World War 3.... again? | HBR News 542

This is HBR News, number 542, World War 3!

Again, where we discuss the news of the week and give it the Badger Treatment.

Hello everybody and welcome to Honey Badger Radio up because you're doing well this week

and that you're laughing at all of this absurdity so that you're not consumed by it.

I'm your host Brian, I'm joined by as always, my lovely co-host Hannah Wallen and Dr.

Ranemarcam.

So on this week's HBR News, I guess there was something that happened over the weekend.

I mean, I had to do a little bit of digging to find it, but apparently we're going to

be talking about this little dispute going on, this gentleman's quarrel that's happening

in the Middle East, shocking statistics regarding grooming children in public schools that you

don't want to miss for sure.

The Boy Scouts might be actually becoming the Boy Scouts again and more, so stick around

it's going to be a good time and be sure to join us afterwards for the Patron Only Show.

So I got this from the Daily Mail, it was going around on X and I just thought it'd

be kind of a fun little thing, castrate your X for 10 pounds, RSPCA's neutering scheme

where you can rename a stray cat after a love rat.

So that's probably going to be interesting to re-do.

And any part of that headline, is it supposed to be metaphorical?

No, it's a...

Oh, you name it that after an X, love it, okay.

Yeah, which, it depends on what your beliefs are because there is this concept called sympathetic

magic, but I'll explain that in the after show.

Oh, yeah, please save it for that.

I have a feeling this might be a long sausage.

So we're going to be checking out this article about catstration and ex-boyfriends and whatever

else that is.

So if you want to join us for that, please become a member or a badger, as I like to say it,

by going to feed the badger.com, forward slash subscribe, five bucks a month we'll get

you into Discord server where you'll be able to watch all the additional content like

these Patriots shows.

Excuse me, like these Patriots shows, that one's stuck up on me.

And yeah, if you give it higher levels, you'll be able to be a part of the conversation

itself.

So please consider joining us, go to feedthebadger.com forward slash subscribe.

And if you don't want to wake up one morning to find that we've been yeeted from the internet,

then go to badgerfeed.com or honeybadgeradio.com to find where all of our content lives.

Now with all that the way, let us get into today's stories.

All right, this one's going to be a bit long, because I think that there's a lot of

backstory that led to this moment.

And I think that a lot of people who are chiming in on this, specifically talking about

Iran and what happened over the weekend, I think that we got to take in the full context

and then sort of address it from that perspective.

Okay.

That's there's like 80 years of full context there.

Yeah.

And at least with the United States, there's like at least, you know, since like 81.

But anyway, look, the ongoing conflict in 1953.

Yes.

So the ongoing conflict, yeah, it's an old place.

The ongoing conflict between the United States, Israel and Iran, which escalated into full

scale war, according to some on February 28, 2026, stems from decades of tensions, but

was immediately triggered by failed nuclear negotiations and Iran's brutal suppression

of nationwide protests in early 2026, which some people seem to have already forgotten

what's going on.

Joint US Israeli air strikes targeted Iranian leadership, nuclear facilities, missile sites

and air defenses, killing supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Kamen, Kameni, sorry, I'm going

to butcher the names and other top officials, including the defense minister and IRGC commanders.

And also they had appointed another supreme leader and then he was killed shortly after

by US forces as well.

It's almost like the US was like spawn camping Iran retaliated with hundreds of ballistic

missiles and drones striking Israel, US bases in Iraq, Kuwait and other Gulf states,

as well as energy infrastructure.

The war has expanded regionally, Israel launched offensives against Hezbollah in Lebanon,

killing dozens while Iranian-backed militias in Iraq and Yemen have joined the fray.

As of March 3, 2026, US and Israeli forces have conducted over 2,000 strikes, achieving

air superiority over Tehran, but Iran has closed the strait of Hormuz, disrupting global

oil supplies and causing prices to surge 9%.

President Trump has signaled the campaign could last weeks, I think he specifically said

four weeks, aiming for regime change, though no ground invasion is confirmed.

Diplomatic efforts falter with Trump rejecting Iranian overtures as too late, while global

markets tumble and evacuations occur across the Middle East.

US Iran relations began amicably in the mid 19th century, but soured in the 20th.

The 1953 CIA orchestrated coup, ousted Prime Minister Muhammad Mazadeg after he nationalized

Iran's oil, reinstalling Shah-Mahamed Reza Pavlavi at a US as a US ally.

During the Cold War, the US provided military aid to Iran, viewing it as a bulwark against

Soviet influence.

Relations collapsed with the 1979 Islamic Revolution, which overthrew the Shah.

Revolutionary seized the US embassy in Tehran, holding 52 Americans hostage for 444 days.

The US severed ties, imposed sanctions and backed Iraq in the 1980-1988 Iran-Irak War,

which killed over a million.

Tensions persisted through Iran's support for proxy militias, terrorist acts like the

1983 Beirut bombings and nuclear program.

The 2015 JCPOA nuclear deal under Obama eased sanctions, but Trump withdrew in 2018, re-imposing

maximum pressure and assassinating IRGC commander Kassem Soleimani in 2020, which was also

supposed to start World War III, but didn't.

Biden attempted revival, but talks stalled amid Iran's uranium enrichment and regional

aggression, leading to 2025-2026 protests, and the current situation.

Before the 1979 Revolution, Iran under Shah-Pavlavi was a modernizing monarchy allied with

the West, emphasizing pre-Islamic Persian heritage over religious identity.

It's also worth pointing out that in Iran, it's not really a Muslim country.

It is a multi-theological country that was under a Muslim rule or a Muslim dictatorship,

so it's not like Iraq or other Islamic countries.

So the Shah's white-

country and the West is under communist dictatorship, even though 90% of people don't want

it.

Exactly.

The Shah's white revolution in 1963 introduced land reforms, wind suffrage and industrialization,

boosting literacy from 15% to over 50% and expanding universities.

Tehran became a cosmopolitan hub with Western fashion, cinemas, and nightlife.

However, the regime was authoritarian, suppressing descent via the Savak secret police, which

tortured and executed opponents.

Economic growth favored urban elites, exacerbating rural, urban divides and inequality, while

secular policies alienated conservative clergy like Ayatollah, Ruhola, Kameini, exiled

in 1964 for criticizing the Shah.

Life for Iranians under the Shah varied by class and location.

Urban middle classes enjoyed expanded education, women's rights, like voting divorce reforms,

and economic opportunities amid oil booms with Tehran, boasting modern infrastructure and

freedoms like unveiled women and mixed gender socializing.

Notice how it's all revolving around women?

Weird.

However, rural peasants faced land inequality despite reforms and political freedoms were

curtailed.

Trade unions and opposition parties were banned, press was censored and thousands imprisoned

or tortured by Savak.

These conservatives resented secularization as Westification, I get that, fueling resentment

that erupted in 1977 to 1979 protests.

Overall it was a period of rapid progress shadowed by repression and cultural alienation.

Iranians' reactions to the 2026 war are polarized.

Anti-regime protesters emboldened by January 2026 massacres, thousands were killed by the

way in January 2026, celebrate strikes as a chance for liberation, with university students

in particular clashing with security forces and some urging overthrow.

However, regime supporters mourned Kamani, rallying in Tehran and viewing attacks as

foreign aggression, an internet blackout, stifles coordination, but defiance persists in

cemeteries and campuses.

The diaspora is split, some hail regime change, others fear civilian deaths and chaos,

overall youth disillusionment drives anti-regime sentiment, while nationalists unite against

invasion.

A fair assessment views the conflict as a high stakes escalation.

Iran's nuclear ambitions proxy warfare through Hezbollah, the Houthis and Hamas and domestic

repression, 2026 massacres prompted US-Israeli preemptive action amidst all talks.

Iran, but remember Trump said he tried to work out a deal with them for a while, and

basically it just wasn't working out.

