Laurence Fox and the friend enemy distinction
The curious case of the fox, the harpy, the deacon, and the firing squad.
Man insults woman - oh no! - Anyway…
So Foxy has learned the hard way that a crass, off-the-cuff, remark will always be used as the rope to hang you with because friend good enemy bad. Let's take a look at; how the serious topic of male suicide has been sidelined by a crude comment, remembering why you should re-take the red pill where debate tactics are concerned, and why this is meaningless theatre thats an easy win for the regime.
I don't recall who said this but in the game of word slinging there are separate areas that dig under the skin for each sex:
To insult a man you attack him as useless, to insult a woman you attack her looks. Almost every woman I know has a time when someone insulted their style, weight or appearance and its something that sticks with them in the most needling way seemingly forever. It's understood by both sexes that these are crudities not to use in civil discourse.
"We're past the watershed so I can say this. Show me a self respecting man who would like to climb into bed with that woman, ever, who wasn't an incel. Who wasn't a cucked little incel. That little woman has been spoon fed oppression day after day after day, starting with the lie of the gender wage gap. And she's sat there and i'm going if I met you in a bar and that was like sentence three, chances of me just walking away are just huge. We need powerful strong amazing women who make great points for themselves. We don't need these feminist 4.0's they're pathetic. I mean who would want to shag that?” -Laurence fox
Now the context for this is commentary on a discussion on the politics show in which Ava Evans, the ‘little woman’ in question, was dismissive of male suicide problems. Obviously this seems like a crude and personal reaction. Though it is a touchy subject for Fox who has had friends commit suicide so it's understandable.
His point is women like Ava have dominated the conversation for so long with this false narrative and men shouldn't even engage with them anymore. This is fundamentally correct, if you know there is no way to change this persons mind, in my opinion.
But to highlight the problem:
He's given the regime ammunition to crucify him and GBnews. Almost anyone I know who has even heard of this topic has heard "man said mean words about woman. Man bad. Cancel man. Give regime power to cancel man.”
Friend good, enemy bad.
Men die, Women most affected…
Let's cover the context for the comments fully even though most people won't have heard them at all.
Comedian Geoff Norcott was alongside Ava Evans on the politics show, as a subject expert, promoting his new book. He commented on a push to help male suicide rates specifically. Below is my rough transcript of the exchange. Apologies it is a little long.
Geoff Begins
“Whats interesting about that is the hostility it faces whenever it comes up. I saw a program where it was a feminist academic and a lib dem MP and they were so hostile to this whole idea. Now if you flipped those ideas IE it's the biggest cause of death for men under 50 is suicide, men are less likely to go to the doctors, men are less likely to maintain friendships. If that was for women we'd be saying why is society making that happen? whereas if it's for men we're saying why are they doing that to themselves?"
Ava counters with
“I think this idea feeds into the culture war a little bit. In my mind I think there should be a minister for mental health that should be all encompassing, you've got something like 7 million children waiting for prescriptions its a crisis thats endemic throughout the country, not specific to men. I think you know a lot of ministers bandy this about as sort of, I'm sorry make an enemy out of women, I think - not you and I think you're not like this but I think Sunak -”
Ava is interrupted by Geoff
“No I don't accept that I don't think it is to make an enemy, if we look during covid men were literally more likely to die from covid. And I don't want to cast myself as a meninist or one of those guys from the manosphere cos thats not who I am but I don't find it interesting that the arguments tend to throw it back on-
Geoff is interrupted by Ava
“But who was doing all the work during covid? if you look into peoples households it was women who were taking on the laundry, the school care -lists more household chores - while doing their jobs.”
Geoff interjects
“I'm not excusing any of that, what I'm saying is there are specific issues that men face that might warrant specific attention. I mean literally the biggest killer of men under 50 is suicide. That is an arresting statistic and if that doesn't warrant specific attention - mental health is an umbrella issue”
Geoff is interrupted by Ava
“I have to say that is also because women are unsuccessful that is, feeds into that statistic.” (I assume she meant to say unsuccessful at suicide, statistically women attempt it more but men use lethal force more capably.)
Geoff cuts back in
"But it feels like, it just doesn't feel like you've got any space for this idea that men might have unique challenges that face them and the problem is even as i'm saying this in my mind it's like I've got out the violin and I don’t want to be this guy because thats part of the problem is cus you're encouraged at one level is men need to talk about their problems more and then the moment you dot you're like ‘alright, not quite so often. And not quite so loud…'.”
-
Geoff isn't even commenting on the topic at hand. He's pointing out the hostility faced by talking about men only. It's easy to pick out his own genuflecting to the regime ‘I'm not an x…’ but In case you missed the key reflexive topic change points from Ava:
Talking about this is a culture war issue and is making an enemy of women, Men's mental health isn't as important as general mental health, being more likely to die from covid isn't as bad as having to do household chores or look after the kids and suicide statistics are worse for women because they survive attempts more often.
