The Saad Truth with Dr. Saad

00:00:00.400 Hi everybody, this is Gad Saad. I'm a bit late to this party, but I wanted to briefly

00:00:06.520 weigh in on the Lawrence Fox, Eva Evans debacle that took place at Great Britain News. So

00:00:18.300 let me just summarize at least what I know of the story and then maybe offer some comments

00:00:26.740 and thoughts. So Eva Evans is someone whom I didn't know until this story broke. She's

00:00:34.680 apparently a staunch feminist who's often made comments that are detrimental to or derogatory

00:00:46.060 toward men in general. And she had appeared last Monday, I think, on a show where they 0.53

00:00:52.260 were discussing suicide. And she seemed to be quite dismissive of the idea that given

00:00:58.120 that men, there are different estimates, but the global male to female suicide ratio is

00:01:05.560 three to one for men, meaning men on average commit about three times or succumb to suicide

00:01:13.160 three times more than women. Now to give you a sense of how powerful that effect is, when

00:01:19.140 you're talking in science about an odds ratio, if you say that giving a placebo pill versus

00:01:26.760 an actual pill resulted in a 1.2 odds ratio, like the effect is that, that means 1 to 1.2,

00:01:33.780 meaning it's 20% more effective. So 1 to 1.2, this is 1 to 3. So it's a massive effect that

00:01:44.820 you seldom see. And so men are committing suicide at an average rate of three times higher than

00:01:53.320 women globally. Now I published a paper back, let me just read it for you. I published a paper

00:02:00.360 in a medical journal. The journal is called Medical Hypotheses, 2007, volume 68, page 692 to 696.

00:02:12.940 I will put the link to the paper that I, of my paper. It's, it was a paper looking at some

00:02:20.260 evolutionarily relevant metrics that might explain why around the world, the male to female

00:02:30.440 suicide ratio might be different. In some countries it might be six to one, in some countries it might

00:02:35.640 be 2.3 to one. And I was arguing that an evolutionarily relevant metric that relates to

00:02:42.500 social status is going to be uniquely important to men from an evolutionary perspective. And so

00:02:47.780 what I did is I took data from the World Health Organization to look at suicide data around the

00:02:56.520 world. And then I also had World Bank data regarding, regarding some economic, you know, metric. And then

00:03:03.560 I correlated these to show that as economic conditions worsen the, the, the, the male to 0.96

00:03:11.260 female ratio worsens. Okay. So it was applying an evolutionary lens to understand some of these 0.61

00:03:18.380 sex differences in this case as applied to suicide. The title of the paper is Suicide Triggers as Sex

00:03:25.420 Specific Threats in Domains of Evolutionary Import, Negative Correlation Between Global Male to Female

00:03:31.780 Suicide Suicide Ratios and Average Per Capita Gross National Income. And as I said, I will put

00:03:36.980 a link to this paper if anybody wants to go see it. Why am I mentioning all this? Because

00:03:41.620 it is certainly a deeply problematic global reality to know that men commit suicide at a rate of

00:03:53.620 three times more than women. Now, it is true that women attempt suicide more often, but men are more 0.95

00:04:02.300 successful in completing that objective. And so in the political discussion that was taking place on

00:04:11.860 the, that show where Eva Evans was dismissing, so someone was saying, well, you know, there, there seems to be

00:04:18.500 some unique challenges that we need to look at in terms of why men are much more prone to commit

00:04:25.940 suicide. And in the same way that we tackle certain realities that are uniquely challenging to women, 0.76

00:04:34.340 it might make sense, for example, to come up with, I can't remember the terms they use, like a ministry

00:04:38.640 of men or something. And she was very, very dismissive in a, in a truly callous and inhumane way,

00:04:47.220 right? I mean, what, why should we care only about men? This is about mental health issue and so on.

00:04:51.480 Because again, I, I don't know her well, but if I can generally explain this victimology mentality,

00:04:58.680 whenever you usurp the full victimology from a quote, marginalized group, then members of that

00:05:06.940 marginalized group get very angry. So in this case, she apparently has built a career on, you know,

00:05:12.820 women being the victims. And therefore, now that you come along and say, but here's a context where

00:05:18.000 it is overwhelmingly men who are suffering. Well, then that's not, that doesn't fit the narrative.

00:05:23.660 And therefore you scoff at it, you mock it. Well, we don't need any special attention to men.

00:05:29.960 So now here comes Lawrence Fox, by the way, who, who's been on my show, I think twice I've been on his

00:05:36.060 show. And he's chatting with Dan Wooden, who's, uh, another person who works at Great Britain news.

