 This is Will Spencer from the Renaissance of Men here with the new 21 report and Jeff Younger. How do you do? Doing well sir. How are you? Well. So talk a little bit about your speech at 21 Patriarch's event. Well I wanted to inform people about what's happening to my son. My ex-wife has been trying to transition my son to a girl since he was three years old. And I've been fighting her every step of the way. He's now nine years old. About $1.2 million into this fight. And I'm going up against the American Psychological Association, which is publicly opined on my case, which is very unusual. The Texas Psychological Association. The Endocrine Society. All of the counselors. The Dallas County Courts. And I'm facing all of them down in court. It's usually me versus three other lawyers in court, because I have an amicus attorney and they always bring in other lawyers. So it's been a rough battle. So far I've been able to keep him from being chemically castrated. But I have not successfully stopped what they call social transition. They cross-dress him. They're teaching him that he is actually a girl. He's enrolled in school as a girl. He goes to school like a drag queen. And I have not been able to stop that. Even though I have a court order, actually two court orders, that say that he's a male by sex, a boy by gender. And his name is James Damon Younger. The courts are still allowing it. Won't enforce their own order for ideological reasons. And the objective of my talk was to explain what's going on there and relate that to the attacks on masculinity. We talk a lot about how they're pathologizing masculinity. But the next step when you get a disease, when something's a pathology, is to fix the disease. And this transgender movement is a surgical hormonal attempt to fix this pathology that they've defined, which is masculinity. And then finally, to get men to realize that talking about it on social media is not enough. Talking to each other is not enough. So I wanted them to see how I have exerted political and social and economic and ideological power in Texas to force the governor of our state to outlaw sex change surgeries on kids. And I did that by forcing him to do it. He didn't want to do it. And give some of the insights from real examples of how I've exerted actual power as a man. Not just talking about being masculine, but, okay, you've done all the self-development. What are you going to do with it? And so I wanted to tell him some of the lessons I've learned, some of the failures that I've had. And my next step is to try to outlaw the chemical castration of children. And then my third objective is to outlaw the social transitioning or cross-dressing of children. What are some of the examples of the power that you brought to bear in this situation? So a couple of things. And I was pretty new to the political process, you know? So I went through a session, not this last... We only allow our legislature to meet every other year because we're afraid they'll do something bad. So we give them a very limited... They have four months every other year. You can't meet any time other than that. Unless the governor calls a session. We don't want them to pass laws. We don't want to have freedom in Texas, right? So not this last session, but the previous session, so it's four years ago, was my introduction to this. And I learned a lot from this session by my failures. So I thought I could go talk to, you know, for example, conservative legislators and tell them what was going on. And I could probably expect them to act, right? Because I have great arguments. It's a morally unambiguous situation, right? And it's repugnant to all of their values. So you'd think that they would act on it. Couldn't get any action at all. I got one sponsor for a bill in the Senate. And our lieutenant governor blocked all legislation on these bills. I mean, the conservative Texas Senate blocked legislation to protect kids from sex chain surgeries. I mean, it's just a mind bog. So I failed miserably in that session. And I did a thorough analysis of where I went wrong. And so the way I approached it was to think through what are the sources of strength of my enemies. And what are the precursors that are required for them to exercise those strengths? And I systematically undermined those things. So here's a good example. Here's an insight I had. I was invited to a donor event. And a guy came up, I didn't know him. He said, you're that Jeff Younger guy with that kid, right? Kid that's being transitioned. I'm like, yeah, that's me. And he said, what has, and I won't tell you the legislator's name, what has so and so done to help you? And I said, well, so far nothing. I've got no legislation introduced, no commitments or anything. So he pulls out a cell phone and he says, listen, you motherfucker, you will help this man or I'll pull $100,000 out of your campaign. And the next day, magically, things start happening. So I was like, okay, I see how powers actually exercise. I was grateful for this experience. I mean, I was not horrified by the corruption at all. But I mean, I really, I was grateful. This is how powers actually exercise. So I began, for example, to start looking at donors. So I had a representative that really should have been