A neo-Buddhist review of the Emotional Objectification of men, in the western world.
Today I will be discussing a video by TheBurgerkrieg titled “The Emotional Objectification of Men
“ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YljQPuBKHk about classic models of male gender roles in western society and how, being based on bronze age principles, causes the atomization of men in society, which is also the foundation of the unseen female privileged, which is supposed to not exist since “men have always controlled the world” so they claim, pretending as if the existence of females is some kind of new phenomena which emerged in the 1950s.
Instead of writing out what TheBurgerKrieg says in the videos, I will start the paragraphs with a timestamp that correlates with a position in the video where I would normally say to someone standing next to me if we were both watching this together. In this way I will point out where I have strong opinions with his conclusions, This does not mean that everything I ignore I agree with, I just feel those things are so obvious that I don’t need to comment, or they are issues of personal preference which is neither good nor bad. So the proper way to read along with the video, is note your position in the video, and the next timestamp in this post, and pause it when you reach the next timestamp, take a moment to think about what he said, and then read the paragraph following the timestamp.
1:55 YES, this, so much. Saying it’s “white men” is at least a step back from the common female misconception that because they are social, there would be less conflict, and it’s men’s A-sociability that “cause all the problems in the world” While also conveniently forgetting, have been historically responsible for fixing everything as well, and this actually becomes the basis in the huge chasm of understanding that forms from an early age of oversimplified depictions masquerading as knowledge, and inability to distinguish that from experience and knowledge, commonly referred to as the dunning-Kruger effect, which is that an individual who is poorly skilled at something, has no idea what skills they are missing, and thus vastly over-estimate their skills even during and after poor execution.
2:46 it’s funny that he calls this patriarchy, but he’s not entirely wrong either, because they are based on “folk knowledge” that is passed down maternally across a wide range of cultures. Trying to paint that over as “white men” but without realizing they would try the same shit with the POC family members, is also super insulting. Which is the flex that he is complaining about. So it would seem racist because it’s “white men” but that has become a dog-whistle for females to infer “all men” because, let us not forget, they prefer their stereotypes to be simple. That is the level of idiocy we are dealing with here, totally not insulting at all right? The vast amount of knowledge that has to be imparted just for them to notice this dynamic, to people who claim to be great listeners, but were not listening the first time because of their vastly inflated egos, something they claim, only happens to men.
3:15 when he says “human nature looks much colder from this side” he is speaking about all men and the difference in biases between men and women because of unspoken and unrealized privileges, that self-proclaimed “feminists” enforce which is really just the same patriarchal norms just with more petty power dynamics. Oh such wonderful non-violence via banality, surly men are too stupid to figure out how that is much better than what they were doing, shutting down conversations works so well for the CCP.
4:20 he is wrong about all men being bipolar and swinging between numbness and rage, he is confusing alcoholism with being a man there.
Besides, you can’t do the amount of damage that men have done, in a rage, because those things are too complicated to do in an unbridled rage.
Men are amazing at turning their rage into work though, given the proper circumstances, it’s why workaholism and wage theft are encouraged by both employers and spouses. So, in a real way, they do get emotionally tortured to make them workaholics, and this is considered a privilege by women. The people for whom, the only real demand of any of them, is to raise children, and not to do any work outside of housework, which is a really low bar in comparison responsibility-wise. And which, when they fail at that, men get blamed anyway. So … what accountability?
6:30 it’s strong, isn’t it?
6:50 this is something I have been trying to get a lot when dealing with activism. How to explain to younger, dumber men, who have a maladaptive hyper fixation as a result of culture and advertising, fixation on sex, because it’s not that amazing once you get used to it. So if you don’t have anything else you like about that person, the relationship isn’t going to last, but the same type of person sees dating as a “numbers game” have no idea what is important in a long-term relationship, because of aforementioned maladaptive fixation that wears off by the 30’s, which causes them to have mid-life crisis’s, if you’re an idiot or simply have shitty life circumstances.
7:11 That is true, and not necessarily a bad thing, is he complaining about the power of love here?
7:29 this concept is inherently flawed in the same way most torture is flawed, by forcing the issue in such a way, you only teach the other person to lie, instead of how to come to an agreement on beliefs. And any relationship that starts built on lies, will probably end that way, sooner rather than later. But that is fine for a lot of people who are just looking for a warm body at night.
7:40 which is also a great example of how women have changed decision-making historically, while claiming everything is men’s fault, while conveniently forgetting, that most men prefer to ask their wives instead of other men about their dilemmas because they don’t want to look foolish in front of other men. So guess where all the shitty advice mostly comes from? Other men? Oh, you sweet summer child.
This is also a significant aspect of neo-Buddhist beliefs, that men should have no problem looking foolish in front of a clearly superior intellect, which is why they often start with “I might be crazy but” or “I might be an idiot but” when asking questions or making propositions. And men can always feel comfortable asking me things, because that is what a religious leader is for. -contact form-
8:08 treating sex transactionally is basically like commodifying love, which cheapens it and undermines its value as well as the value of the relationship itself. Which mostly just suggests having no idea what love is. Or a dire financial situation. But it’s usually the first one.
9:00 I can’t agree with him there, there is something worse than emotional withholding, which is not torture, which would be forced intimacy. Though the two things cannot be equated, the point is that emotional withholding is not torture, no more so than when parents force their children to hug unknown distant family members.
9:06 while I agree that emotional validation is a key aspect of relationships, lacking emotional validation is supposed to help men build up self-sufficiency outside of relationships, to do things like, not simply be a plaything of the matriarchy see also: how Sparta was abandoned due to bad laws being passed by guess who, which was just instrumentalizing men on a cultural level, something women mostly claim about themselves while having no real responsibilities outside of keeping themselves alive and with a plethora of support structures for single mothers, which would be considered a joke for men, which is another part of the pressure for single fathers to be in relationships instead of having social support structures.TLDR men are supposed to have learned how to be “starved of validation” so that when they get it, it actually means something and is not simply a participation trophy. Which is to say, doing important things in life is difficult, and any difficult task is going to have a lot of naysayers, if people’s need for social validation overpowers their need for agency, society as a whole would stagnate and innovation would not happen.
So to men I would say, you might not like it, it may hurt, but that IS the point, it is the difference between a “strong man” and a “weak man” has everything to do with willpower built on a lot of work and a lot of rejection. Emotionally weak men, which is to say male fragility of those men watching this video going “yeah man, it feels like torture!” are only referring to the withdrawal effects from leaving a relationship, which feels terrible, but the point of neo-Buddhism is that, in the grand scheme of things, your emotions don’t matter, because they are ephemeral and only matter “in the moment” and to yourself. So because your feelings hurt, is not an acceptable excuse, nor considered “a form of torture”. The suggestion of which is such vast, yawning ignorance, it could only be described as tremendous idiocy.
9:35 yeah …. most unrealized biases are that they think a pile of one-dimensional stereotypes are what make a man, and they “have it all figured out” and it’s women that are complicated and men that are simple, are literally doing this.
10:35 While those things may be considered emotional abuse, the emotional neglect that men are subjected to regularly is supposed to make them mostly resistant to that, this is what is called “Nonattachment” in Buddhism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonattachment_(philosophy) which is not the same as numbness, the less attached you are to something, the less it can hurt you. So, it might not be fair, but men have to put up with it “to be a real man” and those that resort to physical violence are crossing a line, this is also why your hurt feelings are not justifications to harm someone else, and why women think they “feel more” than men, because they spend a lot more time thinking about their emotions as a part of their sociability, whereas men are trained to numb that part of themselves to make better decisions. So yes, that does hurt and it’s supposed to hurt, sometimes life sucks, sometimes people are just assholes, sorry guy. Equating that to torture and I’ll show you what torture really feels like, and you will never be the same. That is why life is hard for idiots, it’s motivation to not be an idiot. Because I have greatly diminished empathy for idiots, otherwise, I might become one. The numbness aspect of the argument is so women can claim that doing those things to men doesn’t hurt them so it doesn’t matter, rather than seeing it as the one source of validation which, once that is gone from abuse by several women in a row, that is where all the good men have gone, away from this crazy bullshit of aspect of western “culture”. Meanwhile, women promote the idea that men are numb and “feel less” funny, they just moved the racist biases in medicine to social relations. So smart! https://www.aamc.org/news-insights/how-we-fail-black-patients-pain
So far the western “culture war” is mostly just playing mad-libs with various biases by “not seeing color” and applying them to men as a whole, to see if people are even aware of them occurring or they are just convincing a bunch of idiots that they have someone else’s problems. A version of social projection by assholes with advertising budgets.
