Based Camp | Simone & Malcolm Collins Based Camp | Simone & Malcolm Collins

In this eye-opening discussion, Malcolm and Simone delve into the fascinating world of paraphilias, more commonly known as fetishes. They explore how these seemingly unusual attractions can provide insights into human neurology and evolutionary conditions. The couple examines the prevalence of "monster girl" fetishes across various cultures and historical contexts, and how they relate to super stimuli and innate disgust responses. Malcolm and Simone also discuss how certain physical traits, such as hair and eye color, may have evolved due to extreme mate selection in specific populations. Throughout the conversation, they emphasize the importance of understanding and contextualizing one's own sexuality to avoid shame, addiction, and harmful behaviors. Join them for this thought-provoking and educational discussion on the complexities of human sexuality.

Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello, gorgeous. Hello, Simone. So this is the subject that I particularly find interesting. And a lot of people are surprised. They're like, why are you interested in obscure paraphilias, which are more commonly known in the public as fetishes? And the answer is, is because it tells us a lot about human neurology, human evolutionary conditions, and the way humans think more broadly.
And people might be like, wait, wait, wait, what do you mean by that? Right? So if you see an impulse that exists across a broad breadth of the human population, but doesn't appear like it would have been selected for in an evolutionary context, like it wouldn't have increased the number of surviving offspring they had, you have found One of two things.
Either you have shown that you misunderstand the [00:01:00] environmental context that humanity evolved in and that something that seems like it would have been a maladaptive behavior was actually a positive behavior, which is very interesting if you find that but then the other. thing that you may have found is you have found a way that the brain essentially breaks or a pathway doesn't work correctly, but doesn't work correctly in a way that happens over and over and over again in different humans, which tells you something about like if trains keep flying onto a road at a certain point you can tell broadly, at least in one area.
Where a train track is likely supposed to be and like the speed of trains on that train tracks and where trains are turning on that train track. Now, this becomes especially interesting in the world of fetishes and paraphilias. Because this is a very common area where you see something [00:02:00] that is very clearly a hard coded biological instinct in individuals. Cross culturally
Would you like to know more?
Malcolm Collins: , people will say, Oh no, well this is all like modern internet stuff that's causing this. And we'll get into that argument in a second. Well, I can get into it right now. It's just very obviously not. If you look in a historic context most of the paraphilias you see today, like sadism and stuff like that, you're going to see in like the Marquis de Sade, for example, which was definitely in a pre internet context, or you see in the British vice, which was a so common a fetish among British people.
They called it the British vice, which was men who liked being spanked by battles by women.
Here is James Joyce writing about farts. Big fat fellows, long windy ones, quick little Mary cracks, and a lot of tiny little naughty forties ending in a large gush from your whole
I think I could pick hers out in a room full of flirting women. It is a rather girlish noise, not like the wet, windy fart, which I imagine fat [00:03:00] wives have. It is sudden and dry and dirty. Like a bold girl would let off in fund in a school dormitory at night. I hope Nora will let off no end of her farts in my face. So that I may know with her smell also, so people will be like, oh yeah, Weird stuff like farting pouring that that's like from weird Brazilian.
No. It was around the time of James Joyce

In this insightful discussion, Malcolm and Simone Collins explore the evolution of cultural frameworks in modern society, tracing the transition from disgust-based morality to cringe culture, and ultimately to the emerging age of vitalism. The couple delves into the factors that have driven these shifts and the implications for our understanding of morality, identity, and social norms. Malcolm and Simone begin by examining the era of Protestant Christianity's dominance in the United States, characterized by a disgust-based moral framework that often led to the persecution of marginalized groups, such as the LGBTQ+ community. They argue that the recognition of the flaws in this system led to its eventual downfall and the rise of cringe culture, which relied on secondhand embarrassment and conformity to shape social norms. The discussion then turns to the emergence of vitalism, a cultural framework that celebrates individuals who unapologetically embrace their identity and break free from the constraints of cringe culture. Malcolm and Simone highlight examples of vitalistic figures, such as Tiger King and Donald Trump, and explore the potential benefits and drawbacks of this approach. Throughout the conversation, the couple emphasizes the importance of personal choice in belief systems, the value of austerity, and the role of faith in shaping one's outlook on humanity's future. They also touch on the concept of anti-racism as an ontological framework and the potential for anti-DEI consulting to promote meritocracy and combat bigotry in the workplace.
Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] I think it was the recognition that disgust based morality was leading to immoral actions. Like the persecution. No, hear me out here. I genuinely think it was the disgust based morality caused the persecution of LGBT individuals that led to the destruction of that system. Because That's not
Simone Collins: just how ridiculous it ultimately was.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah. Cause many people were like, why am I attacking somebody for something about themselves that they can't change? I think it's the new cultural framework that is going to dominate in the next age, which is the age of vitalism. So vitalism I would define as A cultural framework that sells itself with a love of existence and a love of being who you are unapologetically. One of the problems with the vitalist system, I'll also explain why it's going to potentially eventually crash, is often the people who care the least about how [00:01:00] society judges them like us, for example because of that, they lack a general moral framework and they'll just do narcissistic stuff all the time in a way that like the Tiger King or Trump does, right?
Would you like to know more?
Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. We are going to be discussing a very interesting topic today, and there's going to be a long amble at the end of this because sometimes we just have casual conversations before them. And we had a really interesting one before this episode, but I'm going to be discussing a concept That I have been thinking about personally, and a fan sent me some ideas that actually helped me flesh out this concept into a broader concept about how our society functions and where we are moving as a society and a, a realistic path through the pervading nihilism of our current age.
This story starts in the age of our childhood or our parents when the [00:02:00] dominant cultural group in the country was Protestant Christianity. These were the days of the satanic panic and a lot of the anti gay stuff and stuff like that.
Simone Collins: We're talking the 80s, early 90s.
Malcolm Collins: There was, and I love this.
Some people still think we're there. Like they still think like the Republicans are like the anti gay party or something like that. It's freaking insane. Like I cannot, it's insane. 45 percent of gay men voted for Trump, by the way. Like we are no longer in that the gay party and the non gay party.
Society has

In this thought-provoking discussion, Malcolm and Simone explore the complex relationship between human predilections, such as arousal patterns and food preferences, and the cultural norms that shape our attitudes towards them. They question why it's socially acceptable to shame certain food choices but not sexual orientations, and delve into the historical context of how sexual compatibility became a key factor in modern relationships. The couple also examines the formation of subcultures around shared experiences of societal othering, and how these communities can become intrinsically tied to one's identity. Throughout the conversation, they touch on topics such as the AIDS epidemic, the conglomeration of the LGBTQ+ movement, and the potential risks and benefits of gender transition. Join Malcolm and Simone as they navigate these sensitive issues and share their personal perspectives on fostering a supportive environment for their children.
[00:00:00] I don't know where are you're gonna go, so let's dive right in. It's something I've been thinking about recently.
, there are many things that humans have predilections for, whether those predilections are genetic or due to our environment growing up. Two broad categories where I think humans have a varying predilections that are both genetic and environmental are the things that arouse them and the flavors that they enjoy.
That's true. Yeah. Okay. Huh. So the question then becomes why is it that I cannot impugn someone if I'm like I don't like this particular food I don't think that cake is healthy, I don't think you should eat cake every day, I can understand that my kids might even like the taste of cake, okay?
But I am going to shame them for eating cake, I am going to withhold cake from them, Yeah, or soda or alcohol. People are very passionate about these things. Why is it that as a society, that's a totally normal thing to [00:01:00] say, but if I come from a cultural group that has similar beliefs around something like gender transition, that's same sex attraction that's seen as homophobic
Would you like to know more?
Our family doesn't particularly like Italian food. Like I find it to be carby and honestly a little bland for my taste.
 We don't serve it a lot to our kids. Okay. Now some, a family that likes Italian food that like receives pleasure when they eat Italian food and really enjoys that.
I understand that there's other families like that. I just don't want that for my family. Right now, this is a totally normal and inoffensive thing to state. No one is going to say I'm a pasta phobe when I state something like this. Yeah. That's just not for you. What is really fascinating is when I correlate this with something like sexuality, you would get an extremely negative response.
because a lot of people they will attack our [00:02:00] position on gayness, which is to say that I, as a family, like in my kids were born, same sex attracted or due to environmental conditions become same sex attractive.
I'm not going to shame them because I think that we have other solutions to have families right now. And I think that, that the cost of shaming them are less than the benefits from a cultural perspective. But I hold. Nothing against the cultures that do. And I can understand why from a historic context, especially if they have other cultural solutions for same sex attraction.
The and a lot of people are like, all conservatives have the same solution to same sex attraction. And it's this is just objectively not true. So if I'm just contrasting three groups here traditional Catholics, traditional Muslims, and traditional Protestants traditional Catholics who are born same sex attracted.
If you look at the Catholic priesthood, some studies show that over 50 percent of the priesthood is same sex attracted. It is, they get a, position of status, but they just have to maintain celibacy. That's actually a pretty good trade off and not particularly inhumane. It's like ethical

