P&C drink and review a Wee Heavy from Belhaven brewery, then discuss Pearl Davis and her opinions on men’s rights. The boys first heard about Pearl when The Daily Wire’s Andrew Klavan and Michael Knowles interviewed her. She’s an anti-feminist but also somewhat anti-traditionalist. Pearl tries to focus on reality – the facts on the ground – rather than coming from a particular ideological viewpoint. From Pearl’s perspective, marriage is a raw deal for men. Here are some quotes from Pearl, to give you a feel for her point of view. “Women can’t be criticized on the internet” If a man says a woman isn’t wife material, is he allowed to have that opinion? Traditional conservatives believe in holding men accountable. A man can’t be broke. He has to take care of his family. He has to stay in shape. When women do something wrong, it’s always because they were lied to. It’s always because of feminism. Why is it that when women do something wrong it’s always somebody else’s fault? “Women like to be objectified” Women only cry about objectification when they can’t get what they want out of being objectified “In all of history there have always been concubines. They have a place.” “When women lead, societies and relationships go to Hell.” “Why can’t we have a conversation about women without ‘but men.’” “Women should submit to their husbands in all things.” (from the Bible) “I prefer prostitutes to most tradcon women. At least the prostitutes are honest.” “Don’t be a prostitute and then find God at 29.” “Many women screw up their own lives and then make it everyone else’s problem.” “I’m not the enemy. The real enemy is these simps and these old, bitter, single women with nothing better to do.” “Old, bitter women lie to younger women because they don’t want to be alone in their misery.” “Women are fatter than ever. They’re sluttier than ever. More mental disorders. More tattoos. More drinking.”

The boys drink and review Chocolate Cherry Stout by Firestone Walker Brewing, then discuss an alternative history book about the evolution of humans. 

In this view of human evolution, a different group of humans – the Floyds – took over Beringia and then migrated into America. When Columbus came to the Americas, he didn’t find Homo Sapiens. He found the Floyds. 

The book starts by introducing us to this alternative modern life, where modern man and this other version of man are living side by side. We learn the history – from Beringia until the conflict with Columbus. 

First contact took place in Florida, which is why they’re called “Floros,” politely, or “Floyds,” derogatively. 

The Floros are very compact and strong, and very useful in close-in fighting. They were captured en masse and taken to Europe to serve as infantry in everybody’s armies. 

They integrated into society to some extent, but remained second-class citizens. 

Once warfare modernized, and close-in fighting was not prized to the same extent, the Floros lost some of their utility in the infantry. They still did manual labor, which they were very good at, but they didn’t bring particularly good skills. 

Modern man (homo sapiens) tried to integrate them into society. 

One flaw in the book is an unrealistic expectation that there was no interbreeding – because the Floyds were not very attractive. 

The Floridius Rights Movement advocates for the Floros and tries to help them, but the Floros don’t want the help. 

The book pokes fun at a couple modern themes. 

1. Liberal woke activists who protest on some people’s behalf, but those people don’t really want it. 

2. A simpler life is a worse life, and more material stuff makes a better life. 

After the end of the book review, P&C discuss some of the issues raised by the book, such as why are we the only version of “man” left on the planet? Why did the Neanderthals and Denisovans die out? 

P&C go into an extensive discussion of differences between Neanderthals and modern humans, and why we may have replaced them. 

P&C drink and review Experimental Black IPA from Bell’s, then discuss Christian Nationalism. 

First, what the heck is Christian Nationalism? Pigweed started with three theories. 

1. An invention of the left to denigrate patriotic Christians. 

2. It’s a real movement that is way overdue if we’re going to save this great nation. 

3. It’s a real movement that is a threat to religious liberty and will transform America into a theocracy. 

Were Christian nationalists behind Jan. 6, and do they want to create something like The Handmaid’s Tale? That’s what the left wants us to believe. 

The opposite is the case. The left is trying to eliminate the influence of Christianity. The Amy Coney Barrett nomination process showed that clearly. We’ve come to the point that being a sincere believer might disqualify you from public office. 

Four separate Supreme Court cases – that have never been overturned – say that the United States is a Christian nation. 

What does that mean? Is it contrary to pluralism? Does it mean that we round up unbelievers and make them second-class citizens? 

Quite the opposite. It’s because we’re a Christian nation that we give rights and respect to other people. 

The fact is that all law is based on some system of morality. The only question is what morality you are going to use. 

***

Here's a link to the Florida Man episode.

https://spotifyanchor-web.app.link/e/XcC185ICaJb

P&C drink and review Hell or High Watermelon from 21st Amendment Brewery, then, with special guest Longinus, discuss the cost of professional sports. 

Why are we, in the words of Pigweed, willing to spend so much money to watch grown men play children’s games?  

But that’s not to the point. The boys are focused on the cost of a baseball or football game. Why has it increased so much? Is it worth it? 

From 1970 to the present – in today’s dollars – the cost for a family of four to attend a baseball game is about 4x. Who pays this, and why? 

Along with this increase in prices, we have an increase in coverage. When Pigweed was a lad, there was one, one-hour show on sports. Now, we have several 24x7 sports stations talking about sports all year long. 

There’s also the moral question. In a world that can’t decide what a woman is, sports provides some clear guidelines. The player is either in or out. The ball is in the strike zone or it’s not. 

Another angle – people can’t sit quietly with their own thoughts. They need a distraction. Every bar and restaurant has constant sports.

Is sports filling a hole left by the lack of religion, or community? Also, to what extent is this a public question? Is it in the local government’s interest to get people involved in local sports?

The boys drink and review Pigweed's homebrew Irish Stout, then invite John Wayne Jew onto the show to speak about the month in woke (at about 4:00).

The silliness of woke-ism is almost unbelievable. P&C and their special guest discuss some of the obvious lunacies, including the following.

Some Canadian police recently encouraged residents to leave their car keys outside so thieves can steal cars without any violent confrontation.

After the destruction of the Key bridge in Baltimore, some wokesters want a name chance, since Francis Scott Key doesn't meet modern moral standards.

A Democratic representative says black should be exempt from taxation to make up for past injustices.

NPR hired 50 new interns. Only 5 of them were white males.

On the positive side, some companies are pulling back on DEI and other woke policies, but it's not clear if that's a significant trend.

P&C drink and review Cru Cab IPA from Big Truck brewery, then invite special guest Longinus to help them discuss a novella by Marquez. This is part of P&C's on-going "shortcut to the classics" series.

The book is written by an old man about an old man who is reflecting on his life.

On his 90th birthday, the unnamed protagonist -- who is a confirmed bachelor and frequent patron of brothels -- wanted to give himself a night of wild love with an adolescent virgin. The book is about his reminiscenses, but mostly about his relationship with this one girl.

The protagonist has lived 90 years with no love in his life, but now, at the end, he falls madly in love with a very young girl, with whom he doesn't have sex.

The book presents some deep reflections on love, sex, passion, and jealousy. In one sense, it's a very raunchy and disturbing book, with difficult themes. In another sense, it's an interesting commentary on love.

The boys drink and review Crimson Crue red ale from Dogfish Head brewery, then discuss apocalyptic religions -- specifically the JWs and the SDAs.

The two groups have points in common and some important distinctions.

Both groups are rooted in the Millerite movement and some disappointing predictions about the end of the world. They both

* believe in one God,

* are somewhat obsessed with the Book of Revelation,

* have some odd views about what happens to the soul at death,

* believe the Bible is inspired and infallible, and

* are (or can be) a touch cultic.

The distinctions are more important. The JWs are not Christians, in the sense that they do not believe in the Trinity. SDAs do. 7th Day Adventists also have a better understanding of salvation, and several other things.

SDAs have some interesting distinctions -- like their insistence on a Saturday Sabbath, and their reliance on the prophecies of Ellen G. White -- but they are Christians.

The boys drink and review Super Thick Pastry Stout from Old Mother Brewing in Frederick, Maryland, then discuss the Big 5 personality characteristics.

There are a lot of personality tests out there, like Myers Briggs and the Enneagram. Those aren't as solidly based in science as the Big Five.

You can remember the Big Five with with of two acrostics, OCEAN or CANOE. They are ...

The Big Five personality traits, also known as the Five Factor Model (FFM), are a widely accepted framework for understanding human personality. They represent broad dimensions of individual differences in personality. Here's a brief explanation of each:

Openness to Experience features characteristics such as imagination, insight, and a broad range of interests. Individuals high in openness are often curious about the world and other people, eager to learn new things, and open to new experiences, including unconventional ideas or novel solutions. They tend to be creative and appreciative of art and beauty.

