Channel: Mohammed Hijab
There's been a lot flying around on the internet in regards to, you know that slap that you gave to the unformed midtable Chris Rock, no, physically, I'm formidable person there. I'm sure you're regretting. You've already apologized, I'm not speaking about the morality or immorality of that. I want to dig deeper into something which I feel is at the crux of the issue, which I think may be okay. And I'm not trying to diagnose you particularly, but I'm putting out there
a, an issue of cognitive dissonance. So you actually have now cognitive dissonance for those who don't know, is when you have, you know, conflicting attitudes or beliefs about something, right, which causes you uncomfort from a psychological perspective. Now, what exactly am I talking about? Look, think about it, right? You probably are a consumer of feminist ideology. And the reason why I say that is because you're an open relationship with a woman who's spoken, who's Jada, you know, who's spoken openly and candidly about polyamory, and, you know, all these kinds of things. So, obviously, that discourse is antithetical to say, a nuclear family, you know, setting or arrangement
where you have a typical for, say, traditional roles of males and females, the man is the breadwinner, the woman is the, you know, whatever she isn't, or she may have more than one role,
but that there is some kind of a managerial hierarchy within the household where the man is at the top of the hierarchy. You see, in the traditional roles, you have a managerial hierarchy, and the man has responsibilities, say the responsibilities of protection, of breadwinning and so on. In exchange, the man has rights, okay, as well, for that breadwinning. And for that protection, which are, for example, that the man is to be respected as the commander in chief, the final decision maker and certain things. And that of course, there's exclusivity on behalf of the woman, okay in the relationship. And in some cultures, including the Islamic culture, which I come from polygyny is
allowed to polygyny, meaning that a man can marry multiple women, but a woman that she cannot do that. So this is the kind of dynamic we're talking about when we talk about traditional family roles. Obviously, traditionalism is different depending on where you go, or what you do. However, what I want to say to you is, think about this for a second Will Smith, yeah. You got up and slapped a man. Okay. Now, I'm not talking about once again, the morality of the point that you felt the need to protect Jada, your partner?
Why do you feel a need to protect her? This is my question. Because if you consume a second way feministic discourse, then it's not about protecting the woman, because really protection should be split 5050 A woman should be able to protect herself. In fact, she should be outrightly also downright right.
appalled at the fact that you by standing up doing what you did,
that she she feels the need to be protected, because as a feminist, as a person who believes in equal rights, so she should get up herself. Why did she even look at you. I mean, there's famously, she looked at you in a certain way, and you felt an expectation. But here, therein lies the issue, because they're in shows inconsistency. In a way, you need to feel like you need to uphold traditional roles, the lack of which I've already elaborated upon, which can take more than one form and permutation. But at the same time, we feel the need to acquiesce and capitulate to a feminist discourse, which indicates equality in all cases. But it's like, in this case, you are conflicted
between two different paradigms, the traditionalist paradigm which says that the man is the protector, and that he ought to protect the woman and so on. And the feministic paradigm, which doesn't have any of that, and we're seeing the collapse as a tangent. And I'll come back to the point of the feministic paradigm when it comes to the Ukraine issue right now, which I haven't spoken about, because I'm not an expert on it. You will realize I haven't released any videos, because, you know, I don't want to have a half baked analysis or anything, right. But the point is, with one thing about the Ukraine issue is that men are being forced to fight for their country and
women and children can leave. But where are the feminists to say, in fact, this shouldn't be the case, because there should be equality? Yeah, with men and women, in this case, in terms of military putting your life on that literally putting your life on the line.
So we're seeing an inequality that right, or an inconsistency then feminist discourse, it shows the entitlement that feministic discourse actually brings to the table. It's not about actual equality that they want to see manifest in the political, social and economic sphere as they claim. It's, in fact a matter of getting as much as you can through entitlement as possible. And this is why I think it's up
in your relationship, by the way, yeah. So you are conflicted between the traditionalist protective role. Get my wife's name out of your effing mouth. Why do you feel the need to say that very loudly? Why? Why? Because you feel like you need to protect her. But once again, the protective aspect of a relationship. Yeah. Is not required in a feministic relationship. Yeah, if you're walking in the street and someone tries to fight Jada, she should fight she should defend herself. She should defend herself. This should be what it is. I want to give you another thought experiment. Now assume it wasn't Chris rock that was speaking on the you know, that you slapped on? You. You
assume it was a woman that you slapped?
Assume it was a woman comedian? Yeah. Like she was on there. And she was getting slapped up. I believe that the social reaction of these feminists lefty people that I've seen a lot of their kind of articles to see the social reactions, yeah, would have been completely different.
Like, the fact that many feminists have not considered this. Yeah. Or lefties or whatever, people on the left in American politics that have put on these opinion. We've seen these kinds of like, you know, New York Times, opinion, articles and so on. We've seen these kinds of things. Yeah. Where it's not being condemned in the way that it should be. But the question is, why? Well, sometimes even apologetic way that a person shouldn't have read one time, a person's shouldn't accept a joke or something like that someone was writing this and in a newspaper. The reason why is because deep down even feminists realize, as with the Ukraine issue, as with the Will Smith issue, they realize
there is a disparity here in the way men are being dealt with versus women are being dealt with. But once again, if that disparity exists, why not cater for it? In social and political life? So going back to the point, Will Smith Look, your problem is less
about Jada Smith? Is not you cannot. That's about hopefully, yes. Her name. Yeah.
It's not about that woman is
more to do with you, bro. Can you? You know, you know why? Because you haven't chosen a path for yourself. You haven't chosen a path for yourself in relation to morality in relation to ideology in relation to what is the purpose of life? These questions have have not been answered by you. I'm not gonna give you the answer to these questions right now. It's not the time and place for it. But what I am going to say to you
is that once you remove that cognitive dissonance, which you may have, I'm not diagnosing you. But you may have I'm just putting it out there.
And you start thinking about, you know, what, if this if these are the principles familiar, and domestic, and so on principles that I put and live my life with, then I'm going to, I'm going to follow it through to its logical conclusion, because why should you have to offer an additional protective role to a woman who doesn't believe that it's in her? It's her right to have it, in fact, maybe insulting on her paradigm for you to offer such a role? Why should you do that? It makes no sense.
And with that, I conclude goodbye.