In this thought-provoking episode, Malcolm and Simone Collins delve into the recent controversy surrounding the attempted cancellation of YouTuber Wendigoon by the channel "In Praise of Shadows." The couple examines how this incident serves as a disturbing case study of the rise of extremism and dehumanization within certain ideological groups.
Malcolm and Simone analyze the rhetoric used by "In Praise of Shadows," drawing parallels between their language and tactics to those employed by the Nazi regime. They discuss how the dehumanization of perceived outsiders, the justification of violence against them, and the attempt to police and purify communities are all hallmarks of fascist ideologies.
The conversation also explores the importance of intellectual diversity, the dangers of ideological echo chambers, and the need for a sane and principled opposition to counter the spread of extremist views. Malcolm and Simone emphasize the value of cultural sovereignty, pluralism, and the fight against bigotry and radicalism from both sides of the political spectrum.
Throughout the discussion, the couple reflects on the broader implications of this controversy, the state of online discourse, and the potential for a return to civility and understanding in the face of increasing polarization. They also touch on the importance of holding individuals accountable for their actions to discourage future attempts at cancellation and dehumanization.

Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] The horror community, being a normal welcoming community, welcomes people with all ideological perspectives into it. But once you get a critical level of this ultra progressive, ultra urban monoculture perspective, they now think they own the entire cultural category, in this case, horror.
And they now have a duty to police entrants into this community. Only people who one think like them and fit their cultural rules belong in this community, but then he also reveals his hand about what he thinks about general society is at first he says, they should not be welcome in our space, but then he says they should not be welcomed in public in general.
Simone Collins: Wow. Okay. The argument being that they. spread harmful messages, presumably?
Malcolm Collins: No. I, he said we'll get to the arguments that he might use to justify this in his head, but generally he sees them as subhuman, not deserving of the same dignities of other human [00:01:00] groups. And that they should be treated as such.
And a lot of people don't understand how people can walk towards something like a Holocaust and society may not recognize that they're walking in that direction. Society where people like this person are tolerated. Is a society that is walking towards a holocaust.
Simone Collins: Yeah, but dehumanization is the first step of any of this.
You can't do these things to people. And
Malcolm Collins: elevating the murder of this family just for being in the wrong area, as a positive thing. But the most important thing in understanding how this larger memetic structure works is for a medic structure to stay stable like this. It needs to not encounter pushback, right.
Would you like to know more?
Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone!
I am excited to be here with you today! We are going to cover the recent controversy around the attempted cancellation of Windagoon by In Praise of Shadows. However, we're not going to just spit the facts of the case and then react to them, I think, like a lot of people do. I want to be very based in the way [00:02:00] we do this.
I have a very unique take on this. And I think that there is a unique takeaway and a pretty big one to be had by this. Honestly, I found learning about this case it's just some of my perspectives because I think it's perfectly encapsulates two things.
One is how the mind virus of the urban monoculture works. How it has looped around from general progressivism to basically just being Nazism or at least a form of fascism. Although I think now t

In this thought-provoking discussion, Malcolm and Simone Collins sit down with renowned physicist and science communicator Sabina Hossenfelder to explore some of life's biggest questions through the lens of physics. Hossenfelder, author of "Existential Physics: A Scientist's Guide to Life's Biggest Questions," shares her insights on free will, the nature of time, and the challenges of understanding reality.
The conversation delves into the implications of determinism and randomness in quantum mechanics for the concept of free will, the consequences of Einstein's theories on our perception of time, and the role of emergent properties in grasping complex phenomena like consciousness. Hossenfelder and the Collinses also examine the importance of predictive models in defining understanding, the evolutionary biases that shape our perception of reality, and the potential risks of misaligned AI in the context of branching timelines.
The discussion also touches on the challenges of incorporating cutting-edge scientific knowledge into societal frameworks, the importance of science communication, and the need to address issues within academia while maintaining public trust in the scientific method. Throughout the conversation, Hossenfelder emphasizes the value of curiosity, tolerance, and the pursuit of understanding in navigating the complexities of reality.

Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] Hello, this is Malcolm and Simone Collins, and we are joined by today, I think one of the best science communicators, if not the best science communicator on the internet, Sabina Hassenfelder. You can go find her on her YouTube channel. I suggest you check it out and subscribe, or you can check out her books, one of which, and when I read the title, everyone's going to know oh, that's why she's on the, yeah, that's why you're excited to have her on.
But she doesn't have a giant, like 1. 3 million followers. It absolutely huge platform for. hitting people with reality, which I love, but the book's title is existential physics, a scientist's guide to life's biggest questions. And what I wanted to talk with you about on this episode is where you see the limits like what does physics answer?
How have people misapplied physics potentially to try to answer life's biggest questions? I think a lot of people will. sometimes try to do. And yeah, just what are [00:01:00] your thoughts on this field as someone who is so knowledgeable in the best understanding of the fabric of reality that scientists have today?
Would you like to know more?
Sabina Hossenfelder: So maybe I should first explain what I mean with existential physics. So that though, that's a little bit weird because actually I didn't come up with the title. My, my editor did. So the original title of the book was more than this because I wanted to say that physics is more than. What you learned at school, it's not just about how atoms move and the ideal gas law and, switching the light on electricity, all that kind of stuff.
Physics is actually a tool that tells us something about our own existence because it's about discovering. the fundamental laws that the universe works with, and we're part of the universe. So it tells us some, it tells us something about us. And so existential physics, the way that I understand it now, even though I didn't coin the word is that it's about what physics tells [00:02:00] us about these big existential questions.
Like for example, does the past still exist? What really is time? What is this moment of now that we experience? How did the universe? begin? How will it end? Do we have free will? Are we really just big bags of atoms? And so all those big existential questions. And sometimes I come to the conclusion that actually physics can't really tell us anything about it.
But in other cases, I think physics does tell us something.
Malcolm Collins: I would love to dig into your thoughts on free will from the perspective of physics, because that's the topic we talk abou

In this eye-opening discussion, Malcolm and Simone Collins delve into the controversial topic of corporal punishment and the latest research challenging the mainstream narrative. They examine a groundbreaking 2023 study that found previous research on spanking relied on unadjusted correlations, ignoring crucial factors such as child behavior and genetics. The couple argues that the evidence supporting the benefits of mild, immediate physical correction has been largely overlooked due to ideological biases and the categorization of spanking as a human rights abuse.
Malcolm and Simone also explore the potential psychological damage caused by alternative disciplinary methods, such as emotional punishment, and the evolutionary basis for physical communication with pre-verbal children. They emphasize the importance of cultural diversity in parenting practices and the dangers of imposing a one-size-fits-all approach. Throughout the discussion, the couple shares personal anecdotes and insights from their own parenting journey, advocating for a more nuanced and evidence-based approach to the spanking debate.
Malcolm Collins: , [00:00:00] A really big study came out in 2023 that basically went through all the old research and showed that, yes, I was right to think it was sus . Now, you would assume at the very least, they would be correcting for child behavior, right? In these giant samples. I hope so. Yes, basically, they didn't
And they just used a giant sample size to push under the table that they weren't correcting. If you can't understand why this would be so insane and why this would obviously show that spanking had all of these deleterious outcomes, consider our family. We do not do any form of corporal punishment with our daughter.
Because she just doesn't misbehave in the way our boys misbehave.
In these studies, she would be in the category of non spanking, and my sons would be in the category of spanking, and then they would be like, look, spanking is causing more bad behavior.
I was like, no, you [00:01:00] idiot! 2018, the A. P. A. Task Force on physical punishment of Children recommended an resolution opposing all physical punishment, although the task force cited it. Okay. Thank you. Five meta analyses, they relied almost entirely on Gorshov and Gorgon Kehler's 2016 evidence against physical punishment, which came exclusively from unadjusted correlations.
EXCLUSIVELY from unadjusted correlations The task force ignored two stronger meta analysis that went beyond correlations, these other meta analysis concluded that harmful effects of physical punishment were, quote unquote, trivial. However, the randomized trials find spanking has a slightly positive effect. .
Would you like to know more?
Malcolm Collins: Hello, Simone. As we are now widely publicly known as the Abusive parents for our bop strategy to parenting.
Bop It. Twist It. Soccer Boppers! Soccer Boppers! You can sock all day, and bop all night!
Malcolm Collins: Like
Simone Collins: soccer [00:02:00] boppers. Yes. It's more fun than
Malcolm Collins: a pillow fight. This actually brings me to one of the first things that I've really noticed in the few days, because I didn't really think anything about the bop when it happened, and in the few days, in the while, since the initial event, I have now been paying much more attention to how I physically interact with our kids, and it's now really apparent to me, like, how rough I am with them normally, when I'm, especially with the boys, that I
Simone Collins: But In a positive context, I would say like of all the physical interactions we have with our kids, the bopping is probably the lightest and gentlest.
Malcolm Collins: Yeah, like I, that was the thing that sort of surprised me and made me realize why I didn't think anything of it, that I like regularly punch the kids while playing or throw them across the room and they just find it hilarious. That doesn't sound very good,
Simone Collins: but aren't we very rough