Conscientiousness involves high levels of thoughtfulness, good impulse control, and goal-directed behaviors. Highly conscientious individuals are organized, reliable, and diligent. They plan ahead, work systematically, and carry out tasks with attention to detail. This trait is often linked with academic and career success.

Extroversion is characterized by excitability, sociability, talkativeness, assertiveness, and high amounts of emotional expressiveness. Extroverts derive energy from social interaction, are often enthusiastic and action-oriented, enjoy being around people, and are often perceived as full of life and energy.

Agreeableness includes attributes such as trust, altruism, kindness, affection, and other prosocial behaviors. Individuals who score high in agreeableness tend to be cooperative, compassionate, and friendly. They are more inclined to help others and value getting along with people.

Neuroticism is associated with emotional instability, anxiety, moodiness, irritability, and sadness. Individuals high in neuroticism may experience more frequent and severe negative emotions than their peers. They tend to respond worse to stressors, are more likely to interpret ordinary situations as threatening, and can struggle to bounce back from challenging events.

After the boys conclude their discussion of the Big Five, Pigweed relates a story from Mrs. Pigweed, who went to pronoun class. P&C review some of the material from the class and conclude it's a huge smoking pile of nonsense.

At the end of the show, Crowhill takes a shot at reading "the worst sentence ever written" by Judith Butler.

The boys drink and review Planetary hazy IPA from the Ministry of Brewing, then discuss the decline of religion in the west.

The boys review some of the stats on the decline in church attendance, the rise of the "nones," and how religion has less and less influence on western civilization.

But there are some important elements of society that are heavily and positively influenced by religion.

Many science-minded people think it's good that religion is in decline. The so-called "new atheists" say we can craft a new morality based on reason. Is that really working?

This aligns with the the ideas of the enlightenment -- that reason could replace religion. But does that work?

Richard Dawkins recently revealed that he was a "cultural Christian." Is that all we have?

The P&C show has frequently discussed an evolutionary psychology explanation for religion. Societies with religion edged out those without.

There's a quote attributed to Chesterton that says "when men cease to believe in God, they don't believe nothing, they believe anything."

There is a God-shaped hole in our hearts. If that hole isn't filled with God, it will be filled with something else, like environmentalism, wokeness/activism, identity/narcissism/transgenderism.

Neitzche feared that when religion died, it would be replaced with hyper-nationalism and other ills. "I didn't see this coming....but, I'm not surprised."

There are lots of indications that the concept of God underwrites many of the social norms that we rely on.

There's also the issue of archetypes and evolutionary psychology.

One argument for the existence of God is that without God everything goes to crap. Is that where we are? Is God necessary, whether he exists or not?

The boys drink and review Tmave Pivo, a Czech Dark Lager by Ten Eyck brewing.

54% of people in America think the government has too much power. Does the federal government do too much? Is it too big?

Government debt has been a problem for a while, but recently it has spiked to almost unbelievable levels. Is this a good thing? How do we stop it?

What is the federal government supposed to do, and how does that match with what the federal government actually does? There are some things the government does -- and spends money on -- that have no justification in the constitution.

The Ben Franklin players finish the show with a dramatic reading.

The boys drink and review Giant Flaming Zombie Polar Bear Double IPA by Atlas Brewing, then discuss Frank Herbert's Dune and J.R.R. Tolkien's Lord of the Rings.

Which one is better? Where are they similar, and where are they different?

Dune is a great work of science fiction and the Lord of the Rings is a great work of fantasy. They have a lot of things in common, including a medieval fee, knights, castles, great houses, wizard-like characters, and immense, involved world building.

There are strong differences as well. Dune looks to the future while the LOTR looks to the past, and has more of a nostalgic feel. Dune is technological, but in the LOTR, it's usually the bad guys who use technology.

The LOTR has a much clearer moral universe, with more differentiation between the good guys and the bad guys. It's not exactly clear who the good guys are in Dune.

Tolkien was a devout Catholic, and the LOTR is infused with a religious sensibility, even though there is not actual religion in the book. Herbert was not a believer and presents religion as a tool to be manipulated for political ends.

The LOTR is very mythological, and sometimes even sacramental, while Dune is speculative and includes psychedelics.

The P&C Man of the Week this time is James Carville. (Starting about 34:00.)