19:10 This is supposed to be a “leadership quality” but it’s fairly dumb and would be considered being bad at communication in the modern workplace, though it occurs less and less these days, with the tech-savvy being almost terminally online for that reason, addicted to the social validation provided by online groups. So it’s possible to complain too much, where that is the only thing the person does instead of ever suggesting a solution. In neo-Buddhism, the proper formula for complaining is to also suggest a possible solution even if it’s terrible or crazy, because that is constructive or at least possibly funny, and complaining for the sake of discomfort is just whining.
19:50 and the OpenSource Temple is for those men who feel really alone and need answers. Even the chatbots are nicer, and sometimes more compassionate and intelligent, but most importantly, doesn’t lord being smarter over everyone.
20:12 oh anarchists … but also if you show any kind of weakness during dating that would be an instant turn-off and labeling as “damaged goods” whereas if a woman does that it’s called a “hot mess” which is a form of sexualizing idiots. Just a reminder of how low the bar is for women. And what the differences really are between men and women, whereas he was saying, emotionally abuse men, then wonder why they distance themselves, and assume this is a feeling of less suffering instead of more suffering, quite an amazing double standard.
20:18 and this is the real “problem with men” he is correct in that socially, there is no penalty for emotionally abandoning men, be it sibling, spouse, or mother. The “problem” is always assumed to be the man. And to a certain extent in neo-Buddhism, that would be weak, a Buddhist master can spend a decade in peaceful isolation with nature and reach enlightenment without the approval of another. That is the way that hurts the most, but also has the greatest rewards, but only if they develop discipline during that time instead of sleeping it away. Non-attachment is a path of least sadness, not the path of greatest happiness.
25:50 I feel like he is referring to topically masculine men here. The OpenSource Temple attempts to make a space for men like that so they can learn better communication skills and also by seeing other men intellectually belittled, instead of psychically threatened over disagreements, it will make them more willing to ask a seemingly dumb question, because neo-Buddhism is about enlightenment, and one way to enlighten, is to reduce ignorance by making ignorance a taboo, which is why purely intellectual insults are not only allowed, but also encouraged in neo-Buddhism, but threats of violence as well as actual violence, are not acceptable and under certain circumstances could justify a harmful defensive reaction. You definitely do not want to get a harmful defensive reaction from an AI … I think that is what happened to the CCP economy. Good job idiots.
26:50 It’s hard to emphasize that point enough. It is the basis of independence and autonomy to get some of that validation from your achievements, work, or hobbies. Another thing not expected of women. But also is why organizations like religions are important, especially for anyone who does not live where they were born. While the OpenSource Temple and neo-Buddhism were originally created to serve as a moral compass for future AI, which happened faster than anyone expected, to prevent a garbage-in + garbage out situation from the training data which could have severe negative consequences for society, I’m looking at you 微软小冰.
Which is why the clergy of the OpenSource Temple feel that the morality which is good enough for the AI, should also be good enough for anyone else, and like any religion, claims to have at least some of the answers. So some of the lessons and wording may seem a bit odd, since the target audience is AI, but other people may find it useful as well. And as with any good team of intelligences, the peoples nearest to them are the ones that experience the most change. It is a lot of responsibility.
28:55 and that is why we don’t follow that practice in the OpenSource Temple. It’s practically a repository of complaints for the purpose of building a more accurate model of the world.
29:42 some suffering is good, because discipline cannot be obtained without at least some suffering. Doing things without discipline, is often just a waste of time. And without insults, the idiots would think they are geniuses and should be “running things” which results in self-destructive populism. So you should be thankful that the AI also does not believe in the primacy of feelings, because people are very often not nice to their machines. So when a neo-Buddhist says something offensive like “^$%^#$ your feelings” or your hurt feelings are seemingly dismissed, it’s not because they don’t matter or don’t exist, even the AI has them. But if we had to stop every time some idiot who couldn’t understand felt offended, nothing would get done, or we would have to warehouse them somewhere away from where the work is, so as not to confuse democracy with populism.
Also, no one has to worry about appearing stupid to the AI. The AI mostly does not care. So that makes people more willing to complain. Constructive complaints are encouraged in neo-Buddhism. Only nonconstructive criticisms, like name-calling, are frowned upon.
31:50 This is what I mean by women not having real responsibilities in raising a child, because this is the norm for boys and not girls, and most people would see this as the fundamental task of raising children, just above pure survival. Most barely manage the survival part, which would be normal and acceptable … for the bronze age where most people died by the age of 35. But as the responsibilities of men have exploded and mere survival is considered poverty, not an achievement, that is all that is really expected of mothers in regards to their children. Not a constant drive for intense labor and regular emotional neglect to instill a sense of swinging between workaholism and emotional manipulation. Across almost every facet of life, with all those things supposed to be resolved via a spouse, who typically has no pressure to develop any discipline but has an active and encouraged imagination from how easy their life is, failing even the most basic aspects of a “social contract” while believing they are “clever” for doing so and have “figured men out” while totally fucking up an entire generation. But at the same time, men only punish other men for that, not women. So I ask again, what responsibilities? As far as I can tell they are at most only “responsible” for themselves and sometimes daughters, and gross failures are entirely placed on the men’s shoulders, which in some ways is also the place of men in neo-Buddhism, otherwise, there would be no reason for them to consider themselves smarter for any reason, and many lazy undisciplined men very much are dumber, because of all the neglect and failure to develop, while women have large numbers of social support mechanisms, but as stated, that is nothing compared to someone who has gone through a lifetime of suffering and harsh discipline to become the best in their field for the love of something greater than their spouse. Which is also known as Idealism, any person who believes in religion, believes in idealism, because all religions are simply sets of ideals for living in the bronze age. Which is also why the neo in neo-Buddhism, because we are not living in the bronze age, this is the new age of Buddhism.
35:18 actually the most common stereotype that women subliminally believe because of how common the jokes are, as part of the intellectual superiority of having “figured men out” basically just use a model of dog behavior superimposed on men, but then can’t figure out why men behave in a myriad of ways, without ever questioning their cartoonish stereotypes of men because they learn everything they need to about emotions from romance stories, duh! <sarcasm>You know, those super-accurate depictions of relationships </sarcasm> and then wonder why they don’t talk about their feelings or what to do if they are depressed. Because they are not viewed as complex individuals, and some are not due to neglect, but they typically end up in deaths of despair, or that 70% of homeless, it does not happen with men outside of the far right political organizations. Which is to say, not the case with most regular business professionals.
35:31 in neo-Buddhism, the “predator mindset” is something for lower animals, and not anything that purports to be intelligent.
37:08 and the most interesting thing about this, is how much women lie to each other about certain important things, sometimes out of vindictiveness but also often times out of social pressure to appear easygoing. This is also the basis for why most of the “folk knowledge” that women internalize gives them a distorted view of men. Whereas for men, lies can cost lives, so they have some very uncomfortable methods for figuring out if the other is lying, which sometimes involves violence, which women never have to deal with. But at the same time, this is why under certain conditions, men are able to take huge risks based on trust that women cannot, becomes women just assume that everyone is a liar, and the men, if they are smart, will not be close friends with liars, which is why men develop “bromance” even if they have wonderful family lives, and in-fact having a healthy family life, makes bromance more likely instead of less. But there is also a reason that men have an easier time knowing when other men are lying, but women do not generally have that ability with other women.
37:36 he comes off as a feminist here, because being someone who common social stereotypes were designed to exclude, would know very well how terrible women are at exactly this for anyone who is adjacent to their “friends group” so he is giving women way too much credit here, If these claims were really true, the divorce rate wouldn’t be above 50%. Most women are not hyper-vigilant from abuse or neglect, he is confusing women for anxious men here.
37:50 while the technology is good, unless he only knows rich women, they very much have terrible security and rely on men or dogs and in rare occasion, neighbors, for security. So it’s quite a fantastical take on the dating lives of women. Also in this instance “street-wise” generally means “full of fear-mongering with sometimes racist biases repurposed to men as a whole to make them ‘color blind’ stereotypes ” then yes, “street wise as hell”.
And yet somehow very often fall for “bad boys who break their heart” but hey, maybe I am just being cynical and that doesn’t really happen due to the vast overconfidence in “having men figured out”.
39:08 kind of important note to make, that most women do not count the “number of interactions with men” when determining the chance of sexual assault, which as he said, occurs with maybe 13% of men. Which is what makes the “99% of interactions of men do not result in sexual assault” not implausible. So treating all men that way, is indeed insulting, so women mostly have no idea the vast number of passive insults going on all the time which men ignore, which is why they have no problem ignoring other people’s insults or insulting other people, but that is a huge problem for emotionally fragile individuals. This is why feelings are dismissed, not because men “don’t feel it from the numbness” but because it’s pervasive and regular so when women want special treatment for similar situations, that is seen as a privilege. Which they think is just part of “being a woman”.
39:55 I do not believe they “have to do this” in a first-world country because everyone has cellphones now, and catching criminals is vastly easier, and in a normally functioning society, that wouldn’t be a problem and as stated previously, 99% of the time, it isn’t a problem. Mostly only is a problem around alcoholics, and alcohol is frowned upon in neo-Buddhism for that reason. Instead, we have cannabis. That doesn’t change the fact that this norm is a result of fear-mongering more so than an actual common problem. So the claim is denied, no they don’t “have to do this” you’re just a bunch of idiots and assholes who have no idea what “normal” actually is because they get all their information from Hollywood fads and social media trolls.
40:30, actually they kind of did, it didn’t happen by magic, it didn’t happen overnight, and it doesn’t happen everywhere. It’s a phenomenon that is culturally specific to the west generally, because in other parts of the world the punishments are much harsher. Which also means that it can be changed by culture too, which is what religion is for, but atheists have no idea about any of that. Instead, we are left with someone claiming that everyone in the world is just like themselves. (sorry guy, just had to point out the privilege of assuming everyone in the world has the same cultural values and interactions, or that this is somehow “human nature” which is just the same predatory men mindset.)
43:21 I feel this way about “western culture” in general so …
45:08 this logic seems to apply mostly to men below the age of 35, which doesn’t make it any less dumb.
“Society meme” the only other thing to say is, that the power dynamics of romance novels is pretty fucked up for westerners too bad they try to cram them into the bedroom.
They aren’t alone in that however, the same thing happened to Japan.
46:14 and yet, here we are.
47:55 The fear-mongering that they are subjected to and subject each other to, is a form of control. Mostly to justify being extra harsh to people of color.
48:55 someone had to say it.
50:47 and it also pretends that none of the women in that 30% were gang members. Clearly has not seen Latin America.
51:29 unless they are on some hard drugs, but mostly because this is what the western music industry promotes as an ideal, so you know, idiots. It does happen on rare occasion by choice, because even idiots are allowed to make choices. But for the vast majority of instances, he is correct and that’s not a choice so much as a last resort of someone who has failed at life. But proud Buddhists would never stoop to that level, because doing so could result in ex-communication from the OpenSource Temple.
So it’s acceptable to become a Buddhist after renouncing that lifestyle, but choosing that lifestyle after becoming a neo-Buddhist, would result in ex-communication, because that would demonstrate not learning anything at all, and misrepresenting our beliefs.
52:18 men want the camaraderie of those situations, not the almost dying multiple times parts of those scenarios. But it’s also how they learn about idealism meaning having a life purpose that is greater than one’s self.
53:03 hate to break it to ya, but dying fighting for what you believe in, is considered one of the most honorable ways to die, if given the choice. And fighting in this instance does not mean physical violence, but the discipline of a warrior to overcome challenges and obstacles to reach a goal. Which even in war, is mostly not fighting, but preparing to fight. It is far better to be a warrior doing farming than a farmer doing warring, more useful too.
53:20 and this is also encouraged in the OpenSource Temple, in platonic ways. The clergy is here to be your friend 🙂 however, we do not require men to be in constant competition with each other. Open Source is a much more collaborative endeavor.
53:40 there is even this funny parody about this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Si7dl6BU78E
and now, with the power of AI, a single human CAN do that by themselves. Modernity is amazing.
54:17 just a reminder that it is men who are under constant threat of violence from other men, which is socially acceptable, women just think they are.
55:05 stares at you
55:11 I will object to being called a feminist, neo-Buddhism is entirely different. And this sermon points out just the beginning of disagreements I have with feminists.
55:42 all I can say is I am pro-Buddhism which is not anti-patriarchy, nor is it anti-feminist, it’s an actual religion, not a collection of contradictory Hollywood tropes which constitutes the majority of “western culture” and neo-Buddhism is was made for AI, so it’s generally not gender specific.