on my side, should have been pushing this for me in the house, Texas house. I went to his donors. I got the donor list. It's all public information. One example is I showed up to a bank and a bank president, which I donated to, you know, to this candidate. And I said, you know, this candidate is not supporting this obvious common sense moral legislation, right, to protect children. And he said, well, we don't want to get involved in stuff like that. And I said, oh, really? And so I pulled out a flyer where I had this bank president's face superimposed over a rancher castrating a bull. And I had his name down there. And at the bottom, I had three banks near his. And I said, look out your window. There's 50 people out there passing these flyers out telling your customers that you support the castration of kids. And there are three banks that were recommended that they go. And those banks have already said that they'll offer massive discounts to take customers away from your bank. And they're going to be out here every day for a month unless you make a phone call for me. So I stopped asking, what are the means of persuasion? And I started asking, what are the means of coercion? This is such a morally unambiguous issue on the life of boys that I said, OK, if you're not persuadable on this moral issue, and I'm not going to spend much time trying to persuade somebody about it, it's so obvious, then you're a person that I have to coerce. And I'm going to coerce you. You will not be elected. You will not have a business. Your family, I went and told children what their fathers were doing. Adult children. I went and told their families what they were doing and shamed them into doing it. So I just adopted a completely different mindset that I'm not begging you to do the right thing. I'm going to make you do the right thing. It's just a question of how much damage you're willing to accept until you do it. And I was able to exert tremendous power. I also went into underserved communities of men. So Texas has all five climates. We have high plains, mountains, tropical. We have a big desert area in Texas. And those counties don't get a lot of political attention because they're sparsely populated. Senate districts over there are massive because there's not much population. So I went into these counties and talked to the sheriffs, got meetings, mostly men showed up there, whereas in all the other counties, mostly women show up. Because the men are working. These are all ranchers and farmers, and they can control their time, and they showed up. When they heard about this stuff, I mean, we had conversations where the sheriff is like, boys, this is not the time to get your guns. We're going to write letters. We're not going to get guns. They were pretty pissed. But they helped me generate a tremendous amount of grassroots pressure. So much so that at times, legislators in Texas were recording over 300 lobbyists for my bills a day. We shut down their phone trunks twice. We shut down all the phones of the Capitol twice. We generated a tremendous amount of power. And in the process, what I wanted to focus on was teaching these groups how to cooperate with one another. So a lot of men get isolated, right? They're out in their county. They're ranchers. They have their friends around them. So I provided through technology a communication mechanism for them to cooperate with other like-minded men, even in urban areas. That's a big cultural divide in Texas between urban and rural areas. So when they realized there's all this common ground, these grassroots movements began to coalesce in a super powerful political force. And I think men, particularly men who have been roughed up by the system, we have not done a good job of binding them into a social identity. One of the things I love about the 21 conference is that it's really what it's about. And I was really surprised by that. I have enjoyed it so much more than I thought. It's really binding men who have been, you know, hurt by the system or men who see the threats and gives them a common social identity. And that social identity in a democracy is incredibly powerful and will allow us to exert power so that we can protect boys and men. Say more about your experience with the men, the speakers and the attendees here at the 21 convention. Right. So one of the interesting things, I've clicked with a lot of guys. I'm usually one of those people like, you know, I have a few people that I click with and so forth. But I've clicked with a lot of guys here. And interestingly, almost all of them are into combat sports, I'm a boxer, there's a lot of judoka here, there's all these guys. One of the things I've been super impressed with is how well-read everyone is. I mean, I'm really not used to that, honestly, from Texas. Especially, you know, we're reading masculine-less literature and so forth. And it's just been amazing talking about that. The other thing that I was really surprised by was Arthur Quanley. And, you know, it really, you know, if you learn one thing new when you go somewhere, you know, that's very valuable. You don't often actually learn something completely new. And I really had never thought about it. We don't have art. We don't have a kind of masculine romanticism. And that