Diabolical Lies

Have you heard? The men of America are in the midst of an existential crisis. A battle for good, evil, and the future of humanity. Who will emerge out of the darkness to lead the masses to freedom? Enter, stage left: one Scott Galloway. Enter, stage right: two extremely hot and horny hockey players. WHICH OF THESE HEROES WILL SLAY GLORIA STEINHEM RESTORE GLOBAL DIGNITY TO THE MEN?Today, we find out. A note from Caro before we begin: If the details within this episode cause your brain to overheat, I recommend pausing and listening to one of two auditory meditations: * any live version of Praying by Kesha* the West End Girl album from start to finish Worked like a charm for me!Below, you’ll find a summary of the three major debates we wish to have with Galloway, as well as an additional list of resources to pad your intellectual toolkit for your own interior monologue debates, followed by some love for Heated Rivalry to balm your restless soul. Scott Galloway vs. Diabolical Lies, a Debate in Three Parts1.) On educational biases against men The argument made by Scott Galloway: The crisis of modern masculinity begins in the schoolroom, with young boys falling rapidly behind in the educational system by the time they reach kindergarten. This is largely due to developmental differences and educational biases which put young girls at an advantage, one that carries on through to college and higher ed, where they now have majority representation. TL;DR: Little girls have way better brains and the school system is totally set up for them to win, which is why they’re fully creaming little boys all around the world, and that is bad.The rebuttal, from Diabolical Lies: It’s true that certain studies have shown broad neurological differences between the sexes during adolescence, but these differences do not constitute a monolith. Plenty of other studies have flat-out disputed the premise of neurological differences altogether, alternatively suggesting that the difference in behavior between young boys and girls in classrooms is culturally driven. And anyways, given how men have been known to cut out the frontal cortex of ladies who yap too much, I think we’re licensed to say: Stay the fuck away from our brains regardless, you weirdos! It also seems like an example of profound biological cherry-picking to claim that women have an indisputable biological advantage to young boys during the educational period, when the onset of menstruation during this exact same time period puts women at a proven massive deficit on a global level. An estimated one in five girls globally and one in four in the US end up missing class or dropping out of school altogether because they cannot afford menstrual products. Is that a crisis? How about the fact that unexpected pregnancy is the number one reason young women drop out of school altogether, a stat that translates to millions of educational dropouts globally each year? How about that? Is that a crisis? Additionally, while it’s true that young girls do score higher in class on average, and that they do attend higher education in greater numbers, there’s no evidence that this is due to an educational bias. On the contrary, there is strong evidence to suggest that girls score higher grades in class and go on to college and graduate school in high numbers because they have to. Evidence shows that women need to have at least one more degree than men to achieve pay parity across a number of fields; even then, the pay gap is still stark. And beyond that, it’s worth asking a few questions: are young men no longer going to college because the system discriminates against them, or are they no longer going to college because college is now coded as feminine, and therefore perceived as undesirable? And if we’re going to worry about educational biases, is gender truly the lens we should be examining the problem through, or are race and class far more useful for exploring discrimination in educational outcomes?TL;DR: idk, read a book or somethingmental health breakI HOPE UR FUCKIN PRAYING SCOTT2.) On men being specifically and exclusively screwed in this current economy The argument made by Scott Galloway: The current economy increasingly punishes the many in favor of elevating the few. In recent decades, the cost of housing, education, and healthcare have skyrocketed, and wages haven’t even remotely kept up with inflation. For the first time in American history, younger generations no longer feel confident they will achieve a higher standard of living than their parents… and this dire economic situation is one that disproportionately impacts men. TL;DR: Men care more than women about manly things like living in homes because rahm emanuel said soThe rebuttal from Diabolical Lies: Contrary to popular belief, women are also people, and therefore impacted by broad socioeconomic issues, not the least of which include the affordability and housing crisis in America. This is to say nothing of the childcare crisis. In fact, according to a recent University of Kansas analysis of Bureau of Labor Statistics data, more than 400,000 women left the workforce in the first half of 2025, marking the steepest decline in over 40 years for mothers of young children. The main reason why these women left the workforce? They wanted to be good Christian wives and mothers, of course! Neat little fun fact for you: When something has to give, societally speaking, it is always the woman who gives it.TL;DR: Women also need homes and groceries and money for childcare. Radical concept, I know!mental health break 3.) On men needing women to serve as the “guardrails” of culture The argument made by Scott Galloway: In order to be functioning, contributing members of society, men need a sense of purpose in their lives. They need to feel victorious. And since world war is no