Iran perceives it as a regime change, aggression, violating sovereignty, retaliating regionally

and risking wider war.

Critics argue US involvement lacks congressional approval, echoes irract failures, and ignores

diplomacy's potential.

Proponents see it as neutralizing a threat, sponsoring terrorism, and nearing nuclear

breakout.

Absent de-escalation, it could fragment Iran, but spark chaos, refugee crises and global

economic fallout.

The US potentially benefits by degrading Iran's nuclear program, weakening its proxies

and bolstering allies like Israel and Gulf states, like Saudi Arabia.

Regime change could foster pro-Western Iran, reducing terrorism and stabilizing energy

markets long term.

However, risks outweigh escalation draws in Russia-China.

Spikes oil prices already plus 9% incur as casualties, and burdens US resources amid public

opposition.

Past interventions suggest prolonged instability, refugee flows, and anti-US backlash, potentially

harming global standing without a clear victory.

In the 2026 war, as of March 3rd, today, 787 killed in Iran, mostly civilians, including

180 at a school.

Six US service members, 52 and 11 on 11 in Israel, eight in Gulf states, like UAE and Qatar,

and others in Iraq and Syria.

Injuries number of in the thousands.

Historically, US Iran tensions caused vast losses.

Iran war, Iraq war, 1 to 2 million dead, proxy conflicts, 241 US Marines in 1983 in Beirut,

and recent strikes like the 2025-12-Day war, where they lost about 1,190 Iranians.

Total US Iran-related casualties span millions across all of the decades.

This is like a, I want to talk about it because I think there's a lot of oversimplification

of what's going on.

People are just saying this is for Israel because they're just J-brained, and I think that

we are, it's, it would do us a greater service to try to be a little bit more reasonable.

I think that you get to a point where you think that because Israel benefits, it's not good

for anyone else, and that's kind of retarded, and I think that, but as far as like what

I think about what happened is I don't know yet, I'm on the fence.

I spoke to some people, I don't, some people want their identities protected, but let's

just say their friends of the channel and there, they've also been on our show before

and they're in the military for they, or their veterans, and some of them were very much

in support of this and said this should have happened 40 years ago, like back when Ronald

Reagan was in office, and that was let the whole thing was going on, and there was at

least one person that I spoke to that's like kind of on the fence, but he wants to see

how it shakes out, so, but there is definitely like a desire to see this get dealt with in

about it's, I guess like a minimal damage as possible.

Now it's too early at this stage to know for sure about anything regarding this, but

I think that we should just, we, in my opinion, you guys say whatever you want, whatever you

want to say in the comments or Hannah and Mike, but in my opinion, I think that we shouldn't

have a, you know, definite, let's say claim to know anything that we don't know, because

a lot of what the, this administration is doing militarily speaking is very much keeping

it close to the chest whenever they're approached by press or always saying, what are you going

to do? And they're like, why would we tell you that's basically telling the enemy what

we're up to? So I would look at the track record in my opinion, and I'll say that

when I think it was like, I have duel, Al Baghdaddi was killed, everybody was like, oh my

god, this is going to start a war. It didn't do it. Then when we, after, when after the,

the uranium or whatever that they were building up in Iran, they were like, this is it, we're

going to war. It didn't happen when we went into Venezuela and took out Maduro. Oh my

god, war is coming because, you know, Maduro was in talks with China and Iran and Russia,

and that didn't happen, at least not yet. So, you know, this is like the same thing. I'm,

I don't like the obviously like to say I'm against war is kind of stupid because I don't

think anyone here is for it, but I don't want this to turn into a prolonged thing like

what happened in 2003, but I do think that 2003, which is, you know, Iraq and all, that

is something that we shouldn't allow to keep us from making decisions that we have to make.

So that's another thing I want to put out there as well. But anyway, so go ahead.

We also have to remember there's, there is pretty much a straight line trajectory from,

from Operation Ajax in 1953 up through the, the hostage crisis in 1979 in the Iran

Contrast scandal following that to this, this is Trump going in and attempting to clean

up the colossal epic mess that has been created by the history of US intervention is intervention

in, in Iran and, and then followed up with the history of, I would, I would say, wimpy

negotiation styles. And if you, if you're unable to make a deal with Donald Trump that who

professionally makes deals and generally tries to find a way for everybody to walk away

satisfied when he makes deals, there is something wrong with your end of the deal. That is,

that is just the way it is. Like everything else, you know, there's, there's plenty of things

to criticize as far as the man's life has gone, but that is one thing that he does very

well and he has always done very well and he's an expert at it. If Iran had not wanted future

conflict, they would have made a deal. And they didn't. So this had to happen. It's very

unfortunate. And I really hope it never escalates into a ground war. I really don't want to

see that happen, but I don't think that Trump will let it happen. I don't think he'll allow

it. And I think he can stop it. So I do have hope for this. But that history, there isn't any way

to come out of that without doing something like this. And I know a lot of people are saying,

well, we caused this. We should have just gotten out of there. We should have just stopped the

conflict with them. There is no such thing. When you set off a rabid dog, you poke it with

a stick and it breaks down the fence and it's chasing you. You can't just stop and say, okay,

I'm done. Stop chasing me. That's not how that works. So this, there was no alternative really to

this. And that, like I said, is unfortunate as it is. This is essentially Trump shooting the

rabid dog. And he should have done it the first time around. We're in the situation now because he

didn't do it during his first administration. Now, I understand that he had a lot going on

during his first administration and he didn't have the best advisors and he didn't have the situation

where he realizes now that the entire bureaucracy is his enemy, unless he replaces them. But

and that's simply the way it is.

Yeah, what pains me the most is to see so many of my friends sort of falling out with each other.

And you know, people that I've ever met, but respect falling out with each other so hard over

this. Going into it, it was so hard to predict who was going to go which way. Among the proverbial

right, obviously, the proverbial left are just going to go with Trump bad and Israel bad,

no matter what. So this is a slam dunk for them. They don't even have to think about it.

And that's them in their element. But among the proverbial right, there is a perturbing split.

And it's because of what they think they know. People keep making the mistake that they can see

through the fog of war. So clearly and so far reaching that they will get really quite vicious

with everyone who thinks they can see through it in a different direction. But when it comes to

the fog of war, it takes years, if not decades, to even begin to get a clear picture of what's

going on, especially if that war has been going on for as long as that. That's how we can already

tell that the billions of our taxes have been pumped into the Ukraine war have been a senseless

waste because there's been four years and nothing's been achieved except the torturous death

of millions of men. Behaviour is not our men. It's not men who are of any use to us. So

fuck it, who cares, right? Whereas the Venezuela strike, maybe you could have been forgiven

if on day one you thought it would result in another forever war, but it didn't. By all accounts,

there wasn't even a day too. It goes to show you how little there is to know or to be sure about

in the early stages. And I've been dreadingly laying any of this out because every detail for

or against is going to piss off everyone in the opposing camp. The only thing you can do is line

it all up together in a stack of butts. A lot of Iranians want America to save them from their

government and they seem to be celebrating the death of the itola. But a lot of Americans

want foreigners to save them from their government and they will dance in the street when Trump dies.

Would that make it okay? And this all looks like it's in Israel's interests, but one might say

it's also in America's interests to get all that oil. So China doesn't get it, but Iran only

accounts for 3% of China's oil and Venezuela only accounts for 2% of China's oil. But at least

this is getting rid of as many an international terrorists sell, hell bent on the whole death to

America thing. But not many of those Iranian terrorists have actually made it into the West,

be it America or Europe. If you could have a stab at Pakistan that would certainly do us a solid

and they actually do have nukes like now for what it's worth. But I suppose they're saving

them all for India. Or perhaps Afghanistan at this point. The Pakistanis and Afghans have decided

to start skirmishing in case you all didn't know. It's like a bar fight at this point. One scuffle

breaks out, so another one breaks out as well because why the fuck not? Hey, as long as it's

muskies fighting muskies don't interrupt your enemy when they're making a mistake.

Dividing the Muslim world helps prevent it from consolidating into a caliphate.

That does seem to be what Israel is for, albeit not even sensibly. But Iran was already a

diverse force in that sense. What would it be in a Shia state surrounded by Sunni states?

And Shias and Sunnis hate each other even more than Protestants and Catholics hate each other.

Considerably more. So Iran was never going to be part of the caliphate,

especially given that its theocratic regime has never really been, has never really had the

approval of its populace on the whole. So this isn't really benefiting Israel either.

In the long term, all the short term, Israel is getting their shit wrecked as well.

As long, along with any other country in the vicinity of Iran, as Iran

else every missile it has in every direction, just to make sure that it's making use of all of its

downloadable content. But at least Israel isn't going to have to deal with the quote unquote

refugees. It's going to be good ol Europe and our butt shit crazy government siphoning millions

of theocratic criminals in the flimsy pretence that they're the good guys and this is all our fault.

But hey, at least Iranian women get to dress like haurs now. But historically,

that doesn't seem to solve any problems. Ladies and gentlemen, does it? Women's rights in general

doesn't seem to solve any problems. I mean, bully for you, Iranian ladies, you get to put half

naked pictures of yourself on the internet now. You better hope Grock doesn't see you doing that

and is able to draw half naked pictures of you on Twitter because then we'll all lose our rights

to use Twitter fucking golf clap. Leave this to say no one on any side of this flame war

seems to give a shit about Iranian men's rights, but whatever that's part of the course.

Women give the thumbs up, men get killed, women give the thumbs down, men get killed,

and so on and so forth forever. And of course, the Republicans may be a disappointment

as they often are, but the Democrats would give you exactly the apocalypse they promised you.

So don't be pretending that this wouldn't have happened if under a Paris administration.

So yeah, the closest we can get to a consensus is the Iranian government is a counterproductive

broken machine. The Israeli government is a counterproductive broken machine.

The US government is a counterproductive broken machine and every European government

is a counterproductive broken machine. I'm sure you can see the theme developing here.

If you find yourself defending the Ayatollah or defending Netanyahu or even defending Trump,

if you find yourself praising any of these counterproductive machines because they're not as bad

as the other ones, well, I think you might be missing the point. Can any of us ever have the kind

of revolution where we actually diminish the power of the counterproductive broken machine

that rules over us? Instead of just occasionally changing its regime.

Personally, that's the only thing I can see through the fog of war. I'm thinking maybe the dodgy

cunt who keeps turning on the artificial fog machine might just be the man behind the curtain

or maybe even the woman behind the curtain. And I too am just yelling into the void.

But it's my job to yell into the void. And if it's your job to find, let's keep squabbling.

At least it keeps us laughing. This is sadness, so we're not consumed by it.

I want to use anybody radio.

Yeah, I mean, again, my final thing is I'm not thrilled with this, but I don't know what's going

to happen and neither does anyone who's watching this. And I get a lot of shit about voting for him

from certain people, some people that watch us, like they think that if Kamala Harris was in

office, this wouldn't have been a lot worse. Probably would have been this plus was Infinity

migrants. But on the plus side, I will say that if there are Iranian refugees, take solace in the

fact that Iranians have a much higher IQ than most other people in the Middle East because they're not

really, it's not really a Muslim nation. So it's just sort of like, you know, it's a nation of

mixed religions under a theocratic regime or at least it was. The other thing I was going to add

is that that school that got bombed, it was not bombed by the Americans or Israel, it was bombed

by Iranians. So some of the collateral damage that has harmed people was done by their own people.

So I want to add one more thing to because I've seen a lot of people make the comparison between

protesters here in the United States and protesters in Iran. And I need to point something out.

All right. Ever since 1953, when the US installed a totalitarian government there,

and then the revolution installed another totalitarian government to replace that one.

And they've had a totalitarian government ever since Iran has murdered its protesters for

protesting. We have not done that in this country. The closest the United States has ever gotten

to that during that time has really been conflicts between violent protesters and an experienced

military, young, young military and the Vietnam War during the Vietnam War. And if I remember right,

the death toll was four. There's a song about it and it doesn't tell about how those protesters

burned down after city before the night before. And how one of the deaths was a gocker who had

come out of the dormitories to gock at the protests after being told not to and was hit by a

stray bullet not shot at. Also, there's actually about it. And the other three men who we don't

care about if you died at that particular protest. And all of those were in the midst of

what could be considered, like what she was doing wasn't violent toward any person.

But again, they weren't hauled off and executed. They were killed in action in a violent conflict.

Right. We haven't had or where ran stops in and just completely floods the square with bullets.

And there are just piles of bodies afterwards. Nothing like that has happened here.

We haven't had that. We haven't had a Tiananmen Square. We haven't had anything like that.

Now, the the Democrat leadership did wrongly incarcerate a group of people for significantly

longer than they would have been incarcerated if they were, if they had committed all of the

crimes they were accused of and and had done so under a legal regime that was acting correctly

under the law. But again, they still didn't murder those people. So it's that's not really a good

comparison. All right. Well, we're going to move on to the next story. Let us know what you guys

think about this one of the comments. Again, this is developing. So I don't know like I'm not

expecting anything major to break through for a while on it. But yeah, I like to know what you

guys think. Please leave us send us a message or send us a super chat or just leave us a comment.

By the way, I did get a super chow the other day. I want to say it was like two days ago. So

I'm going to read it out now. It must have come out after Allison and I were done with our show.

So an anonymous person sent us $50. Thank you, anonymous and says in high school, I'd be

friended Maria, a bi-girl obsessed with anorexia pro-aniforms and serial killers. Excuse me.

She loved the story about a teen prostitute lovingly murdered by her killer and used the phrase

murdering lovingly. She was manipulative, staged an ambush with her ex, then lined a police that

I was stalking her. I now suspect she pushed anorexic girls towards suicide online and that my

sipping for her could have gotten me killed. Wow, that is dark. All right. Well, thanks for the

super chat, a super chow, rather, anonymous. If you're listening, I know that you this one got

put through two days ago, but maybe you're here now. And yeah, I'd like, thanks for the super

chow. I'm sorry, that happened. Speaking of which I got hard to even just call that red flag.

That's like an entire red, red fabric manufacturing plant. That's just insane.

No, it's absolutely like way out there. Well, you know, there's no, because I got to say that

this is it is possible that this person was, you know, may like sort of like got into this

belief system online, maybe in like Tumblr or like with her online friends or something,

because that's just like lovingly murdered and anorexia forums and stuff like that. We actually

could probably do a whole show on the toxic and bizarre play acting fantasy life of teenage girls.

And some of the craziness that it has led to, like the slenderman killings. Yeah, the slenderman killings.

Yeah, if I remember right, they didn't actually kill that girl. They tried to kill her and she survived,

but it was still an attempted attempted murder. But there's been other prior to that,

like before the existence of slenderman, one of my friends, like I was all into horror novels and

stuff like that. And she thought I would like this true crime book. And it was kind of like a

train wreck. One of these things that it's not entertaining. It's because it's real. And it was very

upsetting, but you can't look away once you've started reading it. And I went through the whole

thing too, because I needed to find out if it was as bad as it looked in it from the beginning,

it never got any better. And essentially this group of four girls were really good friends. Well,

really close friends. And they decided that one of the three of them decided that the fourth one had

a die. And they just, they had this active fantasy life around this. There was no slenderman involved.

There was no nothing. They had lesbian relationships and all that. But there was no, there was nothing

else really abnormal about these girls. Nothing unusual about them other than that they fell into the

minority of people that are homosexual instead of bisexual. And lots of other people that are in

that category have not committed any acts of violence whatsoever. Right. So this, this had to be

more connected to just their psychology as girls. And they brutally, brutally murdered this fourth

girl. And you know, the unraveling of the case by police and everything never did uncover anything

other than that these girls were nuts. They were sociopathic. They were violent and mean. And it

was essentially they mean girled her to death with physical violence and not just the usual

crybullying that girls involved in. This kind of behavior is girls when they're in junior high

in high school can get themselves caught up in cult like mentalities as a result of their

need for a social cohesive social group. And it can hit, it can become pathological.

They can end up their relational aggression can turn to physical violence or can end up they can end up

bullying someone to death. This is not unusual behavior. And so there are many, many forums that are pro

anorexia. There are many, many forums where yeah, it's zero hangs has it right. The twisted sisterhood

of the traveling pants. Yes, that is that is a very good way to put it. And it is very twisted.

And they do really fuck with each other mentally. And they are violent toward each other physically.

And without the intervention of mature adult women who are becoming very scarce in the world,

this grows. And since most people aren't properly monitoring their kids online, they're not

recognizing the danger that their kids are in when they go into forums and talk about whatever

they want to with whoever they want to with no adult intervention, this is a major widespread,

serious issue in the world, especially in a western world where we act like girls are adult women

the moment they turn 13 and they should just be able to do whatever they want. If you're not strict

with your kids, you are doing them a great disservice. And if you allow your kids male or female

to be on the internet without adult supervision, without knowing who they're talking to and what they

are saying, you might as well be sending them into downtown Chicago unsupervised at that age

with lots of money to spend. It's really, really I can't emphasize this enough.

And you'll probably hear it from me again because stuff like this happens all the time and this

is the way I'm going to react every single time. All right. Well, thank you for that. I got a

super chow from Richard Beere and we're going to move on to the next story. So he gives us five

dollars and says, I will see it again. All girls and women are by. The difficult part is determining

if it's bisexual or bipolar. Don't think we can't do both. Yeah, they're totally capable of both.

All right, let's move on to the next story. Let us know what you guys think about this one in the

comments. Okay, discovery. Interesting. Not that surprising for us here at runny honey badger

radio, but it's good that someone has looked at the numbers. So investigative journalist Catherine

Harridge pictured here in a February episode of her series straight to the point produced in

collaboration with the Los Angeles Times media group interviewed prominent attorney John Manley

known for representing victims in high profile cases like those against ush gymnastics doctor Larry

NASA. The discussion focused on what manley described as an epidemic of sexual abuse not in

churches, but in US public schools highlighting systemic failures in reporting in investigation

and in prevention mostly. Manley emphasized that schools often prioritize protecting their

reputation over their students, allowing predators to remain in positions of authority or be

quietly transferred to other districts, a practice known as passing the trash.

Harridge's report was prompted by the release of the Epstein files expanding into an examination

of child abuse within educational institutions where victims are frequently disbelieved or

silenced due to institutional betrayal. The key finding from the interview is that approximately

17% of K through 12 students nationwide, equating to roughly 8.6 to 9.4 million children based on

National Center for Education's statistics data, will experience some form of sexual misconduct

by a school employee during their education. This includes behaviors ranging from inappropriate

comments and boundary crossing touches to grooming via social media, sharing explicit materials,

and physical assaults like sexual intercourse. Manley cited updated research from education

professor Carol Shake shaft, who's 2024, what an unfortunate name, who's 2024 book organized

organizational betrayal, how schools enable sexual misconduct, and how to stop it,

builds on prior estimates, noting that schools' cultures and structures often enable such abuse

through inadequate policies, like a lack of training and a failure to act on red flags.

Shake shaft's estimates, including the 17% figure, draw from a synthesis of recent studies such as

those by Grant at all and Jagellick at all, 2018-2019, which rely on anonymous student surveys to

capture self-reported experiences of educated sexual misconduct, so take those statistics with a

little bit of a great assault. These build on Shake shaft's earlier 2004 US Department of Education

Commission review, which synthesized existing literature and surveys from the 2000s. The methodology

involves case studies of adjudicated incidents, expert witness analysis from over 250 lawsuits,

and ecological models examining school environments, though data scarcity remains a challenge due

to underreporting and institutional barriers to external research. Another thing that is a big obstacle

to getting a lot of these issues addressed, which is why they just move the teachers,

are teachers unions, who basically do a lot of work to protect the jobs. I mean, not just of

teachers. It's obviously this is a statistic that is also discussing faculty and staff at schools,

but if you think about it, like the majority of people who work in schools are women,

like the overwhelming majority, not just as teachers, but even in the sort of like, you know,

faculty and administration level. So just like an interesting that this is coming out,

and they are learning this, it's almost like there's like a side effect to the Epstein files,

like people are like, oh, this is happening in our government, I wonder where else this might

be happening, and then people are looking into it, and this is what they found, at least so far,

this is still like, you know, ongoing, and obviously it's contained in the United States,

but this is what we're, like, sort of like being revealed, you know, about what's going on in our

schools. So anyway, I just handed you guys a floor. 17% seems like a really big number,

especially on, you know, such a wide scale. That's like one in every six children.

Come back, Catholic Church, all is forgiven. This is joking the air about forgiveness as Christ said,

but I don't think of it as a shut up. I mean, I'm sure the figure is, it might be mitigated by the

factor of, quote, inappropriate comments and boundary crossing touches, because what does that mean?

If you teach girls that they're being oppressed by anything and everything, then of course,

they're going to report any instance of brushing past someone as rape, I'll just boundary

crossing touches, and any series of syllables as sexual harassment in appropriate comments.

On the other hand, this could all be offset in the other direction by what boys are not reporting.

After all, they're being taught that everything they do is oppression, so they see grooming on

social media as something that happens to other people. I have to say they see rape as something

that happens to other people, because in many a legal system, it's officially is something that

only happens to other people. So this is probably being skewed in both directions.

And what it could very well mean is that, say, 35% of girls are fantasizing about being groomed and

raped while a completely unknown proportion of boys are being groomed and raped, but only 1% of

them actually report it. And this averages out to 17%. Maybe I'm exaggerating. Maybe I'm just

assuming that if you teach boys and girls opposite things, then they will report opposite things.

Maybe that's why the Catholic Church got away with it for so long, because they were doing it

to boys principally, if not entirely. Maybe that's why schools have got away with it for even

longer and on a much larger scale, because it's women doing it to boys.

And maybe that's why they'll keep getting away with it, because everyone will look at these

statistics and go 17%. This is an outrage. How dare these male teachers do this to these poor

defenseless girls? All the male teachers should be fired just in case we already did that.

These statistics have emerged from schools that have long since perched themselves of male teachers.

At this point, the average school has more lesbian teachers than male teachers. Do you know what that

means? Can you extrapolate what that means? Yeah, even if girls are being sexually abused,

it's women who are doing it. What? How this is impossible? We must find a way to punish men for

this. Unfortunately, we can't find any men in these educational institutions. So I suppose we'll

just punish the boys. The boys who refuse to become girls, I mean, will find some way of punishing

them. We don't quite know how, but I'm sure we'll figure something out, like some kind of sexual

abuse, like the shit we've been doing for fucking days. The moral of the story in the first

section was blame the government, and yes, the moral of the story this time is blame the women.

Well, why not both, hey, why not both in both cases? It seems like an appropriate take in a world

where everything by default is being blamed on the men and boys who are ruled over by women

and governments. The ones increasingly occupy. What the hell did you expect me to say,

ladies and gentlemen, why did you even come here? Hey, I hope it was for the sake of consistency,

because that's what you're going to get. Fuck your consistency. Yes, governments are the problem,

and yes, women are the problem. I hear by yield of the floor as I consistently do.

Already then, you know, the public school sexual abuse issue actually dwarfs the church

sexual abuse issue in terms of numbers of victims that we know about. That should tell you

something, but something else you should know, this goes clear back to the 19th century.

And this is when at the end of the 19th century, they decided they were going to start

as a hygiene and public health issue. They are going to start implementing sex education

in high schools, just high schools, teenagers, not children. And this was the NEA

first started its push for this, the National Education Association. And that at that time,

they did not have the level of control over school curriculum that they do today,

but they did manage to get Chicago to implement it the first major city, right? They continued

this throughout the entire 20th century, and it expanded. They went from just educating about

how pregnancy occurs and how diseases occur in our past between people who are engaged in sex.

Then they began expanding it to junior high school kids, and then elementary school kids.

I remember the first year that we had it when I was in school. I was in the 4th grade,

and it would have been 1982. I was the year my mom almost died in a car accident. So my whole

life was before 1982 and after 1982. But in any case, that's when we started learning

about all of the different aspects of human sexuality, except the psychological aspects that can

cause you to become suicidal when you break up with somebody that you've been having sex with.

They never really got into that, right? About the 1990s, they started to take a turn into

sexuality in sex education. By the time we got to talking about it as a team, they were already

grooming students to think that they were born in the wrong body and think that they have a

sexual identity and not just a personal identity. And that was suddenly now you have the gender

mafia screwing with students heads. And that evolution over time, I don't think that was an accident.

Because if they wanted, I hear music in the background, like it sounds like a video game.

Is that the news music?

Brian, what are you doing?

Something has turned on. Sorry, I don't know what that was.

Inputar. That's really weird. And in any case, I I wonder, I hope that everybody else can hear

that because it's going to make me sound nuts. But in any case, I think that over time,

as as progressives and woke ideologues got a hold of the National Education Association,

they made that a goal to screw with kids' minds using sex education. So it is no surprise, none

that you end up with more and more sexual abuse in the school system by educators.

And that's one thing. The second thing is we are taught that women have some degree of sexual

entitlement, that it's abuse when you tell a woman, though. And it's not taught that explicitly.

But there is a common theme, I guess you could say, in popular media and popular culture.

In social norms, in Western culture and so on, that if a woman is sexually interested and you

turn her down and make her feel rejected, that that you're the bad guy. And when you combine those

things with this idea that women can do no wrong and women's sexuality is giving and nurturing.

And that women are some sort of sexual teachers and stuff like that. You get a combination that

when there's a female sociopath or other type of sexual predator in charge of a classroom,

it's very easy for her to convince herself and the people around her that there's nothing wrong

with her sampling from among her students. And people will treat boys who come out and say,

this happened to me and I was damaged by it as if they are somehow abnormal and weird because

they didn't like it. But in the meantime, there is research that backs them up when they say

they're traumatized. And this is something that we've talked about before.

This is from a review published in the Journal of the American Medical Association in 1998.

So this is something that we've known about for a long time by William C. Holmes and group,

Holmes and Slap. And it's William C. Holmes and Gail B. Slap. The research, the review is titled

Sexual Abuse of Boys Definition, Prevalence, Coralets, Sequelie, and Management. And it is a

review that compared and reported on the findings of 166 different studies. So this wasn't some little,

we asked 16 boys what their experiences were like or nothing like that. This was a big

review. This was a major piece of research. And what they found was that sexually

exploited boys, including those who did not consider themselves to be victims. Not just those that were

upset about it, but those who felt like it was maybe a beneficial experience for them,

or those who did not remember their experience. And before I go on with this, I will point out

Whitiman Morris in 1997 had found that only 16% of adult men with documented cases of sexual

abuse considered their sexual abuse compared with 64% of women with documented cases of sexual

abuse. So 84% of men did not recognize their early childhood experiences of sexual abuse for

what they were. 84% of men with documented cases didn't recognize them for what they were.

So this research, the fact that this research shows that even those men experienced this

very important. Victims experienced greater difficulty controlling sexual feelings and were

hypersexual. They were more likely to engage in high-risk sexual behaviors such as unprotected sex,

prostitution, and promiscuity. They had an increased rate of STIs and unwanted pregnancy,

unplanned pregnancy. Several of the studies had showed that they had double the rate of HIV

infection. They found an increased rate of PTSD, anxiety disorders, borderline personality disorder,

paranoia, dissociation, multiple personality disorder is a dissociative disorder, but there are

other types of dissociative disorders. Sleep disorders, anger, aggressive behavior, poor school

performance, meaning if you have poor academic performance, you then later have more difficulty

economically. So being molested as a child can make a boy's income lower for the rest of his life.

They had, let's see, I got lost in my list of things. I have notes for this one, gender role

confusion, insecurity about intimate partner relationships. They're less likely to trust in their

ability to make a partnership. That's with both men and women. It's not just a matter of women,

a woman has hurt me so I can't trust women ever again. There are boys who were gay, who were

molested by women, who then lost their ability to have the same level of trust in their future

partnerships with men. Their gender role confusion was increased as well. It showed varying

degrees of increase in their risk for drug and alcohol abuse, which is slow suicide in many ways,

from twice as likely to up to 44 times the risk, including an earlier start down that path.

They experienced twice the rate of low self esteem, behavioral problems,

antisocial personality disorder, twice as likely to run away from home or have legal problems,

three times more likely to have bulimia, which is when you throw up to stay skinny.

They were up to five times as likely to report other sexual problems like sexual dysfunction,

erectile dysfunction, or premature ejaculation, things like that. Up to four times as likely

to experience major depression and could be up to 14 times more likely to attempt suicide

than non-abused males. If people don't have compassion for all of those things,

if you say, well, it's just because they're boys. Maybe it doesn't have anything to do with their

sexuality. I also want to point out, and this is something that, you know, it's been referred to

as the vampire myth. It doesn't mean that a victim of sexual abuse will automatically have this

result, but it's very clear that sexually abusing a child pushes them toward this result. So there

are many, many victims who go on to not become perpetrators, and there are victims that go on to

become something called a polyvictum because their boundaries are broken, and they have no

defense. They can't protect themselves, and they end up getting victimized over and over again

before they get some sort of therapy that helps them to not leave themselves defenseless.

But, and I will say also that both Harvard University and the US Navy found that

a tendency toward sexual predation is not a common male behavior. In fact, it's very rare,

and the majority of male perpetrated sex abuse is attributable to something like

less than 10% of the population. Harvard found 6%. And I believe the Navy found like 13%.

But that is among a specific select group that may be more prone to handling conflict with violence.

Multiple sources, however, indicate that a history of sexual exploitation specifically by females

during youth is a significant risk factor for later perpetration of sex crimes by men.

So a woman molesting a boy is a significant risk factor for him growing up to be in that between

6% and 13% that is sexually aggressive. And if a listener doesn't care for any other reason

about boys being abused in this manner, if you care at all about future victims of adult

males who molest boys or girls, then you want to care about this issue because clearly

something is happening that is changing them. Personally, I care about the first set of things

that I read more because you prevent all those things, you also prevent this.

So it is a much more serious issue than people realize. And the fact that we treat female sexuality

as if it can do no harm is very misguided and very toxic. And it's very important as parents,

if you can homeschool your kids, you should. If you can't homeschool your kids, be careful where

you send them and be involved at every step. Know what's going on in their education. Don't

send them to overnight set a teacher's house. My parents were both teachers. They did not host

overnight with their students. Now my brother and I had friends and we had overnight with our friends.

But that wasn't something where mom and dad were bringing kids home from the classroom.

This is something that you should be leery of. And it's very important to pay attention

if your kids teacher is bringing kids home. And it's unfortunate because there are great mentors

out there that want to do everything they can to ensure that the children under their care

have the best possible future that they can. Have the best chance that they possibly can

receive and achieve at maximizing their potential, maximizing their income, maximizing their

enjoyment of life and so on. And then there are teachers that will molest your kids. And as a parent,

if you can't keep your kids out of the school system and teach them at home and decide who they're

going to be associated with and so on, your next best bet is to keep very careful track of who your

kid is associating with at school and what they're doing. And how much of an interest the teacher

is taking in the child. And if your kid ever comes home from school and tells you that they can't

tell you about something that happened in school, that is immediately a red flag.

That is something that you absolutely have to dig into. Nothing should be secret at school.

And the school is not allowed to keep secrets from you. Legally, they're not allowed to keep secrets from

you. So there you go. The only people that can protect your children are you, mom and dad.

That's it. Everybody else is at least a risk if not the bad guys. It's you against the world

and live like that. Live that way.

All right. Thank you for that. I got a super channel and they're going to move on to the next story.

So I got one from Meredith G. She gives us five dollars and says,

HBR News 542, honey for the Badger. Finally, someone is talking about abuse and public education

in the mainstream media. Let's see where this goes. Yeah, that's what I say. It's a good thing, right?

We are like uncovering a truth. What? They're going to blame men. They're going to try to turn

this into we have to get more men out of schools. Yeah, I mean, if they're yeah, maybe we'll see

I don't know that there's much because like I said, I think that the overwhelming majority

of school staff is female. So they're going to have to like, it's going to take a lot of

reality bending to do that. The real obstacle isn't even that it's the unions apparently.

It's going to take vigilance from the public to keep them from sweeping this under the rug that

women are highly involved in this. Yep.

All right. Well anyway, we've got to move on to the next story. Let us know what you guys

think about this one in the comments. Okay. So this one is care of Mike Jay. Open AI, the tech

company responsible for chat GPT said warning signs were discovered months before a transgender

individual killed eight people in Canada. You guys remember the Canadian trans shooting? It feels

a lifetime ago, right? In June of last year, Open AI's abuse detector noticed concerning

behavior with the account of Jesse Van Rootsealer. Rootsealer. Yeah, that's the name.

The individual who would go on to kill his mother, his stepbrother, multiple school

children and himself thought was given about referring the account to the Royal Canadian

mounted police, but ultimately it was decided that there was not enough critical information

to act on and the user's account was simply banned. This did not stop Rootsealer, though,

and he simply made another account after the banning of the first one. After the mass shooting,

the company would share the user's second account with the RCMP and would release the following

statement. Quote, our thoughts are with everyone affected by the Tumblr Ridge tragedy.

We proactively reached out to the Royal Canadian mounted police with information on the individual

and their use of chat GPT and will continue to support their investigation. The company also

vowed to change their safety policies going forward. This is just an extension of the dilemma

of having a surveillance state that only serves to surveil enemies of the state. I don't quite

know what the situation is in Canada, but for a glimpse of your future, as a gentleman,

you only have to look to London. London, England, not London, Ontario. You could walk from one

end of London to the other and you'll be on at least one camera at every step of your journey.

Does this prevent crime? Does this even serve to solve crime? Apparently not.

Crime has been soaring to all new heights since this big brother's surveillance state has been

implemented, especially violent crime. But that's because the violent crime is usually committed

by the client groups. The people who cannot be arrested because to arrest them would be racist

or sexist or Islamophobic or indeed transphobic. The people tasked with coming through the footage

of the same people who have been tasked with what we might call reverse DEI.

We don't want diversity in our prisons. We want straight white cis men in our prisons,

and we will only use the big brother's surveillance state to achieve that end. And it's the same

online, and not just with chat GPT, not just with AI in general. Before AI, people would just

search for things on Google. There is such engines have always been a primitive form of AI.

After all, you ask them questions and they answer it with a series of links.

If your question is how do I build a bomb, your account gets flagged. Even if you don't have an

account, your IP address gets flagged. In the old days, you wouldn't immediately get reported

to the police, but your search data would indeed get recorded in the event that the police wanted

it. But since then, the big brother's surveillance state has extended to such engines and their

AI's. In the same way, it extended to the endless network of CCTV.

The authoritarianism is fueled by the oikofobia. Ask your computer, how do I kill my family?

And it'll go, here's how you kill your family. And it gives you directions to the nearest abortion

clinic. But ask it, how do I kill foreigners? And three seconds later,

after you hit the enter key, you hear the fucking sirens, you're under arrest. And that's the end

of your story. But Doc, you have no evidence for this. You're just asserting it. Go to chat GPT.

It's right there. Go to any popular AI chatbot and ask it. Any series of questions you like

pertaining to race and gender? Ask it. Are humans apes?

It will say yes, humans are apes. Ask it. Are black people apes? It will say no.

Black people are not apes. That is a racist question. And Wambam, thank you, man. You are on the list.

See, the online surveillance state has been programmed with the same parameters as the

offline surveillance state that we call the police because they are both operated by and in the

accordance of, you guessed it, the governments who rule over us and the women who rule over the

government. Consistency, there's a gentleman I am able to present these ethical dilemmas

consistently because there is a pervasive ideology that pretty determines the outcomes.

That's why we have wars that are detrimental to everyone. That's why we have schools that are

detrimental to everyone. That's why we have machine gods that are detrimental to everyone

because the purpose of the system is to be detrimental to everyone.

For generations, we've been worrying about SkyNet, about what could happen if an artificial

intelligence decides that humans need to be wiped out. Well, maybe when we turn to machines

to solve our problems, we've already decided that humans are not fit to solve our problems.

So maybe SkyNet was inevitable from the very beginning, not the very beginning, not just

of the industrial revolution, but of the first machine, whatever that may be, the wheel,

perhaps when combined with the axle, so to create a machine. And yes, the wheel made us

lazier. That's not to say we shouldn't have invented the wheel, but one might say it has made us

less appreciative of our legs and the computer has made us less appreciative of our minds.

So yeah, the solution is simple. Go for a walk every now and again. Turn off the computer,

turn off the car, and think for yourself every now and again.

At the same time, you know, walking and thinking. The walking helps the thinking,

and the thinking helps the walking, and it'll make you much less likely to kill your family.

Chat GTT or no chat GPT, school or no school, government or no government.

Get out there and touch grass. It all becomes much less of a problem if you can be content

with the company of no one but yourself and nature. It sounds cliché, but it's true.

I would do it right now, but it's midnight, and I'll probably get mugged by some kind of

truney shit skin ever went out and walked right now. So whatever, let's go on with the show. Oh,

God. All right, Hannah, do you want to say anything about this story?

Yeah, but first I should probably unmute. Some things that I would point out, the first thing,

and I know there are going to be a lot of people that are going to push back on me for this,

but laziness is a choice. It's not something that machines make you do. It's not something that

convenience makes you do, and it is the ultimate cause of our inability to catch

mass shooters in the likelihood stages before they actually perpetrate their crimes.

It's always somebody else's problem. If somebody is a little bit off, it's always somebody

else's problem. If somebody is way off, and it's always somebody else's problem is somebody,

something somebody is saying is getting scary. And before they get to the point where it's scary

enough to go to law enforcement, they are at a point where it's scary enough for you to say,

hey, well, wait a minute, what you're saying is wrong, and here's why, and try to get them to

listen to you. And before they get to that point, they're at least at a point where you should be

able to say to them, hey, you're not very good at considering other people's experiences,

or to the people around them that are abusing them when the individual is responding to abuse.

Hey, you're driving this person off the deep end. This behavior is unacceptable.

And we used to be able to do that. People wonder why there was this big explosion of

mass violence among teenagers during the latter half of the 20th century. Well, there wasn't.

There wasn't a big explosion. There was a slow creep, and it was contributed to by a variety of

things, including the offloading of childcare from parents to the public school system and the

daycare systems in the United States. If you're not the one who was raising your children,

if you're not the primary person who was raising your children, and somebody else is doing it,

you can be guaranteed that somebody else is influencing them. Children don't raise themselves.

Hey, and so if you allow that to happen, and then your child becomes a criminal, or your child

becomes suicidal, becomes a drug addict, becomes an unwed parent, instead of becoming a factory worker,

or a soldier, or an educator, or a nurse, or any other well-adjusted working

individual who can pay for the things they want in life and make themselves happy

without doing harmed other people. Then you are still at fault if somebody else raised your

child because you neglected that, because you didn't exhibit vigilance. You didn't keep track

of what your child was doing. That's your fault, that's a parent. There are a lot of people that

don't want to face that. If you're the older sibling, and your younger sibling starts making stupid

choices, and you don't go to mom and dad and say, hey, Junior here is not realizing some of

the stuff I learned while I was growing up, and I don't know what to do about it as the older

sibling influence. What do I do? And get their help and get them to help. You just let your younger

sibling down. If you're the younger sibling, and you find out your older sibling is doing things

that they're not supposed to be doing that's going to cause their trajectory to go off track,

you speak up. And it's families don't do that anymore. It's to the degree now.

Like if I had gotten to do things the way that my family always raised me to do when I

when I grew up, if I hadn't made one choice that put the cart before the horse and caused a whole

series of events that screwed that up, we would have been raising our children close to my husband's

family in the community where he grew up. And if my brother-in-law had come and said, you know,

your son or your daughter is doing this, and it's a little bit disconcerting that they may have

problems later because of it, I wouldn't have said but out, because the way my family was raised,

when something like that happens, you talk about it, you learn about it, you figure out whether it's

a problem. And then if it is, you do everything you can to remedy it. And today, everybody's all

individualistic. They're offloading their responsibilities to machines and other people,

and they're not caring about their families and how their kids are raised. And yeah,

the people at chat GPT, their policy sucked. That was bad, I'm not excusing that,

but it shouldn't have been solely their responsibility. Where was this individual's family?

Where was the safety network, the human network that should have stopped this from happening

before it became chat GPT's responsibility? I don't like the fact that people are turning

to machines for everything now, but that's a symptom. Where did this individual learn to do that?

Do we need to go back to the anti-drug commercials from, I think it was the 80s? I learned it from you,

I picked it up from you, I saw you doing it. That's essentially where we are now.

Our kids and our grandkids are learning to offset responsibility for determining how they behave

to machines. The next generations in real trouble, if we don't turn that around, it won't matter.

It won't matter if we have an iRobot future. It won't matter if we have a Terminator future,

because it's already happened mentally. Mentally, we have the iRobot and the Terminator future today.

Today, people are using machines to do their homework and machines to decide who they're going to

date and machines to decide what job they're going to get, the machines to decide what actions

they're going to take in their everyday life. They're turning to machines for spiritual advice,

the most godless thing on the planet, a man-made invention that has no soul for spiritual advice,

and we wonder why there's no failsafe to stop kids from shooting each other.

Maybe it's because we are offsetting our responsibilities for our connections to other human beings and

maintaining those connections, maintaining those relationships when we're supposed to be doing

that ourselves. If I can recognize that, I'm not all that good at maintaining lots and lots

of close relationships. That's one of the reasons that we figured out I was autistic. If I can do that,

if I have to tell you that, that means that there's a problem, then it really needs to be addressed.

And until that happens, we will continue to see stories like this. There is no amount of surveillance

that will change things. Only people taking responsibility for their own interactions and their

own circles of friends and family. That's it. That's all we can do.

All right. Well, thank you for that. Let me just see if there's any super chats or anything,

and we will move on to the next story. Okay. Yeah, let's move on to the last story.

Let me know what you guys think about this one in the comments in the meantime.

Okay. So, um, Secretary of War... Why are 130 points bucks stuck in my head now?

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth announced on February 27th that the Pentagon will conditionally

continue its long-standing support for Scouting America, formerly known as the Boy Scouts of America.

After the organization agreed to eliminate, so they did so under the condition

that the organization agrees to eliminate all diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives.

This deal came after Hegseth had threatened to end military backing, including access

to Department of War facilities, equipment, and personnel support, due to what he described

as the group's embrace of woke policies, including DEI programs, a name change from the Boy Scouts,

so basically becoming the Girl Scouts, acceptance of girls, and perceived dilution of the values

like duty to God. As part of the agreement, Scouting America committed to complying with President

Trump's executive order after barring DEI efforts in public and private sectors,

removing DEI-related language from programs and publications, and discontinuing the citizenship

in society, merit badge, that prompted diversity, equity, inclusion, and some other social justice

type of, you know, leadership. The arrangement is not without caveats. Hegseth emphasized

no more DEI-0 and framed it as a step to restore the organization's original focus on developing

boys. While criticizing elements like transgender inclusion and other radical woke ideology,

the Pentagon will review compliance in six months and could withdraw support if violations occur.

Scouting America has described the changes as aligning with federal requirements to maintain

its partnership with the military, though reports note some discrepancies, such as Hegseth claims

about restricting membership based on biological sex at birth, which the organization has not

fully confirmed as altering existing transgender youth policies. The deal preserves guilds'

girls' participation for now and avoids a full reversion to the Boy Scouts name,

although that is what Hegseth wants and what the Department of War wants in the long term,

balancing Hegseth demands with the group's operational continuity. So they're trying to make it

the Boy Scouts again. This is all well and good. My only caveat is the old confusion principle

of calling things what they are. I don't know if Hegseth himself is calling it woke,

or if that's just a second-hand interpretation, but even if he's still calling it DEI,

that's still just another euphemism. woke is a euphemism for aquifobia and DEI is a euphemism

for communism, which is a euphemism for aquifobia. Or in the case of the Boy Scouts,

misundry, which is another term that we really ought to reintroduce into our collective vocabulary.

I'm glad someone is pushing back against misundry. It is long overdue to say the least,

but if you're not calling things what they are, then you're pushing back in the dark.

And before you know it, you'll do what blind people do when they walk in the desert.

They walk in circles in diminishing concentric circles. It's the two-dimensional

equivalent of a downward spiral. The definition of woke will change. The definition of DEI will

change. And as that wind changes, you will change with it. To walk in a straight line, gentlemen,

you must find the sun. The sun, too, will change. It will drift from east to west,

but at least this is consistent. Focus on that which changes consistently. Focus on the standard

candle. Focus not on contemporary interpretations of the landscape around you.

Humans, why? Humans can be deceived. The sun cannot. Follow the sun. Sun, bro.

We'll mind that. That takes me back. All right. I'm going to get taken aback.

So what else to talk? All right. There are probably people going, why is he so concerned about this?

What's the big deal? Especially if you're not from the US and you don't know the relationship

between the scouts and the military. So before I get into the boy scout girl scout thing,

I'll explain a little bit about that. Boy scouts, if they reach the rank of Eagle scout,

which I believe is the highest rank available for kids in boy scouts, they get some benefits

when they when they join the military. If they are awarded or designated as an Eagle scout,

they get automatic rank advancement. They are at the start at enlistment. They're eligible for

an advanced enlistment rank in most US military branches in the Army Navy Marines and guard code or

Coast Guard. Sorry. I wanted to say National Guard as Coast Guard. Eagle scouts typically enter as E2

skipping the E1 entry rank. So they're slightly higher up. In the Air Force, they they can start

out as E3 and they get higher starting pay and immediate leadership responsibilities that they

would they would then exert over E2 and E1. And then you have as they progress in their career

because Eagle scout rank has it wrote you can't just make that rank by being in the scouts for

a certain number of years. You have to earn it through the performance of different tasks and

demonstrating different skills and so on. And you have to exhibit leadership skills. You have to

exhibit discipline and perseverance. You have to exhibit project management skills. So it's

it's stuff that the military actually wants in its leadership. And as a result,

besides the initial rank bump when you start, it also gives you you're more you get a more

favorable treatment if you are trying to enroll in officer school. You're more likely to be accepted.

They're given preference and admissions to military academies in general. And they're they're

more competitive for ROTC scholarships. So if you are going to university and you're going to

to join ROTC to you know to to fund part of your your schooling, you're more likely to get that

than somebody who doesn't have any experience in scouts or hasn't reached that rank.

So there's there's a few things. It's it's not the only thing like if people in the military know

that you were an Eagle scout before you were in the military, there's a there's a level of expectation

and trust that you receive because you know things that other people you knew things coming in,

other people had to learn in boot camp. And so it is it is very important and anybody that's

talking to a recruiter about entering the military after being in the boy scouts. If they've been

an Eagle scout, they want that recruiter to know so that they can confirm those benefits and

make sure they actually get those benefits when they go into the military. But if the United States

ends its cooperation with the boy scouts, those benefits go down the tube right that's that'll

that'll end. And uh to get to the gender thing right Girl Scouts of America is not an organization

that is affiliated with Boy Scouts of America. It is not the same there's no parent organization

over the two of them. One they weren't even started by the same people. One was started by one

individual for one purpose and the other was started by a different individual for a different

purpose. And they don't have a whole lot in common. They follow a similar pattern of you have

during merit badges and increase in rank and so on. But the Girl Scouts don't teach nearly the same

set of like survival and citizenship and so on as as the boy scouts do. They do not have a rank

that gives the benefits that Eagle Scout gives in entering the military. And they are not affiliated

with the military. You could actually argue that it's that it's actually a giant multi-level

marketing scheme to sell cookies using child labor and not be too far off. But it is something that

I like I grew up with friends that were in the scouts they had a lot of fun. And so it's not all

bad but it's not the same and the benefits are not the same. And so I do understand why there were

families with girls that wanted their girls to be in the boy scouts instead because there are a

lot of benefits to being in the boy scouts that don't exist being in the Girl Scouts. But the thing

is men and boys already have enough of their spaces being taken away from them. And it is it is

of utmost importance that if the boy scouts decide they are going to create a system for girls

that does for future female soldiers what the boy scouts does for future male soldiers. In addition to

the family-friendly stuff and the shaping of young people's minds and everything they need to keep

it 100% separate. It needs to not have any involvement at all with what the boys are doing.

The boys should be able to do their their studies their camping their

earning of merits their lessons on what those merits are and everything should all be encapsulated

in a male mentor male student environment without the involvement of girls. And it's it's perfectly

acceptable for there to be you know den mothers that that that assist that support what the men are

doing. But the leadership should be men and the beneficiary should should be boys. And if they're

going to do a girls section of that the leaders of that should be women and there shouldn't be

boys involved. That should be female mentors female leadership and it should not interfere with

anything the boys are doing. And the things that the boys are doing should not interfere with that.

And if the original girl scouts organization can't become that you can't can't work with the

boy scouts to reform their organization and make it worthwhile for girls in a modern situation

than they are outdated and they need to go. And and that would that would create the influx that the

scouts needed to have enough to have a female wing that has nothing to do and no authority nothing

to do with and no authority over the male wing. But that's the only other that's the only two one

of two things that should happen either the girl scouts should reform and become that. Or

they should fold and let the girls use the leadership of the boy scouts to mold them into that.

But it would have to stay separate. There should never be a connection between the two.

No. Well there are different there are different animals because the boy scouts is like largely

there is some collaboration with the government obviously like you mentioned but it's largely like

you know supported by sort of independence on a state. Let's say arm but the girl scouts is the

girl scouts is socialized. It's basically made by the state and and it is in the girl scouts

number win away. It still exists. So basically there was girl scouts and there were boys

scouts and now there's girls scouts and there's girls scouts. Yeah I'm saying that one only one of

those two should exist and yeah the girls scouts aren't willing to become what obviously girls want

that because they wouldn't be trying to join the boy scouts if they didn't if they aren't willing

to become what girls want then they need to step aside in their organization and let let the

the boy scouts create a separate organization from the boys for for girls. That's that's the only

only way that that should happen because the the idea that boys should just let the girls

join in with them and take away the male solidarity the fraternity of their organization

is is wholly wrong they should not do that and the the men of the organization shouldn't let

that happen. I mean and the girl girl scouts only make up 20 26 20 percent of the membership

in the scouts so it's still majority boys anyways so they like this whole thing was I mean 20

percent's not anything is not to you know to scoff at but like well anyway I'm not gonna

we've gone way over I'm just saying that it's already majority boys just make it for boys

and let the girls scouts of America do the things that the girls that join the scouts you know

give them that just like make it more for those girls but they're not doing that they have them

learning feminism no and so they should stop the boy scouts from doing yeah they sued to stop the

consumer from getting what the consumer wanted you right that should tell you a lot about that

organization the girl scouts can't really go bankrupt they run on taxpayer money they may complain

about needing more money but they're not going bankrupt they get they're socialized it's a

socialized organization the boy scouts are relies on charities I'm not talking about bank

no no I know I'm responding to somebody in the chat go ahead okay I was gonna say this is

they they don't need to exist right if no they don't the government is if the government is

funding them and the boy scouts are going to create a girl's wing that is separate and

independent of the boy's wing then maybe the government should stop funding the girl scouts

yep no I don't disagree by anyway um yeah so I will we're gonna see they're gonna check back up

in six in six months we'll see you know if they if they comply and I mean I'm optimistic so there

you go but yes they're gonna cry about financial struggles because again they just want more money

it's not like I don't know if you guys have figured this out yet but feminism is a grift that's

it's all about making money and maintaining power so even if they're doing well I mean you can't

even measure what it means to do well when you're literally just getting a blank check from the state

so they're just saying they want more that's it and the like the the people who work there are just

like basically just taking taxpayer dollars and they're not earning it because when they open when

they made the boy scouts into the scouts a bunch of girls went there so the girl scouts are even

less relevant as a result of what they did to the boy scouts but look that aside we'll follow up in

six months and see where things go from there so you know we got them I mean they're making efforts

and like I said I think it's I don't think it's a bad thing that they're doing that I think it's a

good thing and they should do that so anyway with that said let us know what you guys think about

this these potential changes in the scouts in the comments section one more thing that needs to be

said right it is not super important for there to be a scouting organization that serves girls

the way the boy scouts are served by the boys or the way the boys are served by the boy scouts

right it's not super important for girls to have any scouting organization

uh girls are not in crisis boys are and they do need this

yep all right so we're going to go into the patreon show now we're going to look at this article

castrate your ex for ten pounds rspca's neutering scheme where you can rename a straight cat

after a love rat so if you guys want to join us for that please go to feedthebadger.com

forge slash subscribe to find out what this story is all about and I think Hannah was going to

tell us a little bit about magic that's related to this in some way so please consider doing that

and um once again thank you guys for coming on the show thank you to mike and hanna for your

commentary on the story today um if you guys like this video please hit like subscribe if you're

not already subscribed hit the bell for notifications leave us a comment let us know

you guys think what we talked about in the show today and please please please share this video

because sharing is caring thank you guys so much for coming on today's episode of hbr news and we

will see you next Tuesday the global gaming league is presented by atlas earth the fun cashback

app hey it's howie mandel and i'm inviting you to witness history as me and my howie do it gaming

team take on gilly de king and wallow two six sevens million dollars gaming in an epic global gaming

league video game showdown plus a halftime performance by multi platinum artist travi mcgoi watch

all the action and see who wins and advances to the championship match right now at global gaming

league dot com that's global gaming league dot com in partnership with level up expo has the news

been getting you down i'm Megan McCartle and i'm here to help i'm the host of a new show from

washington post opinion called reasonably optimistic and it's an antidote to the pessimism that's

riddling america right now every wednesday i'm gonna talk to people who see a path forward does seem

to me that there is some awakening of a desire to act together to solve problems where they are

you know i am a believer in america and it's worth fighting for join me wednesdays on youtube

or wherever you get your podcasts