Friend (women) good, enemy (man) bad.
Re-taking the red pill
On watching Ava's comments back I felt like I had been transported back to 2016 and was watching the red pill all over again. The whole documentary is worth a watch, and can be found online for free, but I would draw peoples attention to Cassie's video diaries and particular the one at roughly 1 hour 22 minutes. She describes how whenever she hears the MRA's point of view her instant answer is to turn the topic around to talk about women's struggles because she's been conditioned that mens issues can't be talked about without 'equally' talking about women.
There are interviews where she describes how when she started out discussing things with her boyfriend she wasn't listening or addressing the things he was saying she would just have her counter-facts ready as 'answers’ for how women have it worse. And how social media constantly keeps these things to the forefront programming the default answer to be ready in the mind of women.
In practice this is shouting down men by shifting the discussion back to women as people are naturally inclined to side with women.
As the documentary progresses this is something Cassie struggles to come to terms with mainly due to how the different sides seem to act and treat each other. The main thing I want to highlight is that this is the reflexive reaction for shutting down and moving the conversation away from the discussion at hand to maintain dominance in this area. When Fox says “spoonfed oppression” every day this is what he means. Almost all women do this because they have dominated this space for so long and want to maintain their hegemony on policymaking and resource allocation here.
There is a natural prejudice to side with women over men as seen by the "make an enemy of women” comment as a tactic. And so I find it curious, but not surprising, that this discussion is no different in 2023 than it was in 2016 and I'm sure for much further back in time.
And in case that doesn't drive the point home remember this quote from 1998
"Women have always been the primary victims of war. Women lose their husbands, their fathers, their sons in combat." - Hillary Clinton
Friend (feminist) good, enemy (MRA) bad.
Why none of this matters. And why it does matter.
To understand why nobody is talking about the serious topic of male suicide - because it doesn't matter to the regime - we need to discuss a german philosopher. For those not familiar with the concept of the friend enemy distinction here is a quick summary.
According to Carl Schmitt, the fundamental criterion for defining political entities is whether they are a "friend" or an "enemy" of a particular group or state. Schmitt argues that the friend-enemy distinction is not merely a matter of policy or preference; it is existential and absolute. It goes beyond differences of opinion and enters the realm of existential conflict. This means that the identification of a friend or enemy is a matter of life and death, where the enemy is seen as a threat to the very existence of the political entity.
As far as I can tell this is true in all times and places. The regime sees it this way but those against the regime still fail to grasp this concept.
Regime friend good, Regime enemy bad
Fox is an enemy of the regime. Ava supports it. End of story. Of course pointing out the hypocrisy of the left is meaningless for the same reason. What we should actually be doing is looking at who shouts what way to determine who really is a ‘friend’ or an 'enemy'.
Down with this sort of thing! (careful now)
Let's investigate the friend enemy fallout shall we.
Father Calvin Robinson did the sensible thing and criticised Fox for his comments but supported both his colleagues right to free speech, asserting that Fox defeated her arguments without needing to stoop to that kind of language. Perfectly reasonable and measured response that you would expect from an intelligent, articulate and principled man such as him. So of course the management did the only sensible thing they could and sacked him alongside Fox. And so we have two persona non-grata's.
All of the legacy mainstream news outlets have declared fox a misogynist. Sky news were, quite frankly, rude to Calvin in his own home when he went on to explain the situation. Ignoring his points about free speech and constantly trying to focus on Foxy's 'misogynist’ comments. No surprise there. But what about GBnews itself? So many people had hope for it as a genuine alternative to the regime media complex.
This includes everything from black lists of guests considered too controversial ranging, from the infamous Tommy Robinson to the lightest touch tory Darren Grimes - Whom GB news actually still employ -, to changing the name of Calvins show removing the word ‘Crusade’ from the title and even dictating the clothes he could wear.
His explanation was simple. While the upper management and 'stated’ goals of the channel seem clear, they have hired industry professionals who have come from the regime media complex. They are the ones thwarting the possibility of shifting the Overton window beyond its boundaries as they do for every institution. Shutting down discussion, removing opposition.
And so it remains that those against the regime need to learn the hard way, once again, to gate-keep harder and figure out exactly who is a friend, and who is an enemy.
because friend good, enemy bad
Some say that men dying in combat is worse for the women… It's obviously the mens fault for dying, others that the enemy of my enemy is my friend so its ok to shag them.
Me?
I'm an AnywhereSomewhere
Thank you very much for reading and I'll be seeing you.