longer a reliable failsafe for men feeling purpose, the goal of securing a wife and mother for your children is the best motivator for men to do the stuff they need to do, like stay in school and get a good job. Women like educated men with good jobs! That’s why people got married more in the 1950s: because women found men in uniforms attractive, and because those men in uniforms knew how to behave like gracious, respectful suitors worthy of female affection. That’s what we need to get back to: a 1950s-style of engagement. TL;DR: Women are, as we have discussed in a recent episode, the morality police for society. Their job is to alternately be the carrot and/or the stick to lure or prod men forward as good citizens of society, and that is…a really healthy perspective to have on how men and women should operate! For sure! No downsides detected here!The rebuttal from Diabolical Lies: Ha ha, okay, so just to be clear here :) women did not enter into marriage and motherhood in the 1950s because the men were hotter and nicer back then :) they entered into marriage because they had very few legal rights of their own :) they were property, Scott :) do you know what property is? :) the first no-fault divorce law was passed in 1969 in California :) women were not allowed to access credit or bank loans free of male cosigners until 1974 :) there was no such thing as paid maternity leave until 1993 :) are you picking up what I’m putting down here :) did I stutter :) we had no rights :) and then we got some rights :) and now you’re very politely trying to take our rights :) get the fuck away from our rights, Scott :) TL;DR: Scott Galloway I will drive to your house and lobotomize you myself and you can let me know how much you like a 1950s-style approach to dealing with our problems In conclusion: We win the debate and are just flatly correct but Galloway will still continue to out-earn, out-panel, and out-scream us for the rest of his days, a truly delicious irony for a man who has made a career whining about men falling behindMore Galloway-related stats to peruse at your leisureIt might be true that there are differences in brain development between the sexes……but it also might not be!It’s also been a proven fact for decade that race and class discrimination are far more impactful variables in the educational bias conversation than gender. Consider this NYT summary of a 2025 study on which kids are admitted to the best colleges, and why: “For applicants with the same SAT or ACT score, children from families in the top 1 percent were 34 percent more likely to be admitted than the average applicant, and those from the top 0.1 percent were more than twice as likely to get in.”Moving past education to the workforce: boy, there also sure is a lot of evidence that (in spite of the assuredly profound systemic biases put in place against them) white men still manage to make way more money, serve in more executive positions, occupy the majority of seats in Congress, have larger net worths at the end of their careers, and found more companies!oh also the gender wage gap has been at a virtual standstill for about two decades now, with women earning 85 cents on the dollar to men Fear not tho, Richard Reeves wants you to consider how nuanced the gender gap really is in both directions, because again, if you are not listening, the boys are struggling in school and ladies live a bit longer and that is the most important thingAs an aside you should listen to this IBCK podcast episode on Reeves’ book, Of Boys & Men, where Peter and Michael spend time deconstructing this whole idea of little boys and girls and their brains and their kindergarten teachers, etc. It’s worth noting that affordability crises often lead to the worsening of gender and racial wage gaps. Just one of the many takeaways from this study that we wish Galloway would read: “Both women’s and men’s typical earnings increased in 2023, but women’s increased less than men’s. Adjusted for inflation, the earnings of a typical full-time year-round working woman increased by 1.5 percent in 2023, compared to a 3.0 percent annual increase for a typical man.” As for deaths of despair: It’s true that men make up the majority of these deaths. In fact, the highest suicide rate among any demographic group in America is men 75 years or older—but even this stat contains more nuance than Galloway is willing to consider. First: Young women actually attempt suicide more often than young men. Second: One of the primary theories for why older women commit suicide less than men is because they are the primary caretakers for children and the elderly. Oh, also, this is the date psychology site and YouTube channel I was talking about from which Galloway cribbed the “statistic” he repeats on every daytime television news program. Very legit, very cool!….now some Heated Rivalry content to soothe your frayed nervous system after learning about the three Ps “Popularity of Heated Rivalry has Surprised Even Television Executives,” by John Koblin for The New York Times“The Delicious Anticipation — and Yes, Release — of Heated Rivalry,” by Naomi Fry for The New Yorker“Heated Rivalry Is Gay Culture’s Next Frontier,” by Jim Downs for The New York TimesThis YouTube Q&A with Connor Storrie, Hudson Williams, and Jacob TierneyThe Empty Netters Podcast and the What Chaos PodcastThanks for coming, folks, good luck sleeping at night after so much talk about menThe disgusting brothers circle jerk of loveThe TikTok video primal scream for straight women everywhere“Why Heated Rivalry’s Relationship of Equals Is Revolutionary,” by psychotherapist Leor Ram for Out MagazineThis gotcha journalism attack piece by Jessica Winter for The New Yorker: “What Did Men Do to Deserve This?” This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.diabolicalliespod.com/subscribe

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.diabolicalliespod.comEarlier this month, the Office of the Texas Governor Greg Abbott quietly released a statement that “emphasized the importance of TPUSA Club America chapter enrollment and involvement on high school campuses across the state,” in effect signaling their intent to support after-school programs for right-wing extremism in Texas public schools.This would appear to be your average, garden-variety depressing update relevant only to those living where the Stars At Night Are Big And Bright, except for the fact that Texas has long been a laboratory for approximately half a dozen Christian Nationalists, high from huffing the fumes wafting off their barrels of oil money, to speed-run insane shit that ends up in documents like Project 2025. So what can we learn from studying their playbook and understanding the mechanics of their holy war as ground zero for Christian Nationalism? Diabolical Lies investigates.

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.diabolicalliespod.comSurprise! Caro & Katie react in real time to the programming we all should’ve seen coming: “CBS News Presents: A Town Hall with Erika Kirk.”

Coming at you with our first ever bonus conversation for the public, in which we discuss the ongoing Starbucks Workers United strike taking place at hundreds of locations (and growing) all over the country right now. It’s also a conversation in which we offer a humble request of you this holiday season: Don’t go to Starbucks right now, if you can manage it.If, for whatever reason, you do need to go to Starbucks right now, fine. This is not a game of purity tests! It’s a game of numbers. As such, consider cutting your usual order or frequency of visits in half. Get your kid the cake pop, but cut out your regular cappuccino, or take the venti to a tall, etc. Every dollar you withhold from this corporation during a sustained labor strike is going to hit them that much harder, and the potential ripple effect of a combined consumer and labor boycott on one of the largest food & beverage corporations in America is hard to overstate.Other references & citations* As of Monday, 3,800 baristas across 130 cities are holding the line* Workers in 10 other countries (!) began protesting in support* If you’re a Starbucks barista thinking about organizing your store, you can reach out here* Starbucks Workers United national strike fund This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.diabolicalliespod.com/subscribe

First things first: Merch is here! Get it now before it’s gone. We’re so proud of this limited edition drop of deeply diabolical merchandise. Items will ship in mid-January, and 33% of all net profits will go to Feeding America, a non-profit nationwide network of more than 200 food banks that feed more than 46 million people through food pantries, soup kitchens, shelters, and other community-based agencies.If you’re a paid subscriber, you can access two exclusive pieces of DL swag by using your special password, which can be found in our merchandise announcement, or in the episode preceding this one in your audio feed. I, Caro, usually to try to be witty for show notes but frankly there are too many resources to share for this episode so I’m going to organize them by the three major topics covered in this conversation and then leave it there, ya girl has been poring through met gala archives for days and she’s TIRED.on the body positivity movement, aka that time period where we were all briefly “liberated” by the charitable and fierce activist work of, uh, corporate capture First, you should read anything that Virginia Sole-Smith or Aubrey Gordon write on the topic (and here’s the column we quote from Gordon about being “body positive but”)Now, onto the links.The Guardian op-ed on the “end of body positivity” by fat columnist and writer Rose StokesSome useful historical information on the history of fat activism (generally speaking, the national association to advance fat acceptance (naafa) is a great org)Vogue’s 2025 inclusivity report which lamented our drop in body positivity from, checks notes, 2% percent of models to 1.8% of modelsSome helpful context for the real-world weight loss of glp-1 vs clinical trialssome evidence for just how often we undergo a culture-wide chicken little moment of running around screaming that “ultra thin body types” are “suddenly back in vogue” and “it’s a dangerous new trend”* we were worrying about it in 2023* …and also in 2022* …and also in 2019* oh and by the way, when we *did* have fat characters on the screen, we basically mocked the characters mercilessly for being fat, yay for body positivity!* anyways yeah we were also talking about this in 2016* and 2012* and 2007You get the point. Oh also here’s an op-ed about michelle obama’s crusade against obesity that might complicate the narrative around conservatism equaling skinny cultureon the moral panic around eating disorders, featuring a series of fun facts caro learned on her intellectual rumspringa which thoroughly blew her mindsome recent studies on the potential inheritability of eating disorderssome background information on how men and fat people have been historically excluded from eating disorder research and recovery avenuesa historical explainer of anorexia (and here’s where I found the William Gull excerpt)info on the high comorbidity between anorexia and obsessive-compulsive disordera deep dive on the “biopsychosocial” of it all in relation to eating disordersand then a quick side door into the tressie-katie convo that truly rocked our worlds as well as this incredible comment we received on our liv schmidt/skinnytok ep, in its entirety:casual!on the magical third door/leg stool: Rayne Fisher-Quann’s theory of being “womaned”Here’s the full piece Fisher-Quann wrote for i-D MagazineAnd the book I reference, Damned Whores & God’s Police, by Anne SummersHere’s the JLaw NYT interview, as well as the Kristen Stewart NYT interviewThat’s it, thanks for coming to the show, there will be no encore, etc etc etc- This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.diabolicalliespod.com/subscribe