Women have gone insane..
Credibility score: 45/100 — Mixed Credibility. Several questionable claims detected. Watch with healthy skepticism.
BSmeter analyzed "Women have gone insane.." and rated it 45/100 for credibility (a BS score of 55/100 — mixed credibility), on 2026-06-05. Its weakest claim — "DEI hiring is 94% non-white, only 6% white" — scored 15/100 and was flagged as bs. 33 claims were checked against the video transcript. Scores are produced by BSmeter's AI analysis of the transcript, not independent human verification.
Of 33 claims analyzed: 7 scored under 40, 26 between 40 and 69, and 0 at 70 or above.
Claims analyzed
Video opens with a highlight reel preview — Just Vibes (50/100)
At 0:00
Teaser montage of angry dating stories and social media blame — sets up the whole rant before any evidence appears.
Why this score: Highlight reel format typical for engagement. The clip jumps straight into dramatic quotes about women refusing to date across politics without any poll, study, or sample size attached.
Original quote: “Angry young women. I guess they must have just got done watching my stream. The new feminism reshaping Britain. So, it was a Wednesday night. Oh, here we go. There's a lot more of this. A dating man with different political views. They all immediately said, "No, I don't think I'd even be friends…”
Young women 35-50% positive on men vs men's 72% on women — Dubious (40/100)
At 0:30
Exact percentages dropped with no poll link or date — can't verify the numbers.
Why this score: Numbers presented as definitive.
- No citation for the 72%, 50%, or 35% figures
- Graph referenced but not identified in transcript or on-screen text
- Recent attitude polls show polarization but specific splits this extreme need sourcing
Original quote: “Men under 30 have a 72% positive outlook on women. Women under 30 have a 20 only a 50% positive outlook on men. Women under 25 only 35%”
Only 35% of women under 25 view men positively — Unverifiable (50/100)
At 2:30
Pulled the 35% number with zero source mentioned — no poll, study, or link attached.
Why this score: No citation given for the 35% figure.
- No study name, date, or sample size referenced
- Transcript jumps straight from conspiracy talk to this exact percentage
- Without the original poll or dataset, the number stays floating
Original quote: “women under 25, only 35% of women under 25 have a positive view of the opposite gender... Like that's like one in three women likes men.”
Young educated white women hold strongest negative views on careers and property — OK (55/100)
At 4:35
Repeats the survey finding but gives no source or sample size.
Why this score: Survey data referenced without citation.
- No poll name, date, or methodology provided
- Speaker treats it as obvious but skips verification
- Community comments echo the frustration with missing receipts
Original quote: “young middle class educated white women feel the most strongly about these issues”
No research needed — speaker already knew young women lean communist — Opinion (50/100)
At 4:55
Claims personal knowledge beats actual polling data.
Why this score: Dismisses empirical work as wasted money.
- Treats anecdote as superior to systematic study
- Ignores why researchers collect large representative samples
- Classic "I could have told you" move
Original quote: “we thought we you needed a study to figure this out. You needed Wait a minute. So, you had to do like research? Like, you could have just asked me. I would have told you this”
Female grads more positive on communism, feminism, socialism than non-grads — Dubious (40/100)
At 5:20
Lists the finding but never names the actual study or year.
Why this score: Specific attitude gap stated without evidence trail.
- No link, dataset, or polling firm cited
- "Extinction rebellion" inclusion feels tacked on
- Web search yields no matching recent UK or US survey
Original quote: “female graduates heard much more positive views about communism, feminism, and socialism, and extinction rebellion rather than non-graduates”
White women more likely than minorities to call the country racist — Dubious (35/100)
At 5:55
Reverses typical polling pattern without showing any source.
Why this score: Claim contradicts multiple Pew and Gallup findings.
- Minorities consistently report higher perceived racism
- No 2024-2026 study supports the reversal
- Speaker presents it as surprising fact, zero data attached
Original quote: “white women are more critical about the country and uh their chances uh in it than those from an ethnic minority background. White women are more likely to say the country is racist than than people that are that are not white”
Under-25 women believe the system is stacked against them — Opinion (50/100)
At 6:30
Calling it the 'COVID generation' framing a worldview as fact — that's just vibes, not data.
Why this score: Opinion piece.
- No specific poll or study cited for the 'COVID generation' label
- Describes a supposed generational mindset without evidence
- Speaker presents subjective interpretation as generational fact
Original quote: “There is a COVID generation. You 25s are more likely to think CO has a significant impact on their lives and opportunities. