YT YouTube2Text

YouTube2Text → Transcripts → How Society Ensures Our Disconnection

How Society Ensures Our Disconnection — Transcript

by The Loneliness Industry Podcast · 13,058 words · 1,979 segments · language en · Watch on YouTube

Open in transcriber Summarize with AI Download SRT/VTT

Full transcript

0:03Hi, and welcome to the loneliness
0:05industry, a podcast where we decode the
0:07societal [ __ ] that parades as wisdom
0:10and serves to keep you stuck. If you're
0:12listening for the first time, I'm Jordan
0:14Rain, a philosophy graduate with a
0:15severe allergy to self-help gurus. And
0:18my own way out of debilitating
0:19loneliness began when I realized that
0:22the very discourses claiming to solve
0:23our problems really just cleverly
0:25perpetuate them. Now, if you're already
0:27following, welcome and thank you for
0:29being here. I am glad for new listeners,
0:31um, returned listeners, and thanks for
0:34tuning in. And if you are a returning
0:35listener, you'll notice I have pushed
0:37back the episode on heteronormativity
0:40cuz a few things just made this one more
0:42necessary. Uh, it's life, you know,
0:44sometimes it throws things at you that
0:46stir up new thoughts or or reveal the
0:49need to clarify old ones, actually. So
0:51today, what I really want to do is to
0:53drill down into what might be the
0:56solution to loneliness, connection, and
0:59make it really clear how the values that
1:01we hold as a society, make that
1:03connection so damn difficult. Uh my hope
1:06is that in understanding that the real
1:08solutions, the ones that we're not shown
1:10in therapy or self-help books, might
1:13become a little clearer. So, two things
1:15sparked this episode. one was an
1:18obviously well-meaning but um
1:20unfortunately missing the point comment
1:21on YouTube that made me realize I really
1:24need to pull everything together that
1:25we've explored so far to understand that
1:28loneliness isn't just personal, it's
1:30structural and in many ways it's become
1:32a precondition for existing in this
1:35society. So this episode's a way of
1:37bringing all of the things together
1:38we've talked about in the last few
1:39episodes so far and how they relate to
1:42loneliness. And the second part was a it
1:45was a very real experience that I didn't
1:47know if I want to share, but it it
1:49relates so directly to loneliness and
1:50made me think so much about the
1:52mechanics of it that I'm going to share
1:54it. Um, as I said in the very first
1:56episode, I'm not doing this because I'm
1:58healed. Uh, loneliness is so hard to
2:01escape in our culture that I'm still as
2:04plagued by it as as anyone else. So, it
2:07was just one of those evenings where the
2:09loneliness was so intense. It felt like
2:12a physical ache and I needed to be
2:13around people. U not because being
2:16around people always leads to connection
2:18cuz often it just doesn't. I'm sure you
2:20all know how profoundly alone you can
2:23feel when you're in the company of
2:24others and there's no real openness
2:26there. But, you know, as a middle-aged
2:28single person living with a dog, being
2:30around people still seemed like a better
2:32bet than sitting at home.
2:35And uh somehow that night there was
2:38someone there who just who really let
2:40themselves be seen and who let me be
2:43seen in return. A person who was not
2:45performing, someone was actually really
2:47there, really open and present and
2:50probably also lonely but warm and human
2:53and real. Um, so you know, one of those
2:56things where you talk for hours and
2:57laugh a lot and drift into those weird
3:00unguarded places where nothing needs to
3:03be explained and nothing feels like too
3:05much. For me, it was the kind of
3:07connection that just just lands in your
3:09body like a memory from the future. Uh,
3:12like something you didn't even know you
3:14were missing until it arrives. Um, it
3:17felt like home. uh like not home like
3:20familiar because those of you are like
3:22me and have grown up in families that
3:24felt like an unsupervised psychiatric
3:26ward familiar can be dangerous. This was
3:31this is a different kind of this is a
3:32real home something else entirely. It
3:35was safety. It was mutuality and it felt
3:39weird and then the time was up and the
3:43experiences like that they are so
3:45uncommon in a world like this now and in
3:47a country like this even more so. So, it
3:51hit me hard and just made me think about
3:54all the different ways in which intimacy
3:56is blocked and not just by things like
3:59logistics as in our case and not just
4:02because of things like timing or fear or
4:04personal stuff that we often site but
4:07also because of the values we're taught
4:09to hold too dear. In so many cases,
4:12we're taught to close off to override
4:15what we long for, to override ourselves
4:17before we even open up. And sometimes we
4:21become so starved of real authentic
4:23closeness that we hang on to broken
4:26connections just to avoid being alone.
4:29And I've done the latter one a few times
4:31myself.
4:32But that's just that's just some of how
4:34our culture actively interferes with
4:37connection before it has a chance to
4:39take root. So that's where we're going
4:42today. how our societal values actively
4:45block intimacy and connection.
4:49And the experience reminded me that you
4:51don't have to be a queer, middle-aged
4:53person living with their dog to feel the
4:56full force of loneliness. You can feel
4:58it in your family of origin. You can
5:00feel it in a crowd with friends who
5:02never open up or in a relationship where
5:04your partner doesn't see you anymore.
5:07and my own loneliness. It feels so deep
5:10and chronic sometimes that I just don't
5:12know what to do with it. And I know I'm
5:14not alone in that. This is a story that
5:16many of us live just in different
5:19settings in different constellations.
5:22And of course, a lot of people would
5:23respond to this with get therapy.
5:26And whilst therapy can help us make
5:28sense of our feelings and you know some
5:31therapists will even like congratulate
5:33you on doing something productive with
5:34your pain
5:37um but they still can't conjure
5:39connection. Therapy can't undo the
5:40values that have conditioned us to live
5:42in competition and to mistrust intimacy
5:45and to prize control over vulnerability.
5:49And that's why today I want to explore
5:51the tension between psychologyy's focus
5:54on the individual and sociology and
5:56philosophy's attention to the broader
5:58systems shaping our lives. Cuz it's
6:01never just one or the other. Yet we're
6:04so conditioned to focus on the
6:05individual. It means we blame ourselves
6:07for feeling lonely while staying blind
6:10to the wider isolation that we're
6:11swimming in, the wider isolation that
6:14we're we're drowning in. The wider
6:16isolation that's drowning us all.
6:18And I want to pause here because what
6:20we're swimming in, the system and the
6:22structures and the institutions that
6:24uphold it, that is what this podcast is
6:27really about. Now, a search for how to
6:29deal with loneliness. That's going to
6:32turn up a number of podcasts or articles
6:34and nearly every single one of them will
6:36focus on you, what you might have done
6:39wrong, what you should do. As if
6:42loneliness is just a personal failing, a
6:44lack of effort or insight or of
6:46selfworth. as if all around you,
6:48everyone else is part of a rich web of
6:51community. And trust me, I've done
6:54therapy. I've done so much therapy.
6:57Sometimes I feel like there's no
6:58modality that you could name that I
7:00haven't sat through or actually studied
7:02like a lot of you. I've read the books,
7:05done the work, dug through the trauma,
7:07bought the commodifying t-shirt, and yet
7:11I feel painfully alone most days. And
7:15there comes a point where you've done
7:17everything they say you should do and
7:20still feel isolated. And that's when it
7:23hits you. Even though our culture makes
7:25it almost forbidden to say it, the
7:28problem isn't you. It's society. Now, I
7:32might be struck by lightning or
7:33assassins or self-righteous spiritual
7:35but not religious people for saying
7:36that. It's anathema to the self-help
7:40industrial complex, to the wellness
7:42world, to certain kinds of therapy, too,
7:44cuz they depend on you believing that
7:46you are the one that's flawed, that your
7:50pain means you haven't taken enough
7:52responsibility, that you haven't worked
7:54hard enough, that you still somehow,
7:57despite having done so much of it, just
7:59need more therapy. But I'm here to say
8:03no. Society is sick and trying to adjust
8:08to a sick society may well make you
8:10sicker. If you've failed to adjust if
8:14you can't contort yourself into the
8:16shape this world demands,
8:18consider it a good sign. It might just
8:20mean you're not dead inside yet. And
8:24with that, on with the podcast.
8:27I'm heading this section western
8:29cultural values and disconnection or how
8:32to mass-roduce loneliness. As mentioned,
8:35the aim here is to bring together
8:36everything we've discussed about
8:38capitalist values so far. Specifically,
8:41how they prevent real connection and in
8:43doing so make loneliness not just
8:45likely, but compulsory. We'll be delving
8:48into a lot of opposites. Opposites
8:50always gain their meaning from each
8:51other. Their meaning is kind of shaped
8:53by the thing they're opposite to. What
8:56we're going to do is look at how the
8:57assertion of something being good, such
8:59as individualism, gives birth to its
9:01opposite, things like codependence,
9:03being labeled as bad. We're also going
9:06to look at how the opposite of
9:07loneliness, which is connection, is
9:10actively blocked by what we've decided
9:12as good or bad in terms of the values we
9:15hold dear. This means we're going to
9:18talk directly too about what is deemed
9:20sick. Because central to this episode is
9:24how our culture pathizes the opposite of
9:27its ideals. To value individualism so
9:30highly, for example, means that we're
9:33going to end up labeling our natural
9:34human need for one another is bad.
9:37Therapy represents what we are meant to
9:39grasp for as a solution to these
9:42pathologies. And in doing so, it often
9:45blinds us to a more critical
9:46perspective. As an example, the
9:49perspective of Mate Bulby and others is
9:51that we actually become ill when we are
9:54unable to connect and rely on each
9:56other. The term interdependence is an
9:59attempt to destigmatize our inherent
10:01need for co-reliance on one another. The
10:04fact that we still have to go to
10:05therapy, however, to correct what we see
10:07as a flaw exposes how placing the burden
10:10on individuals is not only unjust but
10:13ultimately self-defeating. Fuko might
10:16put it this way. Therapy often functions
10:18less as a liberation and more as a
10:21normalization.
