:22:27.599 --> 00:22:31.759 and pennies on the dollar of what the white color 00:22:31.759 --> 00:22:35.140 cubicle monkeys of yesterday would require for 00:22:35.140 --> 00:22:39.200 the same output. Okay, turning now to the general 00:22:39.200 --> 00:22:42.480 social survey. Let's take a look at what traits 00:22:42.480 --> 00:22:46.359 are associated with female infidelity. If you 00:22:46.359 --> 00:22:50.920 are looking for a potential mate or you are responsible 00:22:50.920 --> 00:22:54.460 for someone who will be doing so, hopefully will 00:22:54.460 --> 00:22:58.779 be doing so in the future. Here are some broad 00:22:58.779 --> 00:23:02.599 tendencies and traits and characteristics to 00:23:02.599 --> 00:23:06.809 avoid and... alternatively to seek out if you 00:23:06.809 --> 00:23:11.769 want to find someone who is likely to be loyal 00:23:11.769 --> 00:23:14.920 to maintain sexual exclusivity with you. the 00:23:14.920 --> 00:23:17.579 general social survey has for decades, ask respondents 00:23:17.579 --> 00:23:21.720 if they have ever had sex with someone other 00:23:21.720 --> 00:23:24.480 than their spouse while married. And so the caveat 00:23:24.480 --> 00:23:28.240 at the outset is this data is being pulled from 00:23:28.240 --> 00:23:31.140 respondents who either are married or have been 00:23:31.140 --> 00:23:33.859 married at some point in the past. It's not looking 00:23:33.859 --> 00:23:38.900 at infidelity if that is what it. if that's the 00:23:38.900 --> 00:23:43.660 term that should be used when regarding a dating 00:23:43.660 --> 00:23:46.440 relationship between two people. And that's probably 00:23:46.440 --> 00:23:48.680 for the better. This is the sort of cheating 00:23:48.680 --> 00:23:52.420 that is serious. It is cheating that has occurred 00:23:52.420 --> 00:23:56.039 between people who have officially made the vows 00:23:56.039 --> 00:24:00.119 and tied the knots and entangled themselves legally, 00:24:00.819 --> 00:24:03.690 financially, spiritually, and otherwise. in a 00:24:03.690 --> 00:24:06.569 way that's a lot more serious than a couple who 00:24:06.569 --> 00:24:09.089 have been dating on and off for a couple months 00:24:09.089 --> 00:24:12.529 when one of the members decides to go in a different 00:24:12.529 --> 00:24:15.029 direction, even if it is without the knowledge 00:24:15.029 --> 00:24:18.609 of the one who she is leaving behind. But the 00:24:18.609 --> 00:24:20.910 tendencies and the patterns are surely applicable 00:24:20.910 --> 00:24:25.309 to less serious relationships. If a woman will 00:24:25.309 --> 00:24:28.769 cheat while married, then it is a pretty good 00:24:28.769 --> 00:24:32.160 bet that she will cheat while dating. First thing 00:24:32.160 --> 00:24:35.299 we'll look at are community types. So women who 00:24:35.299 --> 00:24:39.259 live in big cities are about 30 % more likely 00:24:39.259 --> 00:24:43.839 to cheat than women who live in small towns or 00:24:43.839 --> 00:24:47.299 in suburbia. The differences here as we'll see 00:24:47.299 --> 00:24:50.759 compared to other traits are fairly modest but 00:24:50.759 --> 00:24:53.079 it's not surprising that closer proximity to 00:24:53.079 --> 00:24:55.799 other people and the perpetual bustle of city 00:24:55.799 --> 00:24:58.630 life is more conducive to running around. Sex 00:24:58.630 --> 00:25:00.630 in the countryside doesn't quite get there in 00:25:00.630 --> 00:25:02.970 the same way that sex in the city does. Devotion 00:25:02.970 --> 00:25:05.529 to God is a pretty good proxy for devotion to 00:25:05.529 --> 00:25:09.170 one's man. Women who attend church on a regular 00:25:09.170 --> 00:25:14.329 basis are half as likely to cheat as women who 00:25:14.329 --> 00:25:18.049 never or infrequently attend church services. 00:25:18.589 --> 00:25:22.849 So the non -churchgoers are 100 % more likely 00:25:22.849 --> 00:25:26.660 to cheat than the regular churchgoers are. That 00:25:26.660 --> 00:25:29.619 is in comparison to the community type where 00:25:29.619 --> 00:25:33.440 the big city women are about 30 % more likely 00:25:33.440 --> 00:25:36.839 to cheat than suburban and small town women are. 00:25:37.220 --> 00:25:39.900 More intelligent women are considerably more 00:25:39.900 --> 00:25:44.319 likely to cheat than women of modest or mediocre 00:25:44.319 --> 00:25:48.059 intelligence are. Using the word sum vocabulary 00:25:48.059 --> 00:25:51.519 test as a proxy for intelligence from the general 00:25:51.519 --> 00:25:55.799 social survey we see that women in the top quintile 00:25:55.799 --> 00:25:59.019 of intelligence. are more than twice as likely 00:25:59.019 --> 00:26:02.480 to cheat as women in the bottom quintile are, 00:26:02.859 --> 00:26:07.400 with women in the middle three quintiles being 00:26:07.400 --> 00:26:11.059 about midway between those two points. To put 00:26:11.059 --> 00:26:15.220 some actual figures of straying on here, the 00:26:15.220 --> 00:26:18.000 really smart group, so that's the top 20 % roughly 00:26:18.000 --> 00:26:22.619 of intelligence, 16 .4 % of married women in 00:26:22.619 --> 00:26:24.880 that category have cheated, compared to just 00:26:24.880 --> 00:26:29.650 6 .9 % of women. in the bottom quintile, with 00:26:29.650 --> 00:26:35.250 the middle 60 % coming in at just under 12%, 00:26:35.250 --> 00:26:38.809 having cheated. Female hypergamy is a real thing, 00:26:38.910 --> 00:26:42.109 and the types of women who have the firepower 00:26:42.109 --> 00:26:44.750 to want to do the eat, pray, love thing are the 00:26:44.750 --> 00:26:47.769 ones who are more susceptible to thinking that 00:26:47.769 --> 00:26:50.650 there is really more out there for them more 00:26:50.650 --> 00:26:53.539 to explore of themselves by exploring. other 00:26:53.539 --> 00:26:56.279 people and not being constrained and confined 00:26:56.279 --> 00:27:00.700 by the limiting bounds that official matrimony 00:27:00.700 --> 00:27:04.180 puts in place. I looked here too at a list of 00:27:04.180 --> 00:27:08.759 35 different occupations and ranked them by propensity 00:27:08.759 --> 00:27:11.559 for women in these occupations to cheat. The 00:27:11.559 --> 00:27:14.579 least loyal occupation with the most infidelity 00:27:14.579 --> 00:27:18.680 is real estate agents and appraisers. With over 00:27:18.680 --> 00:27:22.410 a quarter 26 % of them saying that they have 00:27:22.410 --> 00:27:24.829 had sex with someone other than their husbands 00:27:24.829 --> 00:27:28.009 while married. The second least loyal, lawyers, 00:27:28.450 --> 00:27:33.450 with 24 % having ever strayed. Next is writers, 00:27:33.750 --> 00:27:35.950 sculptors, painters, actors, and other artists 00:27:35.950 --> 00:27:39.990 that I grouped together under an artistic umbrella. 00:27:40.490 --> 00:27:45.859 22 % of them. have cheated. Next, fourth least 00:27:45.859 --> 00:27:49.299 loyal are waitresses with 20%, one in five having 00:27:49.299 --> 00:27:52.880 cheated. And the fifth least loyal are those 00:27:52.880 --> 00:27:56.400 involved in sales and finance with 17 % having 00:27:56.400 --> 00:27:58.259 cheated. You'll notice one thing that stands 00:27:58.259 --> 00:28:01.420 out here are these are occupations that are very 00:28:01.420 --> 00:28:04.140 type A, personality driven, at least three of 00:28:04.140 --> 00:28:06.380 them, the real estate agents, lawyers, and the 00:28:06.380 --> 00:28:09.799 sales and finance women. These are aggressive, 00:28:10.160 --> 00:28:12.990 competitive, occupations that involve coming 00:28:12.990 --> 00:28:16.069 into contact with a lot of high -status men. 00:28:16.369 --> 00:28:18.990 These are also occupations that buck traditional 00:28:18.990 --> 00:28:22.470 gender stereotype rules of what women who are 00:28:22.470 --> 00:28:26.130 in the workforce should be doing or prefer to 00:28:26.130 --> 00:28:28.869 be doing. If we look now instead at the five 00:28:28.869 --> 00:28:32.769 most loyal occupations, we see the very most 00:28:33.130 --> 00:28:35.970 loyal occupation of all our teaching assistants 00:28:35.970 --> 