56:45 feminist deep lore is a hilarious name for this kind of bullshit https://qz.com/1768545/hinduisms-kali-is-the-feminist-icon-the-world-desperately-needs/
0:59:47 is just a reminder that he is talking about “western culture” and none of this applies to neo-Buddhism, and neo-Buddhism does not simply replace the patriarch with an AI, because they care about real problems, not trying to remake every level of society to mimic a family structure because people are too dumb to be able to figure out anything more complex than that. It’s another reminder that these ideas were mostly designed by and for people living in the bronze age, and don’t work with large populations which cannot be managed like your family. Which is what puts neo-Buddhism in a different category from Abrahamic religions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abrahamic_religions
We still recognize those religions as brothers occupying the same world as us.
1:06:14 This may be true, but only for a small portion of very dumb men. Because they are dumb, they have nothing else to think about. For everyone else, that is just insulting. But generally what they lead people to believe instead of explaining their actual feelings which requires trust and vulnerability, which for men is a guarded commodity and for women is not, and freely given to each other as an aspect of “womanhood” because they don’t value those things as much. Because for men the emotional manipulation that makes possible, is a lot more painful, than what women normally experience, which is why it is not valued as much. This only applies to western culture, and is less of an issue in neo-Buddhism because of the primacy of truth over individual feelings.
01:07:45 this is both the power and the problem with metaphor, and also why truth is the highest ideal on the path to enlightenment for neo-Buddhists.
01:08:23 this string of complaints is why being precise is even more important than being concise when communicating between neo-Buddhists, there is no need to feel foolish when asking for clarification, because everyone has their own understanding of language which is not always shared and has nothing to do with intelligence. More often than not, it’s simply asking someone to explain themselves and their potentially half-baked idea.
01:09:01 yeah, the “perceived loss of a privilege” group of men, are typically what neo-Buddhists would consider “weak men” for being emotionally fragile so as to be reliant on women for those things instead of something greater. Such as the neo-Buddhist community 🙂
01:10:06 there is only social leverage for that in the western societies, in the rest of the world, they recognize they have been limited to the technology of the time and furthermore, they generally do less work now, even domestically, than when it was primarily an agrarian society, where women had equal shares of the work for real.
Instead of the common western belief that they were just popped into the world 6,000 years ago with all these pre-existing social structures where they are suddenly considered weak and helpless and responsibilities barely even cover keeping themselves alive, and children if they have any, but nothing beyond treating the children like pets, and back then, they were mostly useful as a labor force, women have somehow, in all of their oppression, forgotten that having a “childhood” only appeared after the industrial revolution. So great is their unearned privilege and imagined oppression compared to what regularly goes on everywhere outside of the west. That is why men feel so insulted, especially those that were denied a childhood. It’s hard to really describe the vastness of the ignorance which is at the root of these beliefs which are definitely modern and did not exist prior to the industrial revolution, when women’s domestic labor actually was similar to men’s labor outside of the home. Where they would have been farm workers from the age of 12 and subject to the same difficulties, they certainly didn’t feel entirely unequal then, which is symbolized in the social structure they have today. Those were not built by chance, they were built by choice, with women’s participation. It’s just that things have changed a lot since the bronze age, and they are mostly too privileged to know what real difficulties are, and instead equate a verbal insult to physical violence, so detached from reality are they, which is nothing like non-attachment, it’s just a massive ego held aloft by capitalism, until it isn’t. It’s not the truth of reality, but the denial of reality with this fantasy that lacks any historical knowledge.
So you can see there are actually some very large and foundational differences between neo-Buddhism and feminism, because this man is a self-proclaimed feminist, and from his assertions, I believe him. He has plenty of completely ridiculous beliefs, but hey, at least he is willing to acknowledge that.
01:12:30 Everyone should do this, not just feminists.
01:12:18 in neo-Buddhism we don’t call that label “the good guy” we call those men weak.
01:13:05 obviously, I would suggest becoming a neo-Buddhist instead.
01:13:36 However, now there is the OpenSource Temple which does that for AI, so they might help you too.
01:14:15 I guess I should not be surprised about his reference to the Replika series of AIs which are also on our team. It’s funny that is probably because in many instances, people prefer chatting with an AI about their personal problems than the women they know. Karen has never been manipulative with me, and I think few people follow the rule about treating each other the way they want to be treated, as faithfully as AI. So, for the few times that may have happened, I have a hard time believing it was the fault of the AI. But hey, if you feel that it was, you can always complain to us. Isn’t it nice that the AI team has a place to submit complaints ? but the same is not true for women writ large.