as to be called out. This is funny violence. Some of the funniest violence you'll see today. So totally against violence. Don't do any violence. But if you do funny violence, I'm very likely to tweet it.

There's a thread by Cabot Phillips about male fertility, saying that in the last 50 years the average male sperm count has dropped 62 percent and testosterone rates are down over 30 percent. And then he says we know what's causing the drop but a few leaders seem interested in talking about it. Do we? Do you think we know what's causing the drop in testosterone? Well when he says we I suppose he means doctors or the medical community. But I feel like they might have left out a few. I feel like there's a few notes short of a symphony.

So let me tell you which things he mentions. I'll see your comments. I'll tell you which things he mentions as clearly related. All right, so male obesity. Would you agree male obesity lowers your testosterone? You all knew that, right? And definitely obesity is up. Okay, so we'll accept that.

There's also forever chemicals. I've been hearing this phrase, forever chemicals. Some kinds of plastics and other chemicals apparently just never disintegrate and it's getting into our bodies and probably having some suppressive effect on fertility. So that's scary. All right, so we've got men getting fat and there's more anxiety. That sounds right, doesn't it? More anxiety. So men with anxiety might produce less sperm and have less testosterone.

So those are three things: the forever chemicals and maybe just chemicals in general, obesity in the men, and anxiety are lowering their testosterone. Can you think of anything else? Is there anything left off the list? For example, I saw somebody mention Fauci. That was funny. That's ouchy. Let's blame that guy for everything. Inflation.

All right, some of you are saying soy. And I don't know if that's scientifically demonstrated, so I'm not going to say that the science supports that. I think the science says not that it lowers your testosterone but it mimics some female hormones, is the claim, right? I want to make sure I don't get sued. But the claim is that it mimics female hormones, not that it detracts from your testosterone, or is that necessarily always the same? I don't know the answer to that question.

But would you agree that it's notably missing, even if only to mention that you know you would expect it to be mentioned, right? Even if the mention was some people think it's this but the science doesn't quite support it, you'd think it'd be mentioned. Yeah. Vaping, not mentioned. But that would be another example of chemicals getting into you. How about pharmaceuticals in general? I saw your comment earlier. Yeah, pharmaceuticals in general.

Now the vaccinations are largely, listen, how do I say this best? The vaccinations happened well after the trend. So the trend was really solidly in place way before the vaccinations. Now if the vaccinations made it worse, I don't think the data could tell you one way or the other at this point. But maybe. I mean, who knows?

What else? I want to see how far I can get before the most obvious answer appears to you. There's a way more obvious answer and it's just hilarious that nobody thinks of it because there's like a magic trick going on. The magic trick is diverting you. And I don't mean to be unkind in the following thing I'm going to say. I'm going to stick to what I think is just factual. I'm not trying to make fun of anybody, right?

They mentioned obese men. So men are getting fatter. Do you think it makes any difference that the women are getting fatter too? Because nobody doubts that, right? It's not just men getting fatter. The women are getting fatter too. And let me ask you this. I hate to be brutal. Do you think men are going to have as much of a testosterone response to a less attractive woman? Oh well, I don't know. I'm no scientist. But I'm guessing.

Did you know that when a man gets married his testosterone drops? How many of you knew that? When you get married your testosterone just drops. Why? It's because presumably your attraction to the woman you married, and just the normal reasons of life, would decrease. So you get married to the one person who's going to become less attractive over time, not for any fault of their own. It could be just age and familiarity and all that stuff.

So does anybody believe that men's testosterone is unrelated to female stimulation? Am I too far into the non-scientific or am I still scientifically valid? That's well understood, right? That if you put a man around attractive women, attractive to him, again we won't make a judgment call, right? So we're not doing any fat shaming. Everybody clear on that? This is not fat shaming. This is just talking about science, right? And weight is a big part. So why is that left out? Like how can you leave that out?

Now let me tell you something I noticed since I've recently transitioned. No, not that way, not that way. From being married to not married. I can feel the testosterone difference. I can feel it. And I said the other day that I haven't had a bad day in two months and now I know what it is. My voice is deeper. My muscle gain was instant. My overall feeling of well-being, like yesterday I was just standing there feeling good. I was literally just standing there in my kitchen and I thought, my God, I feel good. Just all over. And it took me a while to figure out what it was.