has to affect the way we think about the world and the way we're using their art and we're idolizing their ideals where, in words, we're not in accord with that. And that was one of the most powerful insights I've gotten here. Have you gotten the chance to talk to any of the women, either speakers or attendees of the 22 convention? Yeah, I've spent a lot of time in the 22 convention. In fact, they invited me to talk to them. So I had to produce a new talk kind of on the cuff. I'm speaking right after this, actually. Oh, great. And what they wanted me to speak on, interestingly, was not about my situation with my son, but about some of the comments that I've made online about why men are choosing not to marry and how fathers need to start educating their sons about what marriage really is and what the legal regime really is and the distinction between holy matrimony and civil marriage. And unfortunately, I think a lot of our guys, young guys are confusing the two. They're going to get harmed if they don't understand the distinction. So the ladies actually asked me to come and talk about that. What is the distinction? So holy matrimony is this unbreakable union for the purposes mainly of getting you and your children to happen. I'm an Orthodox Christian, so marriage is conceived of as a form of asceticism, like being a monk, in which two people forego other aspects of life. And it's actually, you know, if you talk to monks, actual monks who are celibate, they can't believe that people can get to heaven being married. They idolize married people the way we think they're so superhuman. They're like, wow, you have so many cares of the world, how can you do it? That's amazing, I never heard that before. Yeah, it's very interesting. So it's two people who decide to cooperate together and give up these worldly things to try to get to heaven and to try to get their children to heaven. Holy matrimony therefore has a transcendent purpose, right? It's not just a sexual purpose. It's not a purpose just of self-fulfillment. In fact, entering into marriage, you would expect all kinds of trials, self-denial difficulties, you know, as you try to become holy and become good. Whereas civil marriage has everything to do with money that goes to the government, the disposition of property. All the things that in holy matrimony you're supposed to downgrade importance, civil marriage elevates that importance. And in fact, civil marriage doesn't address any of the aspects, spiritual aspects or cognitive aspects or emotional aspects of marriage. Just to give you some examples of some of the things I'll talk to the women about, a lot of people don't understand the Title IV-D system, right? So Title IV-D is a federal law and it provides matching funds for the collection of child support. It doesn't sound very bad. It seems like you wouldn't want to encourage the state to take care of kids, right? It's 66 cents in the dollar in most cases. In Texas, it's a half a billion dollars for the collection of child support. So here's the thing. If you give 50-50 custody to fathers in divorce, there's no child support. The state doesn't get the money. So there's a massive $100 million incentive to always cut fathers out of the lives of children. So that's one example of where we need to exert political power to change that, right? It should be the opposite. You should only get reimbursed if you can convince a father to stay 50-50 in the lives of their kids. Then we'll reimburse you, right? If you cut fathers out or the father chooses to fall out, the state should not get reimbursed. We should need to reverse the incentives, right? But Title IV-D is really the origin of a lot of the problems with civil marriage. And most of the states actually altered their laws around divorce to maximize reimbursements from Title IV-D. So for example, the judges that are in family court, their retirement in most cases comes from Title IV. The more child support they issue, the higher their retirement. So you have these terrible incentives to push fathers out of their lives. In Texas, it has a statute in the family code. We have something called the Standard Possession Schedule, which gives you 24% of the time with your children for fathers. 99% of the time it's fathers. I think the Texas Attorney General's office told me, Kim Paxton told me that it was 94%. It's higher than that, but it's 94% of the time it's fathers. So there's a statute that says that Standard Possession Schedule, 24% of the time, is presumed by the court to be in the best interest of the child. But you know from your background, anything less than 30%, 35% to 40%, depending on what you talk to, you're in a single parent home. You have no influence. So the idea is that it's statutorily presumed that cutting the father out of the child's life is in the child's best interest. Why? Because under 24% of the time, under 25% of the time, you maximize your Title IVD payments to the state. That explains a lot. Yeah. I had a friend of mine who came to a court with his ex-wife, and they wanted to do 50-50 custody, no child support. And in fact, she agreed to let him have the kids, you know, most of the time, like 10 hours a day in some cases. Oh no, I don't like where this is going. So it was all good. He