10:22It teaches us how to conform better to
10:24an unjust system rather than teaching us
10:27how to question it. And I don't know
10:29about you, but if I get the impression
10:30I'm not allowed to question something,
10:32it makes me even more inclined to
10:34question it. So now I want to talk about
10:37loneliness versus connection. As any
10:40philosopher will tell you, one must
10:42begin by defining one's terms. Um, and
10:45we've already defined key concepts like
10:47individualism, the hero narrative,
10:49control, cognitive primacy, and
10:50competition in the previous episodes.
10:53Now, it's time to define loneliness. And
10:56and not in a clinical or self-help way,
10:58but in a critical framework that this
11:01podcast is grounded in. So, here we go.
11:04Loneliness is not simply being alone. It
11:07is the absence of reciprocal
11:09recognition. It is the experience of not
11:11being seen, felt, or mirrored. Now, that
11:15framing draws on people like Carl Yung,
11:17who observed that loneliness does not
11:18arise from a lack of people, but from
11:21feeling unable to communicate things
11:23that are deeply important to oneself,
11:26whether because those things just go
11:27unheard or unrecognized or because you
11:29feel like you can't mention them in the
11:31first place. And it's worth considering
11:34going further with this definition, too.
11:36Hannah Orent warns pretty bleakly that
11:40loneliness is the common ground of
11:42terror, the condition that allows
11:44totalitarianism to flourish by severing
11:48relational bonds. Hardcore.
11:52Lauren Berlin looks at something called
11:54effective infrastructures, meaning how
11:56institutions and cultural norms shape
11:59what kind of emotional connections are
12:01possible or impossible. So both of these
12:04theorists draw our attention to the idea
12:05that loneliness isn't just about the
12:07disconnection that our definition so far
12:10elucidates. It is produced, it is
12:13political, and is deeply tied to the
12:16values Western capitalism teaches us to
12:18hold dear. And this is why inclines me
12:21to add a second part to the definition
12:23of loneliness, and one that you've
12:25probably heard me say before. Loneliness
12:27is not a personal failure but a
12:30structural and relational wound. So now
12:33our working definition is as follows.
12:35Loneliness is not simply being alone. It
12:38is the absence of reciprocal
12:39recognition. It is the experience of not
12:42being seen, felt or mirrored. And
12:44loneliness is not a personal failure but
12:46a structural and relational wound. So
12:50clearly it's pretty horrible, right? So
12:53what stops us being lonely? And whether
12:56or not you're okay with the second part
12:58of our definition, we can still see
13:00pretty clearly what's implied in terms
13:02of solutions. If loneliness is the
13:04absence of being seen or felt or of
13:06reciprocal recognition, then the
13:08antidote becomes intimacy and
13:11connection. At its core, human
13:13connection is built on intimacy. Yep.
13:16And we've even commodified and
13:18transactionalized that word so much that
13:21half of you will think I'm talking about
13:22sex. And I'm not cuz intimacy is not
13:25necessarily linked to sex at all. Um,
13:28think about it. Most of us I've I've
13:30checked the stats on this. Most of you
13:32and me are over 40 here, so you've
13:36likely learned the hard way that sex can
13:38be one of the most meaningless, hollow,
13:40and soul destroying acts that there are.
13:42if the person you're with is a total
13:45[ __ ] or a client or whatever.
13:49And yeah, so sex does not always involve
13:52intimacy, even though it can. Of course,
13:54intimacy is is more than physical touch
13:56and may not involve physical touch at
13:58all. Intimacy is letting ourselves be
14:01known and being curious and open enough
14:03to know the other. So intimacy requires
14:07mutual openness. It requires
14:09vulnerability and truthtelling. It is
14:12about sharing our inner world and having
14:14it received, not judged, exploited or
14:17ignored and accepting the world of
14:20another. So close friendships obviously
14:23are intimate too or can be. And
14:25relationships with family can be
14:26intimate if your family aren't mostly
14:29certifiable lunatics at least.
14:32Now if the very values we hold dear mean
14:35that real mutual openness, vulnerability
14:37and truthtelling are precluded,
14:40that is the structural element of
14:42connection being doomed. So if our
14:45culture thinks showing emotions is
14:47weakness, for example, and insists we
14:49don't show it and vulnerability is
14:51essential to intimacy, voila, we have a
14:55structural barrier to connection. And as
14:58usual, you don't just have to take my
14:59word for any of this stuff. Uh this is
15:01exactly what a lot of thinkers and
15:03authors have already suggested. For
15:05example, Belle Hooks in her book all
15:08about love writes that love cannot exist
15:11without honesty. And Hooks also notes
15:13that love exists in friendships too. Did
15:17you feel that? I wonder if you felt it.
15:18Most of our connection words, love,
15:20intimacy, they kind of draw us towards
15:23the idea that they apply to only one
15:25other person like our lover or partner
15:28or a spouse. And that's no accident
15:30either. And we're going to we're going
15:31to deal with that later on. But but back
15:33to Hooks. And Hooks is not just talking
15:35about romantic love. She's talking about
15:37the conditions for any kind of loving
15:39relationship and the absolute necessity
15:42of authenticity as opposed to
15:45performativity.
15:46In chapter 3 for any of you who want to
15:48find this afterwards, which is called
15:50Yeah. Honesty, be true to love. She
15:52writes that lies may make people feel
15:55better, but they do not help them to
15:58know love. that in a culture that
16:00rewards performance and self-p
16:02protection and the branding of the self,
16:04the kind of truthtelling required for
16:06intimacy becomes rare.
16:09If we are consistently managing
16:11impressions or commodifying ourselves,
16:13we are less able to engage in the kind
16:15of relationships that would truly see
16:17us. We're not even showing our true
16:20selves to be seen. Right? And this is
16:22one of the most devastating impacts of
16:24capitalism on our emotional lives. It
16:27trains us to think of connection not in
16:29terms of trying to really see the other
16:31or of opening ourselves to really being
16:34seen. Rather, it teaches us to look at
16:36all kinds of relationships in
16:38transactional terms. What am I offering?
16:41Cuz you know what do people normally
16:42look like and can I offer them that and
16:44you know what am I getting in return? In
16:46that framework, taking the emotional
16:48risk that intimacy demands seems kind of
16:51foolish. And without taking the
16:54emotional risks required for intimacy,
16:56connection becomes shallow and scripted
16:59and strategic. Things that may reduce
17:02social isolation on paper, but not
17:05emotional loneliness. In practice,
17:09transactional relationships can be seen
17:10everywhere, too. the classic pairings
17:13between, you know, some rich person and
17:15their partner is, you know, their job is
17:17to make rich said rich person look good
17:19and the partner enjoys luxury. So each
17:22is getting something, but neither is
17:24getting love, not the way that Hooks
17:26terms it. With transactional
17:28relationships, that's typical. They're
17:30not about connection anyway, and quite
17:32often it's about something entirely
17:34other such as control. And we will get
17:36to that here today as well. But first to
17:39the importance of connection and what it
17:41facilitates intimacy.
17:44Now that probably looked like a really
17:46bad edit cuz my dog just vomited and I
17:48had to tidy it up. So sorry if this if I
17:50I probably jumped from one place to
17:52another. So evidence that intimacy is a
17:56need and not a nice to have. Gabble Mate
18:00who I mention a lot on this podcast and
18:02others have shown that intimacy is not
18:04optional for our well-being. is actually
18:07essential. Mate points to the importance
18:09of relational safety of having
18:12relationships where we can express pain,
18:14fear, confusion and still feel loved.
18:17This kind of connection is protective
18:19against the toxic effects of stress,
18:21trauma, and of course loneliness. But
18:24under capitalist values of control,
18:27competition, and self-sufficiency,
18:29these conditions are hard to come by. So
18:32what Mart and others show is that we
18:34need space to be known and that means a
18:37number of things. It means having the
18:39time and energy for conversations that
18:41aren't optimized or efficient. It means
18:44environments where emotions aren't seen
18:46as weakness. And it means relationships
18:48where we're not treated as projects to
18:50be fixed or tools to be used or the
18:52means to an end. And finally, we need a
18:55culture that makes room for mutual care
18:58rather than constant self-management. In
19:01short, the very things that might stop
19:03us from being lonely are the very things
19:05capitalism discourages us from doing at
19:07all. Showing vulnerability, being
19:10interdependent, and being honest. Our
19:12culture trains us not to do the things
19:16that would lead to connection and
19:17intimacy. In fact, we're trained to be
19:19ashamed of the things that would. And
19:23this is where the well-meaning, overly
19:25indoctrinated people start yelling at
19:27us, "You're this bummed out about being
19:29lonely." so go to therapy. Thus buying
19:33into exactly the idea that issues like
19:36loneliness are automatically and purely
19:38personal and that the solution is purely
19:41clinical. They're buying right into the
19:43idea that it is we as individuals who
19:45are malfunctioning in a perfectly normal
19:48environment. So it's just us being not
19:51healthy. Q Michelle Fuko who always gets
19:54queued at some point in this podcast. I
19:56should call him a friend of the podcast
19:59because he demonstrates just how deep
20:00this issue goes. Uh and as I mentioned
20:03at the beginning of each episode, uh
20:05capitalist values, the ones that we've
20:06discussed so far along with others, they
20:09shape what we think of as healthy and
20:11unhealthy, sane or insane and good or
20:14bad. Now, Fuko argued that what a
20:16society defines as mad or deviant or
20:19ill, it's not fixed. It actually
20:21changes. And that change is dependent on
20:24what society values at the time. So like
20:27back in the days where religious
20:29institutions uh were those that
20:31essentially ruled and held power. For
20:33example, someone who thought they
20:35communicated with angels as an example,
20:37they might have been called blessed. And
20:40this is because it fit perfectly with
20:42what those in power needed their
20:44subjects to believe at the time. So
20:45people seeing angels are believers and
20:47they internalized the values of the
20:49controlling institution of the at the
20:52time the church. Now at that time anyone
20:55saying uh wait a second mate you're
20:57seeing angels uh that's that's not okay
21:00and um all of those things I can explain
21:02them by let's say physics I can explain
21:04all of that event with with physics. Um
21:06now that was punished that that might
21:08even have you put to death for heresy at
21:10the time. Then of course in post
21:13enlightenment Europe the whole thing
21:15reverses rationality then became the
21:18most highly praised value and it didn't
21:20fit at all with seeing angels. So this
21:23physics fan now is seen as the same one
21:25and the angels seeing person is likely
21:28to be locked up in an institution. Now
21:30you and I might sit here now and think
21:33yeah but come on the angel seeing person
21:35that is nuts.
21:37That reaction isn't objective or neutral
21:40though right? It's shaped by the values
21:41we've been steeped in. Values that tell
21:43us what counts as sane or successful or
21:45worthwhile. And Fuko's point is is not
21:48that one system is more correct than
21:50another. It's the point is that each
21:53system constructs its own norms. And
21:56those norms shape what kind of human
21:58experiences are pathized and which kinds
22:01are seen as completely normal. But you
22:04also you don't need to be seeing angels
22:05or be institutionalized to feel the
22:08effects of this either. If you've ever
22:09lived abroad, you've probably felt how
22:11differently your personality is
22:12interpreted in different cultural
22:14contexts. And I know I have. I've lived
22:16in Germany for for many years. Many many
22:18years if you put them all together. Um,
22:20and I am seen as at best eccentric and
22:24you most of the time irritating and
22:27crazy. And it's because I don't follow
22:29the expected scripts. And I I kind of
22:31refuse to. I do not get excited about
22:34comparing the price of [ __ ] that I don't
22:36even need to buy. And I live in a way
22:38that that does not align with deeply
22:40internalized norms here like
22:42predictability and fitting into boxes.
22:45Now some of you will have had this
22:46experience too and you'll know that when
22:48your way of being disrupts the norms
22:50around you, you often get labeled as as
22:53weird or essentially the problem. And
22:56even if you haven't lived overseas, I
22:57know that some of you are artists. So
22:59you know this, right? We are so often
23:01just called crazy anyway. It's partly
23:03why people call me crazy here. there was
23:05an artist and in Germany I have actually
23:07not heard the word artist used without
23:10the word crazy in front of it here in
23:12Germany. That is that is how different
23:14that kind of lifestyle is to what their
23:16ideal is. So it's it's not because we
23:18are crazy for for pursuing art. It's
23:21because often uh in any in any culture
23:23our values will clash quite deeply. Uh
23:26and in Germany particularly deeply
23:28prizes you order, efficiency and
23:30conformity. Um, and you know, we just we
23:33can look deranged in comparison
23:36and and those who have adopted all of
23:39those values and lived by them for a
23:40long time, they simply can't understand
23:42why someone else would not. Hence, the
23:45other person has to be nuts and need
23:48therapy. And also, if you come from a
23:50culture shaped by different religious or
23:52non- capitalist traditions, the gap
23:54becomes even more extreme. So people who
23:57have internalized western capitalist
23:59norms are way more likely to label
24:02unfamiliar ways of being as irrational
24:04or weird or even as we're looking at
24:06here pathological.
24:08Now it's not just a cultural mismatch.
24:11It's often racism, classism, and
24:13xenophobia. And psychology when wielded
24:16uncritically becomes a weapon used to
24:19enforce dominant norms.
24:22So let's look at healthy versus
24:24unhealthy in western capitalism. In
24:27western capitalist societies, we support
24:30the values of things like productivity,
24:32self-management, competition, control,
24:34and rationality.
24:36These things are aimed supreme, among
24:38other things. If we say things like, I
24:40can't keep up anymore, or I don't feel
24:43in control of my life, that
24:45vulnerability is not met with care or
24:47solidarity. Instead, it's seen as a
24:50personal failure, a lack of strength, a
24:52lack of resilience or agency, and you're
24:54deemed not coping, which implies
24:57everybody else is. And that that coping
25:00is a baseline for health. If you can't
25:03do it, well, yeah, trigger the whole
25:06self-help industry. It's like, I'm not
25:08coping. I should be coping. Coping is
25:09the norm. I must get assistance here.
25:13Because in this context of our culture,
25:15feelings of exhaustion and disconnection
25:17or emotional overload are pathized. You
25:20know, rather than seeing them as a
25:22rational reaction to a relentless
25:24system, we're told that the problem is
25:26within us. And the self-help industry
25:29along with countless therapists, they
25:31rush to restore individual functionality
25:34to get us back to normal. But this
25:37normal is built on unsustainable values.
25:41Competition, hyperproductivity,
25:43self-optimization, control, burnout
25:46clinics, they offer the same promise.
25:48Patch you up so that you can reenter the
25:50cycle even when the system causing the
25:52collapse remains unchanged.
25:55As Bjong Chilhan argues in the burnout
25:58society, we are no longer oppressed by
26:00external forces, but by internalized
26:03pressure to perform. We talked about
26:05this in the episode before this one. We
26:07exploit ourselves in the name of freedom
26:10and collapse becomes the logical end
26:12point. In a world where everyone is
26:15expected to be a self-managing project,
26:17those who falter are deemed unhealthy.
26:20Not because they are, but because they
26:22expose the systems violence. So when
26:25someone admits that they're lonely, it's
26:28not treated as a symptom of structural
26:30disconnection. It's framed as a flaw in
26:32them. Western capitalist values don't
26:34just cause loneliness. They encourage us
26:37to shame people for feeling it. They
26:40define health as the ability to just
26:42push on alone without complaint. Now,
26:45let's get specific in terms of how our
26:47values keep us lonely. So, by now it
26:50really should be clear that feeling
26:51lonely doesn't mean there's something
26:53wrong with you. But if you're still
26:55floundering, that's understandable
26:56because it is a mind [ __ ] um western
26:59cultural values actively produce
27:01loneliness and then turn it around to
27:04make it seem like it's your fault for
27:05feeling it. Um it's that's called
27:07gaslighting, right? It's like punching
27:09someone in the eye and saying, "Oh, it's
27:11your fault. You must have made me hit
27:13you." And you know, this is a classic
27:14tactic not just of narcissistic people,
27:17but of narcissistic societies. And as I
27:20keep promising, we will be diving deeper
27:22into that theme in upcoming episodes.
27:24Suffice to say, the only way to deal
27:26with gaslighting is to find clarity. And
27:29that's exactly what I want to offer
27:30here, okay? A clearer view of how each
27:33of these western cultural values shapes
27:34our ideas of what good or bad are when
27:38it comes to connection. So, we're now
27:41going to drill down into each of them,
27:42okay? One by one, each of the ones that
27:44we've covered at any rate. And we're
27:46going to start with independence.
27:48Now, independence, this is the heading
27:50of this section. Independence means
27:53depending on others is not allowed.
27:56At the beginning of this episode, we
27:58looked at how words like love and
28:00intimacy are often taken as referring to
28:02a specific kind of relationship, right?
28:04The romantic one, that that one special
28:07person. I'm going to call it the
28:08romantic diet. Okay. Um, so we're taught
28:11to kind of assume that when love and
28:13intimacy are being talked about, it is
28:15in reference to that romantic diet
28:18rather than our other close
28:19relationships.
28:21And this reflects another aspect of
28:23western culture that this this romantic
28:25diad the one special bond is is so
28:27loaded with importance that such
28:30pairings come with massive expectations.
28:34When wider kinship structures and
28:36community supports shrink as they have
28:38in many western cultures, we are left
28:40with a romantic diet as our primary and
28:43often only source of emotional and
28:45practical support. Sociologist Eva Elus
28:49has written extensively about this,
28:51noting how the erosion of extended
28:53social ties places enormous emotional
28:56weight on romantic relationships which
28:59are now expected to provide everything
29:01like meaning, belonging, identity,
29:03support, sex, security, you name it. It
29:05that one that one diad is supposed to
29:08provide all of that. That's a lot to
29:10ask. And even as we load all our
29:13expectations of love and intimacy onto
29:15that one special other, the romantic
29:17diet, our cultural worship of
29:19individualism walks handinhand with
29:21other moral ideals. Ideas like like
29:24independence and self-sufficiency.
29:27So yeah, got all of this expectation on
29:29someone for all our love needs, but
29:30we're supposed to be independent.
29:33Yeah. Does that sound potentially
29:34problematic? Yes. But yet we still see
29:38these things as positive, right? So, you
29:40know, self-sufficiency, independent, we
29:41we see that as strong or or noble even.
29:45And that's because Western culture
29:47places those values in the good column.
29:49So, independence and self-sufficiency,
29:51they are good. Words that imply their
29:53opposites, stuff about depending on or
29:56needing others, those get marked as bad
29:59or flawed. And that badness can even
30:02become institutionally upheld as
30:05pathology. As we saw with Fuko,
30:08psychology has often act as an
30:09institution that polices such
30:11categorizations,
30:13ensuring that if we falter on the values
30:15we are meant to hold, we will receive
30:17coaching or therapy or whatever to bring
30:19us back to the values that we're
30:22supposed to want to have in our lives.
30:25So now we have this overloaded romantic
30:28diet, right, which is the only
30:29acceptable place to get our needs for
30:31intimacy and love met anyway. And yet
30:34we're also meant to exhibit independence
30:37and self-sufficiency.
30:39It's like when we come together in the
30:41romantic diet, a beautiful spring is
30:43formed that that that both parties are
30:45allowed to drink from. But then instead
30:49of drinking from that beautiful fountain
30:51that we've formed, we are told it's more
30:53admirable to do what amounts to drinking
30:56our own piss because that is more
30:59self-sufficient.
31:00Brutal enough analogy for you. Let's
31:04look more closely at what we consider
31:05opposites to independence and
31:07self-sufficiency. Now, for example,
31:09words like we've mentioned before,
31:11codependence.
31:13This term became a buzzword in pop
31:15psychology and self-help circles. And
31:18both of these discourses urge us to see
31:20close reliance in relationships as
31:22inherently unhealthy. People who made
31:24each other their world were encouraged
31:26to diagnose themselves with this very
31:27pathized codependency trait. The
31:30assumption behind it that people who
31:33cannot look after their own needs are
31:36dysfunctional. But but but wait rewind.
31:40Remember we have just reduced the
31:42survival unit, the family unit down to a
31:45maximum of two adults. Right? Remember
31:48human beings do need each other. So what
31:50do you think might occur when one person
31:53becomes your entire support system? What
31:55do you expect will happen when we
31:58associate the words love and intimacy
32:00primarily with the romantic diet? What
32:03choice do you have but to rely on that
32:07one special person for your relational
32:09needs? Not to mention other needs like
32:12like helping with and financing the kids
32:14or building and maintaining a home, sex,
32:16intellectual stimulation, walking the
32:18dog, all of those things. Now, all of
32:21this this isn't dysfunction.
32:24It's the inevitability of a flawed
32:27setup. You have to lean hard on each
32:29other because the setup is such that
32:32there's nowhere else to go. The ve the
32:34very structure of our family unit
32:37encourages over reliance and then it
32:40shames it. You know, this is a hideous
32:42double bind for which the proposed
32:44solution is self-reliance, meeting your
32:47own needs or just having none at all.
32:50which makes you wonder if the endgame is
32:52that we all conclude that it's better to
32:53just masturbate into a jar and hire a
32:56nanny. And you know, whilst a worldwide
32:59wank fest may or may not be the tea loss
33:02of our species, as things stand, the
33:05connection of the couple bond is still
33:06pretty doomed, especially when there are
33:09kids involved, placing more needs into
33:12the mix. And yeah, the failure of this
33:15unit's ability to hold up under the
33:17pressure is reflected in divorce stats.
33:20But still, Western capitalism gives us
33:23this message loud and clear. Dependence
33:27is the problem. Reliance on others bad.
33:32And all this means the real issues go
33:34unseen. Like for a start, this
33:35overloaded diet where we're supposed to
33:37get all of our needs, but also a lack of
33:39connection or mutual presence. That is
33:42the real issue. And that lack of
33:44connection may come from that overloaded
33:45diet or just the fact that we're
33:47supposed to only look there for our
33:49intimacy needs. And blaming our need for
33:53one another as the problem simply
33:55reinforces the false ideal of the
33:57emotionally autonomous individual who
33:59needs no one. If you feel lonely in your
34:02relationship, you are told that the
34:03solution is to be a lone wolf, to need
34:06no one, to reduce your needs in terms of
34:09what the other might be able to bring to
34:11the table. And as you may have picked up
34:12on already, the not so subtext is your
34:16needs are too much. Hoping your partner
34:20might meet them is codependent.
34:23Now, this is this is obviously a [ __ ]
34:25setup, right? You you can't win. It is
34:28also a double whammy for anyone in a
34:30loveless marriage. Cuz if you're feeling
34:32awful because you're enduring being
34:35unseen and unloved, you are then meant
34:38to conclude that you're also some kind
34:41of failure or weakling. Yep. Your basic
34:44human need is not okay. You are meant to
34:47transcend it like you're some sort of AI
34:49or robot. And it's easy to conclude that
34:53it is a weakness if you want to feel
34:55loved at all. And you know, if you're
34:58lucky enough not to be in a loveless
35:00marriage, the odds are heavily stacked
35:03against it staying that way. Not because
35:05there's anything horrible about either
35:06of the people involved. Not because you
35:08will stop being lovable, not because
35:10your partner will either, but because
35:12society demands you rely so heavily on
35:14one another just to get by that becoming
35:16distracted by child care, by work, or
35:18whatever it else it is that you have to
35:20organize together, it's just too hard to
35:23find the stuff that brings you close and
35:26facilitates intimacy.
35:28And returning to Bel Hooks, she also
35:30critiques this carving away of wider
35:32connections in favor of the two adult
35:34maximum. In chapter 8, community,
35:37loving, and communion, Hooks highlights
35:40our deep hunger for community, but she
35:42shows that this longing for a wider,
35:44deeper network has been flattened by
35:47individualism. She also challenges the
35:50idea that romantic love is the only kind
35:52that matters and calls for a
35:54re-evaluation of community, friendship,
35:56and chosen families. In other words,
35:59love and intimacy can come from
36:01elsewhere. And no, this does not mean
36:03cheating and stuff like that. It means
36:05forming deep bonds with people outside
36:08the society sanctioned diad.
36:11But here I also want to take a closer
36:13look at the term codependent and this
36:16whole balance sheet of I give to get.
36:19Right? In coining this term we see the
36:21very mechanism by which our culture
36:23undermines our connection to this almost
36:25singular sanctioned lifeline. And it's
36:28it's there too in related words and
36:29terms that pathize our need for one
36:31another like people pleasing. That's
36:34another example. And and I know there'll
36:35be a ton of people out there who want to
36:37chime in with, yes, yes, yes, I'm one of
36:39those. Me, too. But I want you to ask
36:42yourself, is it really so [ __ ] up
36:45wondering, oh, what does this person who
36:48I love need right now? Is that not part
36:51of being connected? I mean, okay, to
36:53explain, I'm going to use a sports
36:55metaphor. And you, you know, I hate
36:56them, so
36:59excuses in advance, right? So, imagine
37:01you're on a soccer team and all you're
37:03thinking about is what you need to shoot
37:06a goal. Uh, and the chances are you'll
37:08just run willy-nilly across the field
37:10ignoring everyone or even fighting your
37:12own team members in order to obtain the
37:14ball until you get the chance to shoot
37:16with said ball. My need is the ball so
37:18that you know I can look like a hero.
37:21However, you know, that would really be
37:23a shitty football game. You would not
37:25make the team if that was that was how
37:28you were working. uh what happens
37:30instead is you know to actually achieve
37:32the goals you'll be thinking hm okay so
37:34I'm actually all the way down the other
37:37end of the pitch away from the goal but
37:39ah my friend Jane she's near the goal
37:42and um she's nowhere near the ball but
37:44I'm near the ball she needs the ball to
37:46shoot the goal so how about I give her
37:48the ball
37:50yeah that works your team will achieve
37:52the goal that you all have right the
37:55whole team wants goals to be shot that's
37:58how community works, right? The people
37:59in it, they think of each other, meaning
38:02others think of you, too. This is not
38:04all just about worrying. This is, oh
38:05god, I'm I'm wondering what does this
38:07person need? You know, in this this team
38:09that we have with the same goals. It's
38:11terrible that I'm wondering what they
38:13need. You know, they're going to be
38:15wondering what you need as well. You
38:17unless you're an [ __ ] But, you know,
38:18generally speaking, that is the point.
38:22The problem is we live in this this this
38:24me first culture. So terms like
38:27codependent and people pleaser, they
38:29exist to tell us to put our own needs
38:33first. They exist to tell us me first,
38:35me first, me first. Get with the
38:36program, me first. These words, they
38:39they come pre-wrapped in the warning and
38:42assumption that others would never think
38:44about your needs. They also come
38:47prepackaged in the idea that it is
38:48better to meet all your own needs anyway
38:51rather than ever ask anyone else to.
38:53Now, given that we are living in an
38:55increasingly narcissistic world, you
38:57might say two things to this in
38:59response, right? And one is that this
39:01messaging is exactly what a person with
39:04NPD, narcissistic personality disorder,
39:06would train you to do if you're in a
39:08relationship with them. Like, you know,
39:10not need anything from them. They I I've
39:14I've done this several times,
39:15unfortunately. If you're in a
39:16relationship with someone with some
39:18horrible cluster of B personality
39:20disorder, they train you to have no
39:22needs. they're not going to be met. Uh,
39:24and a lot of the time they'll also train
39:26you to think that it's bad that you have
39:28any in the first place. The fact that
39:29you're asking them, you know, the
39:31cluster B nightmare to fulfill any of
39:33your intimacy needs, then you're
39:35obviously some kind of codependent freak
39:37and the problem is yours, you know, go
39:39look after your own needs. There is
39:40there is nothing I'm going to give you.
39:42That's how they work. They make you see
39:45yourself, you know, as as a burden and a
39:47freak. Now the second thing you might
39:49say is that has become fair to assume
39:53that everyone is out for themselves
39:55because society is increasingly
39:57narcissistic, right? But think about it.
40:01Assuming before there's any actual
40:03evidence, right, that your own partner,
40:05this this romantic diad person is a
40:08purely selfish [ __ ] that seems a little
40:10bit on the cynical side. cuz our other
40:12option is to assume that our romantic
40:14partner who professes to love us back
40:17might actually give us a bit of thought.
40:19And if they don't and continually show a
40:22pattern of selfish fuckness,
40:24then then you can and should leave and
40:27you can and should smear dog [ __ ] all
40:29over their car. However, working on the
40:32assumption that all others, including
40:35your special connection, think about no
40:37one but themselves is really like to
40:39lead us down that path where we're all
40:41too scared to connect with anybody at
40:42all. Maybe that's the plan. Speaking of
40:46self-centered [ __ ] though, the whole
40:49stop doing so much for others idea, it
40:51encourages us to check in on and measure
40:54who is doing how much of what. It
40:57encourages us, in other words, to be
40:59transactional. And surprise, surprise,
41:02this mirrors a narcissistic metric, too.
41:04What do I get out of this instead of do
41:08I feel connected here? Or is there love
41:11here? Is there warmth here? Even even
41:14emotional complaints now require
41:16evidence like some measurable imbalance
41:19to be considered valid. Saying things,
41:21for example, like, you know, I feel
41:22unseen, therefore it's not working for
41:24me. Right? That that often isn't enough.
41:26Unless you can also prove that the other
41:28person has failed to give back what you
41:30gave in sort of quantifiable terms. And
41:33and Belle Hooks again, she talks about
41:35this in all About Love and she urges a
41:38re-evaluation of that myth. She writes
41:40that capitalist culture frames
41:42relationships as transactions and even
41:45calls for equality can actually miss the
41:48point. What we need is is mutuality. A
41:51different word, mutuality. It's a it's a
41:53deeper flexible sense of reciprocity
41:56that isn't about scorekeeping. It's
41:58about recognizing our shared humanity
42:00and our natural interdependence as human
42:03beings. She says, and I quote, "With
42:06reciprocity, all things do not need to
42:09be equal in order for acceptance and
42:11mutuality to thrive." That's Bel Hooks
42:15all about love. She also invites us to
42:17recognize that our need for one another
42:19is not a flaw to fix, but a source of
42:22strength and a doorway to healing. Now,
42:26some of you still might be thinking,
42:27"Ah, I'm going to go for the lone wolf
42:28option. It's a whole lot easier to just
42:30not need anything, right? Um, but we are
42:34wired for connection." I hate using
42:36cliches that kick around in the
42:37self-help world. And that one actually
42:39does sort of, you know, inccommenserably
42:41with everything else that they say, but
42:44it's true. We're wired for connection,
42:46but connection is pathized. That they
42:49don't get that far in those discourses.
42:51We are wired for connection, but
42:52connection is pathized. In a nutshell,
42:55when it comes to individualism, we are
42:57now trained to hone in on our dependence
43:00on one another as the key problem. When
43:03the key problem in terms of feeling
43:05lonely is more often a lack of real
43:08connection. But we're encouraged to feel
43:11shame about our needing one another at
43:13all because we've been given this ideal
43:15of an independent, self-sufficient lone
43:18wolf whose only need is to chew on the
43:20carcasses of those they have outco
43:21competed.
43:23And because a lot of sociologists and
43:25other thinkers are aware that we do need
43:28one another, it was a very hard job to
43:30bring that back into being not only
43:32accepted but a necessary part of human
43:35relations.
43:36So only now we're just this word is
43:39entering into the public discourse. Not
43:40not in German speaking countries and
43:42English speaking countries though.
43:44Interdependence. I hope you've heard
43:46this word. Interdependence
43:49now known as healthy and absolutely
43:52necessary. And yeah, we needed a new
43:53word for the idea of relying on one
43:55another because our culture done such a
43:58[ __ ] number with codependent. Um that
44:01word is is just doomed for life.
44:03irredeemably categorized as
44:05pathological.
44:06And yet our values in Western capitalism
44:10do not allow us to need each other. They
44:12have turned what is a basic human need
44:15into a character flaw and even a
44:18sickness. The fact that we do need each
44:20other is backed up by science,
44:22psychology, and sociology all show that
44:26we don't need each other because we're
44:27like weak or dependent or broken or
44:29can't keep up with the times. rather
44:32because we're human beings and therefore
44:34actually suffer terribly without genuine
44:37connection. John Bobby's work on
44:40attachment which began with research on
44:42children and orphanages
44:44showed just how severe the consequences
44:46of connection deprivation really are.
44:49Infants who are physically cared for,
44:51for example, but emotionally ignored,
44:54they often develop severe cognitive and
44:56psychological difficulties. Some
44:58literally failed to thrive. Yeah, that
45:00that's a euphemism for dying. They they
45:03died without emotional connection. Even
45:05basic developmental processes stall and
45:08can actually stop. The body knows when
45:12it's unloved.
45:14That early research formed the basis of
45:16attachment theory and now widely
45:18accepted in psychology and it still
45:20points to one radical truth. Connection
45:23isn't optional. It's actually a
45:25prerequisite for healthy development.
45:27nervous system regulation, emotional
45:29capacity, and long-term well-being. And
45:32and we now know this across other
45:34disciplines too, like Dan Seagull's work
45:36on interpersonal neurobiology and Steven
45:38Pores's polyagal theory. They both show
45:41how our sense of safety is co-regulated.
45:44Our bodies need the signals of of those
45:46around us, facial expressions, tone of
45:49voice, presence, all that stuff, and we
45:50respond accordingly. Our nervous systems
45:53are built for relational responsiveness.
45:57But instead of honoring that sensitivity
45:59as wisdom, Western capitalist culture
46:02has trained us to mistrust it. We're not
46:05just told that it's weakness or
46:07oversensitivity or pathology. There are
46:10actual so-called therapeutic approaches
46:12that retrain you to completely discount
46:15your own radar and intuition. It and
46:18I'll get to exactly that in a minute,
46:19but for now, the point is we respond to
46:22emotional starvation with distress. Yet
46:26the system says the problem is in us.
46:30It's not. Responding to emotional
46:32starvation with distress is not
46:34dysfunction. It's actually intelligence
46:36because it's a survival mechanism. And
46:40even so,
46:41sensitivity to how others feel towards
46:44us, intuition, bodily knowledge. Our
46:46culture has taught us to be ashamed of
46:48such kinds of intelligence. We're not
46:50even allowed to call them kinds of
46:52intelligence at all. Some of you will be
46:53like sneering at that. But but being
46:55able to feel when something is wrong in
46:58a relationship, when you're not seen,
47:00when you're not met, when you don't feel
47:02safe, that is a capacity worth fighting
47:04for. It's that's not codependence. It's
47:07a sign that your internal systems are
47:08working even in a world that is built to
47:11shut them down. So the sooner we reclaim
47:14that knowing and name the systems that
47:17make it dangerous, the closer we get to
47:19recovering forms of connection that
47:22don't leave us starving. And to go
47:25deeper into this, it brings me to the
47:27next Western capitalist value that we
47:29discussed in the series so far and how
47:32it directly undermines connection. Um
47:35remember the episodes on control and
47:37cognitive primacy where we talked to
47:39value controlling both our thoughts and
47:41emotions because supposedly having the
47:43right thoughts leads to the emotions
47:44that we want. Um yeah it was a [ __ ]
47:46assertion that is important to remember
47:48that science shows us that emotion often
47:51precedes thought and when it doesn't
47:53precede thought. Thought and emotion are
47:55mutually informing each other
47:56simultaneously. But the idea that
47:59thoughts always come first, it's stuck
48:01anyway cuz like so many lies, it's
48:03extremely profitable and it does a lot
48:06of positive work reinforcing the system
48:08at hand. But importantly, the legacy of
48:11this lie is our pathizing wrong
48:14thinking.
48:16Take CBT, cognitive behavioral therapy
48:18for example. And I know you guys know I
48:20hate CBT
48:22because it is built on labeling certain
48:25kinds of thought as distorted thinking
48:28and replacing them with more rational
48:30alternatives. Right now sometimes that
48:32is useful sometimes. But CBT also tells
48:36us that we shouldn't assume that we know
48:40what someone else is thinking or
48:41feeling. Instead, we're trained to
48:43dismiss negative intuitions like, "Yeah,
48:46Bob from accounting doesn't like me."
48:49Even if Bob scowls every time you walk
48:51into the room because CBT would say,
48:53"Maybe Bob isn't scowling at us, you
48:56know, or maybe he is, but there's like
48:58an officewide scowling competition that
49:00we didn't know about." Or maybe Bob is
49:02scowlling from some sudden stabbing pain
49:04up his ass because unbeknown to anyone,
49:06Bob has a fistula. There are all these
49:09possibilities that may may be the
49:11alternatives to Bob doesn't like me. So
49:13don't don't imagine that you know what
49:15Bob is thinking. We're taught to treat
49:17our own emotional radar as untrustworthy
49:20and we're encouraged to believe that our
49:22concerns about how others treat us or
49:24feel about us are unfounded and and you
49:27know sure sometimes they are. But the
49:30assumption that we never know that we
49:32never know, it's dangerous because it
49:35cuts us off from one of the most
49:36valuable traits that we have, especially
49:39when it comes to recognizing unsafe or
49:41manipulative people. And that trait is
49:43intuition. And actually, you know, we're
49:46not supposed to call it intuition. If
49:47you if you tell the CBT therapist, you
49:50that's intuition, they'll go, "No, no,
49:52no. It's it's mind readading." You know,
49:54we don't encourage mind readading. And
49:57this is a rewarding tactic, right? To
49:59it's a clever way of making something
50:01quite normal like having a gut feeling
50:03about something or an intuition into
50:05something that looks clearly weird. Cuz
50:07you know when you label intuition or or
50:10gut feeling mind readading, it looks
50:12like a distortion and not their
50:14distortion of language, your distortion
50:15of what you're capable of like some
50:17failure in cognition if we call it mind
50:20readading because you know it's not mind
50:21readading.
50:24That said, here's a surprise, right? we
50:26actually can read each other like not
50:28literally look inside someone's mind or
50:30something like that. We we can't know
50:32what's going through Bob's head exactly,
50:34like whether he's thinking, "Oh, this
50:36fistula L is brilliant. Now I have
50:38license to scowl openly anyone I hate."