00:28:40.369 with not a single one of those in the Decades 00:28:40.369 --> 00:28:43.710 of the surveys existence having ever reported 00:28:43.710 --> 00:28:47.210 cheating on their husbands next lowest our bank 00:28:47.210 --> 00:28:50.720 tellers with three percent having strayed teachers 00:28:50.720 --> 00:28:54.880 at 7%, office department managers at 8%, and 00:28:54.880 --> 00:28:59.900 receptionists at 9%. Despite the common image 00:28:59.900 --> 00:29:02.440 of an office secretary doing more for the boss 00:29:02.440 --> 00:29:05.380 than just taking calls and sending out emails, 00:29:05.960 --> 00:29:08.039 it's women in traditionally female job roles 00:29:08.039 --> 00:29:10.319 who are the most trustworthy. I think the teaching 00:29:10.319 --> 00:29:12.960 environment is especially ideal. particularly 00:29:12.960 --> 00:29:16.119 women in elementary and middle school settings. 00:29:16.599 --> 00:29:19.799 The women are surrounded by kids that fosters 00:29:19.799 --> 00:29:22.420 a maternal instinct. They're shared with colleagues 00:29:22.420 --> 00:29:25.880 who are also predominantly women and the men 00:29:25.880 --> 00:29:28.440 who tend to be in elementary school and middle 00:29:28.440 --> 00:29:32.440 school settings are not particularly desirable 00:29:32.440 --> 00:29:35.180 alpha type males with the possible exception 00:29:35.180 --> 00:29:38.559 of gym teachers who teach only as an excuse, 00:29:38.559 --> 00:29:43.079 only as a way of being the coach of the varsity 00:29:43.079 --> 00:29:46.079 football or basketball teams. I shouldn't just 00:29:46.079 --> 00:29:50.500 allied over the other two occupations of high 00:29:50.500 --> 00:29:54.759 infidelity that are not traditionally masculine 00:29:54.759 --> 00:29:58.640 occupations that involve a lot of high pressure, 00:29:59.099 --> 00:30:01.759 highly competitive settings that help build sexual 00:30:01.759 --> 00:30:06.720 tension. Waitresses and artists are also quite 00:30:06.720 --> 00:30:10.319 likely to stray. In the case of the artsy careers, 00:30:10.779 --> 00:30:13.400 those careers by their very definition require 00:30:13.400 --> 00:30:17.440 a high level of openness and so they are by way 00:30:17.440 --> 00:30:19.700 of the personality types they tend to attract. 00:30:20.200 --> 00:30:22.660 That is, those high in openness to experience 00:30:22.660 --> 00:30:25.539 are inherently risky bets. And in the case of 00:30:25.539 --> 00:30:28.559 waitresses, the sheer number of men that waitresses 00:30:28.559 --> 00:30:32.180 inevitably come into contact with means the opportunities 00:30:32.180 --> 00:30:36.039 for flings are endless. There are racial differences 00:30:36.039 --> 00:30:39.480 as well. Black Black women are the most likely 00:30:39.480 --> 00:30:42.579 to cheat with 16 % of black women having cheated, 00:30:43.059 --> 00:30:46.920 compared to 13 % of white women, 9 % of Hispanic 00:30:46.920 --> 00:30:51.099 women, and 7 % of Asian women. So the weeb stereotype 00:30:51.099 --> 00:30:55.380 of the soft -spoken demure waifu is one that 00:30:55.380 --> 00:30:58.809 is born out in reality. The anime girl only has 00:30:58.809 --> 00:31:00.890 eyes for you, Mel House. You're all she thinks 00:31:00.890 --> 00:31:03.089 about, you're all she dreams about. No one else 00:31:03.089 --> 00:31:05.690 but you, forevermore. The biggest red flag of 00:31:05.690 --> 00:31:09.130 all though, by far, is expressed sexual orientation. 00:31:09.730 --> 00:31:15.670 Women who are bisexual, a staggering 42 % who 00:31:15.670 --> 00:31:18.910 are married say that they have strayed on their 00:31:18.910 --> 00:31:21.849 husbands. Or, in the context of this particular 00:31:21.849 --> 00:31:25.240 case, their wives. That's compared to less than 00:31:25.240 --> 00:31:30.660 12 % of heterosexual women and some 34 % of lesbians. 