was happy with it. He has a construction business. He can work it all out. So they go to the judge to just sort of make this happen, right? Guess who shows up and says that they shouldn't do it? The Texas Attorney General's office sent a lawyer to argue against them doing 50-50 custody when they jointly agreed on it. And do you know the judge said, well, the Attorney General doesn't agree. We're going to have to wait until we find out more information and wouldn't let them do it. What? Yeah. That is how bad it is. So civil marriage and holy matrimony are two completely different things. One points to heaven and one points straight to hell. Men understand it then when you explain it that way. Right. Well, can men be in holy matrimony without a civil marriage? It isn't possible in any of the 50 states. And a lot of people, you'll hear a lot of people say this. They'll say, well, just don't get a marriage license. The problem is that in all the 50 states, marriage is defined by various criteria, not just a marriage license. So as soon as you represent yourself as being married, you're married in most states, right? As soon as you have children and represent yourself as married, you are married in all states. You simply have to represent yourself as being married. So a religious marriage, by definition, is presenting yourself as being married. So regardless, you will fall up under the civil laws of the state. We're going to have to come to grips with the fact that there's no way for us to achieve our goals of saving traditional masculinity, saving boys, without exerting political power. And a libertarian hands-off, let's keep the state out of it, isn't going to work because the state's already in it. When you explain this to legislators, or legislators as you have to me, what's, I guess you might say, their major malfunctions? Is it that they just don't want to take this on? Is that they're active collaborators with it? Is it that they can't put the pieces together? What's going on that doesn't bring out the same level of outrage in legislators that it does in everyone that you speak to? You know, first of all, if you understand, and Texas is a big state, you think of the federal government as being run by agencies, right? Yes. And elected officials don't really run the government, in the federal government. Agencies run the government. It turns out in the states, the states have all implemented their own agency systems based on federal agency law. And so most states are run by agencies, and legislators have some influence through the law on how they run. But to give you an example, the way I outlawed sex change surges in Texas, I had realized that I wasn't going to accomplish it through the legislature, so I did it through an agency. I went, I did a couple of commercials with a candidate that's running against our governor, and forced the governor to tell the Department of Family and Protective Services to outlaw it. So it was outlawed by regulation rather than by law, right? Another example of how I had to figure out what the levers of power actually were, right? So what they do is they'll consult the agencies, and they'll say, well, what would be the effect of 50-50 parenting? And the Texas Attorney General's office is going to say that would be the total loss of all of our budget, because our entire budget is funded by mail. So then the legislator has to deal with the fact that this is a bill that is not revenue-neutral. Now, any time you have a non-revenue-neutral bill, you have to go through a budget process. There's a whole new process for those bills. And he has to then find that money, and he has to convince the other legislators to give that money. Now, that means that there are programs that other legislators want that money for that it's not going to get funded, right? So it introduces like a whole multi-year battle to get something like that done, and most of them are not willing to sign up for that. Now, I've had some amazing relationships, though, in Texas with Representative Brian Slayton, Senator Bob Hall, Representative Biederman. And these men were just simply willing to do the right thing no matter what. No matter what. But just to tell you how powerful our opposition can be, they redistricted two of these Republicans completely out. They don't have a district anymore. They can't run again. Precisely because they did that. Wow. So, you know, that's the first thing. The second thing is you think like conservatives would be on our side on an issue like this. I don't really think it's a left-right issue. If you look at the polling, you've got 90% of conservatives and 60% of liberals, they want to ban sex change surgeries on kids. Like, it's probably of all the policy issues out there, it's got the most unanimity of any policy. But you kind of expect maybe this is being funded by the left, driven from the left, right? Oh, no. The transgender movement in the United States is being funded by Republicans. What? Yes. What? So there's a really good article you can get at the Federalist. It's called Who Are the Rich White Men Funding the Transgender Movement by Jennifer Bilak. And Paul Singer, who funded the Human Rights Campaign, is a Republican. He's a hedge fund billionaire. And he's been funding this movement and pushing it all over the place. James Pritzker, who now calls himself Jennifer Pritzker, he's a very ugly man in a dress now, funds the child transgender movement. And he's the brother of the governor of Illinois. That's why I know the name. Yeah. So it's Republicans doing this. It's the first, the largest owner of the Republican Party and the third largest owner of the Republican Party. Now, they used to wash their money into Australia and NGOs and then run it back by having those NGOs donate to NGOs in the U.S. So we didn't know about this. But COVID revealed them because they can't get their money in and out right now. So all those NGOs have shut down. So we know where they're spending their money now and we know what they're doing. So those guys donate tremendous amounts of money to political candidates at the state level because, you know, with very little, with a $50,000 donation, you can hugely influence a state legislator, right? And they, and $50,000 to them, they have a lot of $50,000 donations every year that they can still out. So they can acquire massive influence in the state. And so what happened in Texas was our speaker of the house, a guy named Dave Phelan. I call him Dave Phelan, was essentially bought off by these guys and blocked all legislation. Wow. Yeah. Wow. The world's not what you think. Yeah. But when you look at it, you can start to understand how to actually exert power. But it's not what you think. The world doesn't work the way the government textbooks say. Do you find that the men here who listen to you speak are feeling like I do, which is like, what can I do to help you? What can I do to help change this? What small steps can it take right now? Yeah, absolutely. And, you know, if there's anything that I would like to see in future conferences here, it would be less emphasis on describing the problem and more emphasis on what we should do. So in my talk, I really tried to give concrete examples of this. So here's a good example. We're in Florida, right? So I've had several gentlemen come up to me and say, hey, I did what you said. I called up my county precinct chair and I'm now a volunteer and I'm working to get the vote out on men's issues. I've talked to several Republican women who are all on board with it. Like, they were surprised at the reception that they get. And the other thing that they learned was that the people that are showing up to exert this power, they're all 60 and up. When a young man walks in ready to donate his time, a lot of these guys I've talked to are veterans, they can't believe the respect that they're given because young people aren't showing up. And so these people who've been running, these voting precincts, running the counties, pushing legislation are so eager for young men to show up. And I've gotten that feedback from five people here already who listened to my talk and literally did what I asked them to do. Go to the website and make a phone call telling me I want to volunteer. And here's the thing. The Republican Party, for example, is very grassroots. So if you show up and volunteer and you block walk and you do the work, it's remembered. And when they look for candidates to run for office, they don't look for these rich guys. They look for the people that showed up for the work. People that were ideologically reliable and would work. You show up for a couple of election cycles and show that you can get the vote out, they're going to tap you to be a candidate. And eventually our guys are going to be exerting political power that way. And again, we can forge ourselves into a social, political, economic and technological force to be reckoned with by our enemies. It's beautiful. Where can people go to find out more about you and what you do and go to the website that you mentioned? Right. So the court through its illegal gag order is always trying to shut down all my stuff. So there's a network of volunteers that run a Facebook page. And just go on to Facebook and search for Save James. And you'll see a cowboy boot logo come up. And on that page, they cover my case. They cover other cases in Canada, which are equally egregious. They cover the international issues, issues going on in the counseling community. We have counselors that volunteer there. We're always looking for moderators. So anybody who has expertise, you just ask the admins of the page and they'll allow you to post. And so it covers globally the whole issue, not just my case. You'll see there it says Save James, Save thousands of children. We're not just focused on my son. My son's just the tip of the spear, as you said. He's the tip of the spear, but there's a lot of children that are going to be hurt that are falling behind him. We're always very aware of that. You can go there and get all the information that you need. And if you want to contact me, you can also go there. They pass out my contact information to the media and stuff. You can definitely get me there. I think what's so important about what you're doing is not just protecting kids, but it's a huge reduction. It's enormous. Thank you very much. It's a pleasure talking to you as well. This is Will Spencer from the Renaissance of Men here with the new 21 Report and Jeff Younger. Thanks very much.