50:41Right? We don't know that he's thinking
50:42that. But when we're emotionally
50:44connected to someone, research shows
50:46that we're actually pretty damn good at
50:49reading their mood and their energy and
50:51their inner state. And all of which
50:53amounts to, you know, if you're going to
50:54a CDC BT therapist and you're living
50:56with a manipulative gaslighter and, you
50:58know, they're stonewalling you, they
50:59haven't spoken to you for 3 days and the
51:02therapist is going, maybe there's some
51:03other reason that they're not speaking
51:05to you. You know, like maybe they've
51:06actually had a tongue operation and they
51:08haven't told you about it cuz they've
51:09had a tongue operation. No, you can end
51:12up you can end up being seriously gaslit
51:14by the situation if you don't accept
51:15that you can you can quite often tell
51:19exactly what's going on if people are
51:21close to you. Um, like if you have kids,
51:23you know this too. A kid knows if you're
51:25mad at them, even if you if even if
51:26you're trying to hide it. Um, like
51:28imagine you're so livid with your kid
51:30and this happens. You're so livid that
51:31you can't say anything at all. So,
51:33you're kind of giving them the silent
51:34treatment even if that's not your
51:36intention. The kid knows. The kid knows.
51:39Oh, what's the matter? And you're
51:41nothing. You know, we've all heard that
51:43from our mothers as well. Nothing's the
51:44matter.
51:46And yeah, there's something the matter.
51:49You can feel it and it hurts. The
51:52problem is, of course, it is deniable.
51:56Any stonewaller gets to say, you know, I
51:58didn't do anything. It's all in your
52:00head. Which is what gaslighting is,
52:02right? And your nervous system in the
52:04meantime is just screaming, uh, I know,
52:07I know you're mad at me. Then you go to
52:09your CBT therapy session and if they are
52:12not up to scratch, they may even
52:14gaslight you too with a suggestion that
52:16you know you don't know that the
52:18stonewaller was deliberately ignoring
52:20you because you know maybe they were on
52:23LSD and experiencing any sensory input
52:26at all was just too much for them and so
52:28they couldn't do it or they might have
52:29had such a rough day at work that it
52:31induced periodic paralysis of the tongue
52:35and all of these ways of finding other
52:36explanations for the thing that you know
52:38on a gut level is the case are just ways
52:41of decoupling us from our intuition. And
52:44you know, even if you do take the humor
52:46out of it, even if if Bob is just
52:49indiscriminately prickish to everyone or
52:51your partner was on LSD, the bigger
52:54point still stands. You are not wrong to
52:57notice when things feel off. You're just
53:00taught to doubt it.
53:03So, let's get technical for a second.
53:06The ability to sense others emotions and
53:08intentions is actually well documented.
53:10Neuroscientific research on mirror
53:12neurons shows that our brains are wired
53:15to internally simulate what we perceive
53:17others experiencing. When someone looks
53:19hurt or angry, we don't just observe it.
53:22Our own nervous systems feel it too. And
53:26this is part of what makes empathy
53:27possible. Dan Seagull's work on
53:29attunement reinforces this. He writes
53:32that relationships become emotionally
53:33safe and nourishing when we are seen,
53:36soothed, safe, and secure. And that
53:39requires sensitivity. Not just what's
53:41said, but what's felt. And Louisis
53:44Coalino in the neuroscience of human
53:47relationships argues that our brains
53:48literally develop in relation with
53:51others. Emotional resonance isn't
53:53indulgence. It's actually the foundation
53:55of connection and development. And then
53:58there's Steven Pores's poly vagel theory
54:00which you guys probably know about. It
54:02teaches us that our nervous systems are
54:04constantly scanning for cues of safety
54:06and danger in others often below the
54:09level of conscious awareness. So like
54:11that tight feeling in your stomach when
54:13you know someone is just a bit off with
54:15you. It's not overthinking. It's
54:17neurobiological attunement. That's your
54:20body doing what it's meant to do. And
54:23often, particularly in marginalized
54:25communities, this isn't just emotional
54:27nuance. It's survival. You all know this
54:29too if you grew up in an unsupervised
54:32psychiatric ward like I did or or
54:35anywhere else where you know chaos
54:36reigned and danger could erupt at any
54:39time emotionally or physically. Um you
54:41will know if you grow up in places like
54:43that and this includes you know adult
54:45children of alcoholics and things like
54:46this. You will know that reading the
54:49room accurately can be the difference
54:51between staying safe and getting hurt.
54:54But you know, here's the thing. In a
54:57culture that prizes disconnection, we
55:00are told to see this very form of
55:01intelligence as irrational. We're told
55:03to call it paranoia or catastrophizing
55:06or being too sensitive.
55:09We label people as as needy or difficult
55:11when they express discomfort. And even
55:14if that discomfort is often a finely
55:16tuned signal that something is wrong and
55:18you're picking up on it. And is worth
55:20noting that is often the very people who
55:22do not want to be held accountable for
55:24their actions that will tell us these
55:26things. My mother who was a covert
55:28narcissist, she used to say all of the
55:30above stuff. You know, you're
55:31catastrophizing. You're too sensitive.
55:33You know, you're making you're just
55:34imagining things.
55:36So, you know, I was not supposed to ever
55:38see her as the problem. I I should blame
55:40myself. And you know, this is where
55:42narcissism on the micro level, like the
55:44example of my mother, is the same as the
55:46narcissism on the macro level, a
55:47cultural level. But you might be
55:49wondering, why does this matter? Um,
55:51because intimacy depends on attunement.
55:56If if I can't trust my read on how
55:57you're feeling, right? Say I'm dating
55:59you and I can't trust, you know, that I
56:01know that I can sense how you're feeling
56:03or worse, I've just been trained to
56:05ignore it, right? How could I safely
56:06connect with you? I might end up just
56:08sort of stuffing down the sort of fear
56:11that alerts me to the fact that you're
56:13about to use a shovel on my skull. Or or
56:15it might go the other way. I might I
56:17might ignore the feelings of warmth that
56:19tell me you're actually a genuinely kind
56:21and safe person despite the fact you
56:23accidentally stepped on my dog. And and
56:26if we treat sensitivity as dysfunction,
56:29we break the very thing that allows
56:31people to feel seen and met. The price
56:33of this disconnection, it's not just
56:35loneliness. It's relational poverty. A
56:38world where people are surrounded by
56:40others but feel entirely alone. Oops.
56:44Apologies for another terrible
56:46transition I didn't even know was
56:47terrible. Um, but the section that I'm
56:49up to is control. We're now going to
56:51hone in on control, right? And how
56:53control creates hierarchy and not
56:55connection.
56:57So, you know, control is not only a
56:59value in Western capitalist culture.
57:00It's actually a total aspiration. It is
57:04also a total danger because when applied
57:06to connecting, this is where
57:08manipulation can take center stage.
57:10Gaslighting, blameshifting, silent
57:13treatments, you know, all these tactics
57:15that can be used in the context of
57:16connection and inherently destroy it. So
57:19to control and connection, they just do
57:21not mix as research uh by the Goldman's
57:24demonstrates. And yet the push to
57:26control all aspects of our lives is
57:28there. We're told that taking control is
57:31what gives you what you want. And in the
57:34context of connection, this is fatal.
57:37When the desire to control enters a
57:39relationship, what is really going on is
57:42power over the other person. Cuz true
57:45connection requires mutuality. The
57:47Germans have a word that I I like. I
57:49don't say this very often. It's called
57:51algenhur. That means, you know, eye to
57:53eye. We're on a level. So connection
57:55requires people being on a level. Eye to
57:58eye. And control on the other hand it
58:00installs hierarchy. One person is on the
58:03top being in control and the other is
58:05below. So mutuality evaporates and
58:08connection in the sense of you know that
58:10human being need is gone. And we're
58:13going to bring up Belle Hooks again.
58:15This time chapter two of her book all
58:17about love. Um chapter 2 is called
58:18justice childhood love lessons. And Hook
58:22says that most of us are socialized into
58:23the idea that love and control are bound
58:26together. We're taught that authority,
58:28dominance, and obedience are normal
58:30parts of close relationships, especially
58:33in childhood. But but this this confuses
58:36control with care and it confuses
58:38obedience with love. That conditioning
58:42continues into adulthood, too. And if
58:44you've ever been in a relationship with
58:46a cluster B nightmare, people who must
58:48at all times feel they are in control,
58:51you'll know how the ache of feeling
58:53totally alone, whilst technically in a
58:56relationship feels. As you guys know,
58:58and and I know it personally, too, cuz
59:00you know, I've lived in narcissistic
59:01family systems and dated narcissists.
59:03And I I sometimes wonder if I just date
59:05case studies
59:07anyway, that they weren't just painful
59:09connections. Uh they were simulations of
59:12connection. And I can only echo what all
59:14of the research says. Um I can echo it
59:16from personal experience. Control kills
59:19intimacy. And worse, it it stops you
59:22from forming real connections elsewhere
59:24because being in controlling
59:25relationships, it totally eats up your
59:28emotional bandwidth. And it drives you
59:30slowly nuts. Not slowly really. It can
59:32drive you nuts pretty quickly.
59:34Relationships of control that they do a
59:36similar thing to what society does when
59:38it gaslights you into thinking that this
59:40is all your own fault. drives you
59:42[ __ ] nuts. And you know, even outside
59:44of overt abuse, power dynamics still
59:48fracture connection. Now, you can feel
59:50just as lonely in a long-term
59:52relationship where love has quietly
59:54disappeared. Like, but the structure of
59:56the relationship is still there and
59:58relies on control. Like, who sacrifices
1:00:00more? Who carries the more emotional
1:00:02labor? Who makes the final decisions? uh
1:00:05these more subtle hierarchies, they can
1:00:07go unquestioned because they're baked
1:00:09into how we imagine love is supposed to
1:00:11work. And this is especially true in
1:00:13nuclear family setups where two adults
1:00:16are expected to raise children and
1:00:18maintain a household with with little
1:00:20outside support. And one partner often
1:00:22becomes the emotional manager while the
1:00:24other becomes emotionally unavailable.
1:00:26And that is not intimacy. That is
1:00:28bureaucracy.
1:00:30And it leaves both people feeling
1:00:32profoundly alone. and that that's not
1:00:35about blame. That is about systems. We
1:00:37were never meant to love this way. It is
1:00:39our core cultural values that deform and
1:00:42[ __ ] connection. So now let's move to
1:00:44our other the other value that we've
1:00:46discussed in depth uh so far in the
1:00:48series. Capitalist closeness equals
1:00:52performance. And this is about
1:00:54competition. We're going to talk about
1:00:55what competition really means when it
1:00:58comes to intimacy under capitalism. Uh
1:01:01cuz it's not always the kind of shiny
1:01:02winner takes all competition that we're
1:01:04used to imagining, right? Particularly
1:01:06when we're looking for meaningful
1:01:07connections. It's more about the things
1:01:09that we do to avoid [ __ ] it up,
1:01:12right? Cuz you know, remember with
1:01:13control, anything that goes ary as our
1:01:15fault, which we talked about in episode
1:01:173. Uh so more and more we are trained to
1:01:20monitor ourselves, not just in public,
1:01:23but in our closest relationships,
1:01:25especially in our closest relationships.
1:01:27We learn to audit our words, our tone,
1:01:29our reactions, and even our silences.
1:01:32And we run postmortems on everything
1:01:34like our texts for example, you know,
1:01:37particularly when the person we're
1:01:38engaging with is a potential romantic
1:01:40diet person. We will even ask um friends
1:01:43like, you know, did I come on too strong
1:01:45in this text? Can you read all of these
1:01:46texts that we exchange? Did I come on
1:01:48too strong? Was I too emotional? Did I
1:01:50overexlain? Was I too much? So yeah,
1:01:53this isn't the confidence strut of
1:01:55someone trying to dominate the race
1:01:57because, you know, let's face it, that
1:01:58kind of behavior is insufferable anyway
1:02:00and will run away. For a lot of us, this
1:02:02is more like the the jittery hyper
1:02:04vigilance of someone who's been
1:02:06traumatized by the race, but is still
1:02:08desperately trying not to get
1:02:10disqualified, not to get abandoned, not
1:02:13to screw it up again because we think
1:02:15this is the only race in town. And
1:02:18here's here's the crap fit. Not not the
1:02:20perfect fit, the crap fit.
1:02:22self-help narratives will often call
1:02:25this process self- betterment and and
1:02:27really is it is it self- betterment or
1:02:29is it self beratement because it
1:02:32certainly feels like that a lot of the
1:02:33time it's not a journey of growth
1:02:35necessarily it's a cycle of self-
1:02:37flagagillation followed by the sort of
1:02:39self-correction
1:02:41that still holds on to the idea of our
1:02:43flawedness and the need to
1:02:44overcompensate for it. It is essentially
1:02:47a never-ending effort to sand down our
1:02:49rough edges so we can be more palatable,
1:02:52less risky, and more acceptable. Because
1:02:55in the capitalist culture, obsessed with
1:02:57control, everything bad that happens to
1:03:00you is your fault. That relationship
1:03:02that failed, that your fault. You
1:03:04weren't emotionally intelligent enough.
1:03:05You weren't you weren't healed enough,
1:03:06you got triggered, or you didn't
1:03:08communicate just right. Um, and you
1:03:10know, that friendship that fizzled also
1:03:12your fault. Uh, you should have set
1:03:14better boundaries, should have regulated
1:03:16your nervous system better, should have
1:03:17used eye statements instead of sounding,
1:03:20god forbid, hurt. And the underlying
1:03:24message is under no circumstances
1:03:28be yourself.
1:03:30It's horrible. And and we internalize
1:03:32this until it becomes second nature. If
1:03:34anything goes wrong, it's because of
1:03:36what we did. Because of what I did. So,
1:03:38you know, now my job isn't just to live.
1:03:41It's to preempt disaster, to monitor
1:03:44myself so closely that no part of me can
1:03:47ever ruin anything again. Um, and this
1:03:50is where control morphs into
1:03:51internalized competition. Not not with
1:03:53others but with ourselves, you know,
1:03:54with a past version of us with a
1:03:57version, you know, that that [ __ ]
1:03:58stuff up before. And as we discussed in
1:04:01section five, this is this is where we
1:04:02enter that Sartrian Fodian internalized
1:04:05audience nightmare. We are always
1:04:07already humiliated for having [ __ ] up
1:04:10totally and being yourself again. There
1:04:14in your internal crowd is also the
1:04:16self-help author who kicks you again for
1:04:18being down saying the only person who
1:04:20can sort this out is you. And you're
1:04:22there too, you know, as both the accused
1:04:24and the judge. Is both the actor and the
1:04:26critic. And you feel like someone sees
1:04:28your every failing because they do. That
1:04:31someone is you. and you're terrifying
1:04:34and terrified.
1:04:36So connection becomes performance and
1:04:38not necessarily because we're
1:04:39narcissistic, but because we're [ __ ]
1:04:41scared of getting it wrong or of being
1:04:44that version of ourel that always gets
1:04:46it wrong and we don't want to be that
1:04:48flawed version. We want to be the
1:04:50perfect version that we're striving
1:04:51towards cuz that perfect version surely
1:04:54that gets love. The old version, you
1:04:56know, who did all those fuckups, that
1:04:58person would enter the wrong kind of
1:05:00relationship again. they'll get
1:05:01discarded again. And more than anything,
1:05:03we just don't want to [ __ ] it up. Like
1:05:06like the other person can't do that for
1:05:08us. And because we've been taught that
1:05:11our truth is too much, we edit ourselves
1:05:14before anyone else can reject us.
1:05:18It this is this is the tragedy of
1:05:20so-called self-improvement.
1:05:23It doesn't actually teach us to love
1:05:24ourselves. It teaches us to interrogate
1:05:27ourselves constantly. It teaches us to
1:05:30manage and mitigate our own needs like
1:05:32their threats. It It's not a liberation.
1:05:35It's internalized surveillance. And the
1:05:38crulest part, if we perform connection
1:05:42well enough, if we do the work and keep
1:05:44our [ __ ] in check, we may actually get
1:05:47connection, but we're never going to
1:05:50feel safe in it because we'll never
1:05:52believe we earned it as our real selves
1:05:54cuz, you know, we didn't. We'll be
1:05:56obliged to keep up this performance of
1:05:58of someone who we are not. And we'll
1:06:01stay stuck in this loop, polishing a
1:06:03mask, curating our lives so we look
1:06:05right to outsiders, you know, running
1:06:07interference on our own instincts,
1:06:09hoping that this time if we get it
1:06:11perfect enough, we'll be safe. And if we
1:06:14find love in this way, if someone loves
1:06:16the mask, they still don't love us.
1:06:18There's still that break in the
1:06:19connection because what they love is a
1:06:21performance. And you're obliged to keep
1:06:23it up because you may not want to let go
1:06:25of that actual not relationship which is
1:06:28existing between two facades. And this
1:06:31is what Lauren Verent names cruel
1:06:33optimism. I like this word cruel
1:06:35optimism. The tragic bind where the very
1:06:38things we're told will save us are the
1:06:41things that harm us most. The belief
1:06:44that you know if we just heal harder,
1:06:45perform better, self-manage more
1:06:47perfectly, we'll finally become more
1:06:49lovable. And all we do is is deepen our
1:06:52alienation because love earned through
1:06:54performance is never really felt. And
1:06:57safety bought through self-erasia that
1:07:00doesn't protect us. Instead, in
1:07:03internalizing the values Western culture
1:07:05inculcates in us, we remain attached to
1:07:08fantasies that actively undermine the
1:07:10things that we're trying to reach. The
1:07:12promise of what to do to find connection
1:07:15becomes the prison that excludes us from
1:07:17finding it.
1:07:19And now I want to talk about the
1:07:22antidote right community. And you know
1:07:24really this this is all kind of
1:07:25deconstruction. We're not supposed to
1:07:26propose other systems when doing
1:07:28deconstruction but otherwise it all gets
1:07:30pretty bleak cuz obviously you know it's
1:07:31broken. I will leave you with that. Now
1:07:34here's the antidote. Community.
1:07:37So if control kills intimacy and
1:07:40performance strangles connection then
1:07:43the antidote is not the antidote is not
1:07:45more strategy. It's not better
1:07:47boundaries or better communication or
1:07:48being a better version of you. It's not
1:07:50another self-help book on emotional
1:07:53literacy. It is community. It is actual
1:07:56community. Not the buzzword, not the
1:07:58app, not the podcast or the Facebook
1:08:00platform. I mean people. I mean real
1:08:03messy reciprocal relationships. The ones
1:08:06that don't rely on performance or
1:08:08perfection or pathology. And bell hooks
1:08:12again. Um I read a lot of bell hooks for
1:08:14this. Um Bel Hooks but quoting M. Scott
1:08:16Peek in her book All About Love. Um she
1:08:19describes community as a group of
1:08:21individuals who are moved beyond the
1:08:23surface, who've learned to communicate
1:08:25honestly and who've dropped the masks of
1:08:28composure and who have committed to
1:08:30delight in one another, to mourn
1:08:32together, and to make each other's
1:08:34conditions their own. That is to live
1:08:37inside a shared humanity rather than
1:08:39outside it. And yet this is not a call
1:08:42for kumbaya hug groups. It is a call for
1:08:45radical re-evaluation of our emotional
1:08:47economies. Hooks calls this a love ethic
1:08:50and it sits in direct opposition to the
1:08:52capitalist ethic of domination,
1:08:54self-reliance and profit. The love ethic
1:08:57says loyalty matters, slowness matters,
1:09:00vulnerability matters, people matter.
1:09:04living by a love ethic. She writes, um,
1:09:06we learn to value loyalty and a
1:09:08commitment to sustained bonds over
1:09:11material advancement. And that's the
1:09:14revolution in terms of going against
1:09:16capitalist values cuz everything we've
1:09:18been taught runs counter to that.
1:09:20Capitalism tells us to treat
1:09:22relationships like side quests to the
1:09:24main goal of productivity. It teaches us
1:09:27to that like care work is invisible and
1:09:29and not valued and not paid well. It
1:09:31teaches us that being needed is weakness
1:09:34and that depending on others is somehow
1:09:36regressive when the truth is intimacy
1:09:39cannot exist without interdependence.
1:09:42That there is no such thing as closeness
1:09:44with control and no such thing as
1:09:46mutuality without risk. And so the real
1:09:50work is is not in perfecting ourselves
1:09:52to finally earn connection. It's not in
1:09:54finally getting the performance of
1:09:56ourselves right. The real work is in
1:09:59building spaces where perfection is not
1:10:01the price of entry. Where we're allowed
1:10:03to [ __ ] up and be forgiven and repair.
1:10:06Where people can just be raw and real
1:10:08and held without us feeling the need to
1:10:11somehow fix them. That's community. It's
1:10:15not convenience. It's not performance.
1:10:17But a culture where showing up as you
1:10:19are, come as you are. Kurt Cobain was
1:10:21right. Come as you are is the only
1:10:24credential you need. where our truth is
1:10:27not too much and where our softness is
1:10:29not a liability rather it's a strength.
1:10:33So if we are going to resist this system
1:10:36there's something we need to do. We need
1:10:38to reclaim dependency. Dependency one of
1:10:41those words that we we we're taught to
1:10:43hear it and go that's a bad word. We
1:10:46need to reclaim dependency as as a good
1:10:48thing. If we are going to resist this
1:10:50system, the loneliness machine
1:10:52masquerading as self-help, that's the
1:10:54system, we have to start by reclaiming
1:10:57what has taught us to despise. We have
1:11:00to start by reclaiming what it has told
1:11:02us are things that we don't want to do.
1:11:05Dependency, intuition, softness,
1:11:09relational intelligence. These are not
1:11:12flaws. They are the parts of us that
1:11:13remain human in a world that just keeps
1:11:16trying to make us into robots and AIs.
1:11:19Um, there are reasons we ache in the
1:11:21absence of love. They are the evidence
1:11:24that something in us still knows how to
1:11:26belong even if we don't have the context
1:11:29around us to do it. We've been taught to
1:11:32pathize dependency, to see
1:11:34interdependence as codependence, to
1:11:37flinch from our own longing as if it
1:11:39were shameful. But but what if our
1:11:42longing is actually the compass? What if
1:11:45our need is not weakness? What if it's
1:11:47wisdom?
1:11:49Bel Hook says, "Rarely, if ever, are any
1:11:52of us healed in isolation?" And she's
1:11:56right. Uh we do not recover by gritting
1:11:58our teeth and getting more resilient. We
1:12:01recover when we are seen, when we are
1:12:03met, when someone holds our trembling,
1:12:06unpolished selves and says, "You don't
1:12:09have to be perfect to be loved." Because
1:12:12in a culture that wants us compliant,
1:12:15ashamed, and endlessly self-managing,
1:12:18choosing to need one another is
1:12:21revolutionary.
1:12:22So, let's reclaim our dependency. Let's
1:12:25stop pretending that disconnection is
1:12:27strength and that loneliness is a
1:12:29personal failure. It's not. It's a
1:12:32structural wound. And healing it is not
1:12:34going to come from fixing ourselves
1:12:36personally and all alone. It will come
1:12:38from refusing to abandon each other. It
1:12:41will come from not just automatically
1:12:42shouting get therapy to everyone and
1:12:45instead caring enough to listen to and
1:12:49see each other. And I was reminded of
1:12:52that the other weekend when I met
1:12:55someone that was capable of connection,
1:12:57reminding me that such people are out
1:12:59there. You guys are out there. You know,
1:13:01I'm here doing this. There are people
1:13:03who are capable of connection. So, with
1:13:06another terrible transition, sorry guys,
1:13:08today I just keep needing to stop and
1:13:10start again.
1:13:12To summarize, to pull it all together,
1:13:14this episode set out to name the pattern
1:13:16beneath everything we've explored so
1:13:18far. That Western capitalist values
1:13:21don't just fail to support connection.
1:13:23They actively undermine it. The result
1:13:25isn't accidental, it's designed.
1:13:28Independence has become a moral ideal.
1:13:31So, our natural need for others has
1:13:33become pathized. The romantic diet is
1:13:35framed as the only legitimate source of
1:13:38intimacy. And then we're shamed for
1:13:40depending on it. Control is seen as
1:13:42strength, even though it kills the
1:13:45mutuality that connection requires.
1:13:47Competition teaches us we're only
1:13:49lovable when we're flawless. So
1:13:51connection becomes performance. And
1:13:54therapy, whilst yeah, sometimes helpful,
1:13:57it does often reinforce the idea that
1:13:59the problem is you and not the culture
1:14:02that raised you. And as for Co reminds
1:14:04us, what culture calls sick or
1:14:07dysfunctional is often just whatever
1:14:09threatens its dominant values. And in
1:14:12this system, real connection is
1:14:14threatening because it requires truth,
1:14:16vulnerability, and interdependence.
1:14:20So those things get framed as flaws, as
1:14:22weakness, as codependence. It's kind of
1:14:24another version of divide and conquer.
1:14:26If we don't need each other, we can't
1:14:28come together. And that's not an
1:14:30accident either.
1:14:31Interdependence is not sickness. It is
1:14:34what makes us human. Loneliness isn't a
1:14:37personal failing. It's the outcome of a
1:14:40system that punishes the very things
1:14:42that make connection possible. And when
1:14:44you feel the ache of that, that is not
1:14:47dysfunction. That is your intelligence.
1:14:50That is your nervous system saying this
1:14:52is not how it's meant to be. And your
1:14:55nervous system is right.
1:14:59Now, on the note of community and
1:15:01needing one another, I really thank you
1:15:03for being here and for listening and for
1:15:05your comments, the interactions. It's
1:15:07for me, you know, you can probably tell
1:15:09as someone who's had, you know, kind of
1:15:10a challenging life as a lot of us have,
1:15:13you know, you're not watching this
1:15:14because your life was easy. I would like
1:15:16to keep this going and I would like to
1:15:18turn it into a community project where I
1:15:20can actually offer people the space to
1:15:22come together to be themselves and of
1:15:25course offer spaces for philosophical
1:15:26discussions. So, I'm setting up a
1:15:28Patreon page which is sort of most of
1:15:30the way there and um please do go check
1:15:33it out um because there's different
1:15:34tiers like everything from Q&A to
1:15:36philosophy discussion groups to
1:15:37one-on-one time with me depending on the
1:15:39level of of support that you can give
1:15:41because I actually can't keep doing this
1:15:44um with without assistance. Um no one
1:15:47can operate as yeah a totally
1:15:48independent being as we talk about so
1:15:51often on this podcast. So your
1:15:53assistance would be really really
1:15:55appreciated. um it makes it makes a huge
1:15:57difference. Um e even if even if all you
1:16:00do is the lowest tier because if
1:16:01everyone that listen did that I would be
1:16:04able to continue doing this which is
1:16:06really what I would love to do. Uh so if
1:16:08you're interested in in sessions with me
1:16:10and philosophy discussions and Q&As's do
1:16:14go check out Patreon. Um if you're just
1:16:15interested in helping the podcast keep
1:16:17going, you can go to the
1:16:18lonelinessindustry.net.
1:16:20There is a donate button on the top
1:16:21right hand side and um you can do that
1:16:24as a one-off or monthly. And just any
1:16:26way that you can assist even and if you
1:16:29have if you have no cash at all just
1:16:30just share it with a friend who you know
1:16:32suffers from loneliness or or share it
1:16:35on your Facebook page because that helps
1:16:37too to find the people who you know who
1:16:39need this and may want to get involved
1:16:40in the communities that that I want to
1:16:42build around it. So thank you again
1:16:44everyone. Thank you for your time. I
1:16:46know this was a long episode too. So
1:16:47those of you that made it to the end,
1:16:49you have my utmost respect. You're a
1:16:51good listener. Um, so I will see you in
1:16:532 weeks time and thanks again for being
1:16:56here. Bye.

About this transcript

This page contains the full transcript of How Society Ensures Our Disconnection by The Loneliness Industry Podcast, generated from the public captions YouTube serves with the video. The transcript has 13,058 words across 1,979 segments, with the original timestamps preserved so you can click any line to jump to that moment in the embedded player.

What you can do with it

Use the transcript to take notes, quote the speaker, build a study guide, generate a summary with ChatGPT or Claude via the YouTube Summary tool, or export it as a timed subtitle file with YouTube to SRT. You can also re-open it in the transcriber to translate the transcript into 100+ languages.

Free YouTube transcript tool

YouTube2Text is a free YouTube transcript generator — no signup, no daily limit. Paste any YouTube link and get the full transcript instantly, with timestamps, click-to-jump, translation to 100+ languages, AI prompts for ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, and exports to TXT, SRT, VTT, or Markdown.