00:31:30.839 --> 00:31:33.940 The quite open secret about same sex marriages 00:31:33.940 --> 00:31:37.519 is that they tend to be, well, open. And if a 00:31:37.519 --> 00:31:40.839 woman is bisexual, she's going to be open. Open 00:31:40.839 --> 00:31:44.009 wide to... just about whatever comes her way. 00:31:44.269 --> 00:31:48.450 But don't worry, normalizing homosexuality and 00:31:48.450 --> 00:31:51.970 bringing it into the institution of marriage 00:31:51.970 --> 00:31:56.349 will have no deleterious effect in undermining 00:31:56.349 --> 00:32:00.410 the fidelity that is foundational to the Western 00:32:00.410 --> 00:32:04.950 concept of serial monogamy through marriage that 00:32:04.950 --> 00:32:08.109 has extended back into antiquity. We discarded 00:32:08.109 --> 00:32:12.420 all of that retrograde garbage. 15 years ago 00:32:12.420 --> 00:32:16.599 and as the evidence clearly shows the vigorous 00:32:16.599 --> 00:32:19.980 state of marriage in the western world has never 00:32:19.980 --> 00:32:22.460 been better. And parenthetically all this talk 00:32:22.460 --> 00:32:28.579 about infidelity and by extension marriage and 00:32:28.579 --> 00:32:32.740 the products of the union of marriage that is 00:32:32.740 --> 00:32:37.019 children to the question to a selfish answer 00:32:37.019 --> 00:32:40.039 to the question of why have children, beyond 00:32:40.039 --> 00:32:43.079 it being the most basic biological imperative, 00:32:43.200 --> 00:32:45.640 or the second most basic, I suppose. Surviving 00:32:45.640 --> 00:32:49.640 is the most basic, and then procreating is the 00:32:49.640 --> 00:32:55.000 next. Survive and reproduce, those are the biological 00:32:55.000 --> 00:33:00.079 raison de tres of all animal species, all mammalian 00:33:00.079 --> 00:33:02.759 species for sure. including humans. But since 00:33:02.759 --> 00:33:04.279 we're talking about infidelity, something that 00:33:04.279 --> 00:33:08.799 is inherently selfish, perhaps we can mine a 00:33:08.799 --> 00:33:12.680 selfish reason for having children. And it's 00:33:12.680 --> 00:33:18.980 that as we age, as we move from plucky, adventurous 00:33:18.980 --> 00:33:23.359 adolescence and early adulthood into the middle 00:33:23.359 --> 00:33:27.660 -age mellowness that inexorably sets in over 00:33:27.660 --> 00:33:31.609 time. Everything dulls. Going to a bar or to 00:33:31.609 --> 00:33:35.069 a concert or to poker night. Taking trips and 00:33:35.069 --> 00:33:39.289 going on hiking excursions. Or cruises. Or trying 00:33:39.289 --> 00:33:41.950 the new sushi restaurants down the street that's 00:33:41.950 --> 00:33:44.410 all the rage. Getting the newest handheld gadget. 00:33:44.809 --> 00:33:47.549 Binging on the hottest new Netflix series. All 00:33:47.549 --> 00:33:51.230 of these things dull. They just don't pop quite 00:33:51.230 --> 00:33:53.029 the same way that they used to. They don't hit 00:33:53.029 --> 00:33:55.430 with the same sweetness. The excitement doesn't 00:33:55.430 --> 00:33:59.099 build quite as much. The... Existential experience 00:33:59.099 --> 00:34:02.880 becomes a little more difficult each time to 00:34:02.880 --> 00:34:06.420 divorce from the broader timeline of one's life. 00:34:06.819 --> 00:34:10.039 And really the only way to rekindle that magic 00:34:10.039 --> 00:34:15.099 is to live vicariously. by experiencing through 00:34:15.099 --> 00:34:19.000 the eyes of one's own flesh and blood, the very 00:34:19.000 --> 00:34:21.820 product of your loins, your children, to see 00:34:21.820 --> 00:34:25.380 them experience the things that you experienced, 00:34:25.599 --> 00:34:28.760 but to see them experience it anew in a way that 00:34:28.760 --> 00:34:32.320 you once could, but no longer can, that is satisfying, 00:34:32.500 --> 00:34:36.659 that is fulfilling in a way more deep, so much 00:34:36.659 --> 00:34:40.530 deeper and more lasting than being a millennial 00:34:40.530 --> 00:34:43.809 going to see the newest Star Wars corporate slop 00:34:43.809 --> 00:34:48.150 with a few of your childless buddies cannot possibly 00:34:48.150 --> 00:34:50.329 match. And that'll do it for us this week. Thanks 00:34:50.329 --> 00:35:13.610 for listening. We'll talk to you next time. you