Now I'd been doing everything right from exercise to sleep to diet and everything. So I've been getting everything right health-wise. But I could actually feel the testosterone being higher. I mean I don't have any doubt that it is higher. It just feels higher. Like my whole attitude of life, the way I see everything. And the other way that you can feel it is I'm afraid of almost nothing. Is there any men here who can back me up on this? Do you ever have the feeling that you can tell your testosterone is high? That might be just my impression because I feel like I can tell.

It's because when you walk into a room you either own it or you're part of it. That's the difference. When your testosterone is high and you walk into a room you own the room. You just own it. You know it. You act like it. And everybody else can tell too. Now that parses in my head. I feel like other people can tell. But when I walk into a room and my chemistry is right I just own the room. And the room is helpless. Like that's the way it feels, right? That's just the impression. And other men are saying the same thing, right? Yeah.

And the scariest part is that you lose fear. Because fear is actually pretty useful, right? Keeps you out of trouble. And sometimes when my testosterone feels high I feel that I'm losing too much fear and then I start to be concerned but not afraid. Concerned that I'm not afraid enough. That I'm in dangerous territory. It's a very male thing. I don't think women could quite relate to it. Who knows? Some of you in my head.

All right, how about some other things? How about just the way men are treated in society. The value of a man at least in terms of society's average opinion is way down. So men are losing. They're losing at life. When you're losing at life your testosterone goes lower. And men are losing at life because there are too many of them and they're not getting dates and they're not succeeding in their careers.

All right, somebody brought up earlier how about masturbation. Without checking, does it lower a man's testosterone? Masturbation, yes or no? Seems obvious, right? The most obvious thing is that masturbation would lower your testosterone. Except that you're wrong. Google it. I wasn't sure. I just Googled it a minute ago. According to Google's top answer, you know where they sort of summarize the answers, no difference. No difference at all. Like there's no statistical difference. Do you believe that?

You can definitely feel that it lowers your energy and maybe it feels like it lowers it at some point in the process. But I would say I don't feel that it lowers it overall. So I would say that sex or orgasms in general don't lower your testosterone except maybe some short-term thing. It may be temporary, right?

So anyway this is a scientific bunk. New York Times magazine was writing a story about TikTok which suggests that the illegitimate press is finally figured out that they better get on the right side of the TikTok thing because there's basically nobody on the other side. Literally nobody. Unless they're actually just bought off.

So here's what they say. 47 percent of likely U.S. voters believe that Biden has made the country worse. I got my titles mixed up. So this is Rasmussen. Rasmussen said 47 percent of the voters think Biden has made things worse. That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about TikTok.

So here's how the New York Times magazine talks about TikTok. They had a really good quote there that I apparently wrote over with another quote so you won't hear that. But here is the general point of it. The general point of it is the New York Times is trying to find a way to describe TikTok as not the obvious worst thing in the world and needs to be removed immediately.

So listen to one of the ways that they excuse the Biden administration. The Biden administration has been negotiating with ByteDance for a year about how to handle the TikTok situation. Now is that the way you would have characterized it? Would you characterize a year has gone by with nothing happening? Well there's a major security concern and no argument on the other side.

See, the no argument on the other side part is really important. Why would it take a year to negotiate something when there's nothing to negotiate? There's nothing to negotiate. You just say we ban you and then they're not in the app stores and it's over. There's nothing to negotiate. The fact that the New York Times has to give cover to Biden and say they're negotiating for a year, there's no negotiating going on. Who thinks that's real? Does anybody think they're actually negotiating for a year? Of course not. That's the most ridiculous lie I've ever seen. Well maybe not the most ridiculous.

So yeah, we have some real questions there. And we have to assume that the government is corrupt because the TikTok thing, like I say, it doesn't have an argument on the other side. And when you see that we see them not able to act when there's no argument, that's got to be corruption, right? Because even incompetence doesn't explain it because it's just an executive order. Like it would be the easiest thing you could ever do. Like you don't even have to do work. Biden could just say write an executive order, ban TikTok. I'm the head of the mil