April 22, 2021

GIL

Daily Global New Media

Sacked Eton teacher: I stand by my patriarchy lecture

1 min read

50 thoughts on “Sacked Eton teacher: I stand by my patriarchy lecture

  1. I truly think robust debate is essential if we are to be innovative and creative. Woke, polite tiptoeing does not challenge thinking and articulation of developing cognition in young minds. If this was the only point of view, or the dominant one – yes, I would agree as not acceptable, but it is not. I salut the teacher – we need more teachers like Will.

  2. Don’t be too quick to assume that Freddie adopted the position he did during this interview because he personally supports the Eton position. I know he said ‘I think…’ several times but I wouldn’t take that literally. For me, this guest and his argument was more powerful for the interviewer adopting the position he did than if he had taken a more obviously sympathetic one. Good job Freddie

  3. What a savage. Absolute champion. Regarding women getting turned on by male violence left wing feminist Ana Kasparian said exactly the same thing and that she was turned on by her partner when he wrestled a man to the ground who had verbally abused her.

  4. Some outdated surface level ideas that should be easily critiqued by any feminist worth a damn.

    I’m not a feminist but I can play the part and rip apart these ideas if anyone wants.

    A lot of it is facts, there are only two types of gametes in all eukaryotic organism. There is no binary evolutionary speaking. Sex either binary or no binary isn’t really all that relevant in the modern world tho.
    A Crucial part of feminism is trying to understand sex differences especially cognitive in order to use them against the males to defeat them at the end of the day.

  5. This isn't a debate, you cannot make history balanced by repeating the bits that make you feel better about your manhood, history is history. I bet this guy also is opposed to cancel culture and yet… Ultimately, no one is responsible for things people in the past have done, but you are responsible for learning to examine society and your own behaviour and how not to contribute to the problem.

    Predominantly young/men (succeed) at killing themselves at a higher rate than women due to a, opting for more lethal methods and b, a contributing factor of "what it is to be a man" is an incredibly misrepresented, confusing, competitive and elusive space to try to fulfil as a young man particularly in contemporary times. Does that not say something the need to re examine masculinity? Biology is biology, but we are not 100% ruled by our innate evolutionary behaviour – thanks to our rational capabilities (..biology and social concepts are not so seperate).

    Do not undermine the plight of women to make young men establish their sense of self – that is feeding the cyclic problematic male and female issues.

  6. I understanding wanting to play devil's advocate for the purposes of the interview, but please stop playing into the idea that we as humans are somehow above our own biology. Oh, and the "What did you expect to happen when you present the ideas in the lecture?" just screams of the classic 'victim blaming' that the people who would be upset by the lecture perpetually harp on about. Wanting public debate over 'uncomfortable' ideas is not beyond woke culture. He's trying to teach critical thinking skills for Christ's sake. I had to stop when you said that "teenage masculinity needs to be educated out of the students". Holy shit, listen to your own words. Should we beat them into submission while we're at it?

  7. Freddie seems to feel personally threatened by this topic. He gives the impression that he thinks that traditional male values are problematic and should not be discussed. Will does a good job of defending the need for open discussion of controversial issues in an educational setting, whilst steadfastly refusing to rise to Freddie's many attempts to shift the discussion away from this onto a debate about oppressive patriarchy vs traditional male values.

  8. Man this host is such a wetty. Hand wringing about whether the video was 'sensitive' enough, calling it 'dangerous' or 'unpleasant' because it highlights the FACT that a lot of women are attracted to men who can and will protect them. Total milksop seems completely ignorant of what actually happens in the real world. He's the perfect proof of exactly why this kind of lecture is necessary.

  9. Dan Conner in the show The Conners made the point to his gay grandson that he wanted him to be able to wear and be whatever he wanted but also that he needed to and should be able to defend himself from attack.

  10. He shouldn't have used the Goodfellas clip. He should have used the clip from Kindergarten Cop. Protecting a woman in an abusive relationship can always go either way. Sometimes even the woman herself will attack you.

    Nobody argues with defending children. And it also turns on women.

  11. I worked in law enforcement for 20 years, much of that time focused on juveniles and gangs. Believe me, the boys who came to our attention, nearly all "raised" by single mothers, would have benefited from a teacher like Will Knowland. Although his lectures are provocative, I think that's the point — to challenge boys and to make them think about what masculinity really means, for themselves, their families, and communities.

  12. If he is not fired, he might still fit for teaching. Only from this interview I would prefer him not to teach young people. I have a feeling that his current experience (being fired, and subsequent support/opposition he gets) is pushing his ideas now.

  13. Please start posting your content on alternative media sites, such as Rumble, Bitchute etc. – why go to all the trouble of growing a great channel when you are already marked as a 'wrong think counter-revolutionary' – after all, its only a matter of time before they come for you..

  14. I watched Will’s presentation when the furore first arose. I didn’t necessarily agree with everything in it but surely presenting ideas to our young people and having them discussed openly is the whole point of a decent education

  15. Freddie's worst interview. And I've seen them all. Usually excellent, this one was embarrassing.
    I would love to have had more teachers like Will. He should be running a school.

  16. I was a teacher at an all-boys boarding school. I just used to show the youngsters gladiator movies (not my choice, was part of the curriculum I inherited). Freddie comes across as an effeminate male, but many women find that very appealing. I'm on the opposite end of the spectrum – a "rough cut diamond", many would say. My wife happens to find my attributes attractive (which is why we've been happily married for 15 years). I'm not the "provider" in our family though – it's my wife who has an Ivy League education and who earns the big bucks, and I'm fine with that. Anyway, my point being – gone are the days of "…me man, me great hunter and protector… Uggg! Come here woman, cook me steak…". The game has changed, society has evolved and is far more complicated (and highly structured). The "protector" role that Will speaks of antiquated. We no longer live in an age where "protection" means fighting off a hungry tiger or pack of wolves. Today, "protection" comes from having a good education, having financial means, and understanding the law. So in my case, my wife is clearly the "protector" (of both myself and our children). She puts food on the table, a roof over our heads, puts our children through the best schools, and makes sure we all have whatever we need/want (including my horrendously overpriced 32-core desktop PC). Anyway, enough of this old timer waffling on – in short, the role of "protector" (in this day and age) no longer means having physical strength, and I think this is where I disagree with Will Knowland. Having said that, he should be able to publish/post/say whatever he wants. We need to foster more critical and open debate, not force everyone to sing from the same hymn sheet.

  17. I suspect research would reveal that women are indeed sexually attracted (at least around ovulation) to males who tend to win physical contests against other males and conjecture that there are evolutionary reasons (centred around the notion of ‘natural selection’) for the same. In common parlance it is often said that women are sexually attracted to ‘alpha (a word requiring some definitional work) males’ or ‘bad boys’. This idea seems quite intuitive and not very contestable. It is not a matter of whether it is true, however, but rather a matter of how prudent it is to publish – especially to a highly impressionable (and not very smart, in many cases) adolescent males. It might, for instance, be seen as promoting physically aggressive behaviour. This issue of the wisdom of publishing the ‘truth’, however, is perennial. It comes up in the publication that X has been charged with Y … or even that X has been convicted of Y. While both statements may be true the publication of the same may ruin X. How about the publication that a woman is sexually assaulted and murdered is a park late at night? Again it may be a true (or more or less true) reporting but is it wise to publish, for fear of arousing undue panic in the community? The issue also comes up in publishing that gender (or race) A is superior to gender (or race) B in respect of activity/quality X. Again, whilst it may well be indisputably true, what effect will its publication have on the psyches of members of the inferior group?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

1 × 1 =