00:05:42.120 Uh, I, and I think I've been on his show maybe once or twice. And actually just earlier that last

00:05:47.700 Saturday, I had been on Mark Dolan's show for the first time, who also is a host at Great Britain news.

00:05:55.300 Uh, and Lawrence Fox was basically saying, uh, some really, uh, punchy things about Eva Evans,

00:06:09.020 including he used, you know, certain, some language and some, some ideas that, uh, I, I must say are

00:06:17.740 probably ones that, uh, he shouldn't have used. He said he was, he was basically so repulsed by her,

00:06:23.560 so disgusted by her. He said, well, you know, which incel would ever want to, I think he used

00:06:28.620 the British term, shag her. Uh, now it could well be that he's just exhibiting his sort of moral,

00:06:36.140 uh, repugnance at how she had reacted. I still think that it was ill-advised. Uh, I don't think

00:06:44.500 that the discourse should have this kind of language, whether you find her desirable enough

00:06:50.840 or not to, to be intimate with her has nothing to do with the fact that she was callous in her 0.85

00:06:57.420 position. So you could make that point without using, and by the way, don't, you know, it's not

00:07:02.320 as though I'm this little Victorian prude who can't handle, uh, locker room talk, but you know,

00:07:08.640 you are in a public forum. You are someone who has a certain privileged position in society. I'm

00:07:14.340 speaking now about Lawrence and it would have been maybe better if he had not used that example.

00:07:18.440 But that said, Lawrence went on the attack. He is a honey badger. He is someone who doesn't

00:07:24.560 suffer fools gladly. And he, he posted some tweets from her, some screenshots of tweets. So here's one 0.61

00:07:32.460 from her from January 19th, 2022. I will continue, this is from, uh, Eva Evans, who also, I guess,

00:07:42.020 goes by name Eva Santina. I will continue to wear my mask on the tube to protect myself from the

00:07:48.280 most powerful virus of them all men. So she's able to go on a public forum and say that the greatest

00:07:57.660 virus known to, and I, I believe me, I understand all about hyperbolic humor. I recently got into

00:08:05.000 trouble for, uh, making a hyperbolic joke about the, uh, auditory unattractiveness of the French 0.97

00:08:13.900 Canadian accent. But in this case, you know, this is true to form in terms of how she's very feminist 1.00

00:08:20.520 and, you know, she, she's always fighting against men and the patriarchy and so on. So I will continue

00:08:25.640 to wear my mask on the tube to protect myself from the most powerful virus of them, all men, meaning 1.00

00:08:30.640 she, she'll hide maybe herself because men are such pigs. All men perhaps are rapists. All men are 1.00

00:08:36.420 predators. All men are viruses. So that's one. So she can say that, but he can't go and hyperbolically, 1.00

00:08:43.760 and again, I, I would not have, uh, advised him to use such language and such, uh, prose, but he did,

00:08:55.160 uh, and he was angry. Okay, let's go on. Then speaking about the point about the shagging,

00:09:02.800 he then, he meaning Lawrence, finds a whole bunch of places where she used the shag term.

00:09:10.480 So I live by a church that has been ringing bells since 9 a.m. Please, how do I make it stop? He's

00:09:16.740 not going to shag you. And then she answers someone else, some guy, I'm not going to shag you, pal.

00:09:23.660 Lawrence isn't going to shag you, mate. I'm not going to shag you, mate. Again, she's answering someone

00:09:29.780 else. So she can go on the record in a public forum and say to a wide assortment of men, 1.00

00:09:37.220 I'm not going to shag you. You're unworthy of being shagged. But when Lawrence does it, 0.84

00:09:43.880 he loses his job. Now, Dan Wooten, who, with whom he was having the conversation, because he,

00:09:49.820 I guess, didn't walk away in, in, in, in abject indignation because he smiled and so on. Then he was,

00:09:57.440 I don't know if he was suspended or fired by proxy. He didn't exhibit the right level of repulsion

00:10:03.020 at what Lawrence was saying. So he was then let, let go or suspended. And then Calvin Robinson,

00:10:08.860 whom I also know, who's an absolutely lovely guy, who's been on my show, refused to go on Dan

00:10:16.200 Wooten's show if Dan Wooten wasn't going to be the host or something to that effect. And he was

00:10:20.800 suspended. So basically, Great Britain News is suspending any, anyone in sight. Oh, the, the,

00:10:27.200 the great three grammar teacher of one of these three people, put her in prison by proxy, right?

00:10:33.220 It's a form of orgiastic hysteria. So what are the key lessons here? Number one, in a fair society,

00:10:40.540 people are punished in the exact same way for a, uh, uh, if they break the law or break a norm.

00:10:52.360 There is no preference given to people who are tall or short or atheists or believers or men or women,

00:10:59.680 right? That's why lady justice in general is blind, but that's why our moral code, our etiquette code 1.00

00:11:07.120 has to also be blind. It's not, if you're a woman, you can get away with calling men viruses, 1.00

00:11:13.920 the worst of viruses. And you can use exactly the thing that got Lawrence Fox into trouble,

00:11:20.460 which is, I'm not going to shag you. I'm not going to shag you. But the minute that he uses it,

00:11:25.060 then he becomes persona non grata. He's a disgusting, vile creature that must be excised 1.00

00:11:31.380 from the public square. Now that also says something else. It says that if I'm speaking 1.00

00:11:40.380 now to the feminist Eva Evans, if men and women are equal, of course they should be equal under the

00:11:47.180 law, but if they're equal in their abilities to navigate, for example, through the public arena,

00:11:54.620 then women should not need extra protection when someone uses this, I consider it to be inappropriate 1.00

00:12:01.700 and, you know, vulgar discourse, which is I'm not going to shag you. If it's inappropriate for him

00:12:07.920 to use it on you, which I think is inappropriate, then it's certainly inappropriate for this lady 1.00

00:12:13.740 to be using it on men. It can't be that she gets a pass, but he doesn't. Because then that is no

00:12:20.580 different from Sharia law. Islamic law, as I explain in the parasitic mind, precisely recognizes 0.99

00:12:29.800 that a crime, the punishment for a crime depends on the identity, the religion of the perpetrator 0.85

00:12:39.320 and the victim. Muslim man kills a Jewish woman is not the same penalty as a Hindi woman killing a 0.96

00:12:49.240 Muslim man or, you know, whatever permutation you want. So that's the problem with the progressive 0.98

00:12:56.200 calculus. When it creates these hierarchies of victimology and marginalized groups, you're exactly

00:13:05.620 abiding to the tenets of Sharia law. What makes the West great, again, are these deontological 1.00

00:13:12.920 principles that are inviolable? We're all equal in terms of what is expected of us, both in terms of

00:13:21.000 proper discourse, proper etiquette, following the law. There is no difference if you're a man or a

00:13:27.800 woman. It's not if you're a woman and you speak in a vulgar manner about men, you get away with it. 1.00

00:13:33.060 But if it's the other way around, you don't get away with it, right? And basically that argues in a

00:13:38.920 in a very, perhaps not so subtle way, that women are delicate flowers that can't handle then that 1.00

00:13:46.440 discourse. When a woman gives it to a man, he's supposed to brush it off and move on because a strong 0.99

00:13:52.920 woman is going to fight for her position. When a guy uses the exact same language on a woman, then suddenly 1.00

00:13:59.800 he becomes Himmler. This is not good. So to summarize, in my view, it was inappropriate for Lawrence to

00:14:07.560 use that kind of prose. I think it debases the discussion for absolutely no reason. He could

00:14:16.600 have made his position known without talking about, you know, she's unattractive to be shagged and so on. 0.87

00:14:25.000 I don't think that he should, you know, he should be able to receive a reprimand from

00:14:31.000 GB news, perhaps get on and say, Hey, I apologize. That was crude and vulgar and in poor taste of me.

00:14:40.040 And I apologize, uh, unreservedly for what I said. And then we hug it out and we move on. There needs

00:14:47.480 to be a way for there to be a path for someone who makes a mistake to redeem themselves. And again,

00:14:55.800 uh, what happens with the ultra purist progressive woke mob, the cancel culture is that there is no way

00:15:03.880 to, uh, seek penance, right? You're out, you're dead, you're executed, so to speak, not executed

00:15:12.680 literally, but your career is executed. You need to be removed from society. And now she goes on a 0.99

00:15:19.400 victim tour. She's been, she's receiving death threats and violence and she's a victim and I'm

00:15:24.760 more victim and victim. If I showed her the number of death threats that I received for all sorts of

00:15:30.200 reasons, uh, I'm willing to bet that I would score much higher than her in terms of actual victimology.

00:15:37.240 So there you have it. Let's step back people. Let's be fair. Let's be reasonable. Let's be proper

00:15:44.840 in our public discourse. But if Lawrence Fox is going to be fired, then by that exact same

00:15:51.640 calculus, there is no reason why this lady should not have been fired long ago. In my view, 0.99

00:15:57.080 neither should be fired. Neither should engage in, engage in this kind of discourse. And we should be

00:16:03.000 adult enough and anti-fragile enough to handle when people use language that is otherwise inappropriate

00:16:09.560 and vulgar. Have a good evening, everybody. Take care. Ciao.

The Debacle at GB News- Laurence Fox versus Ava Evans (The Saad Truth with Dr. Saad_588)

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript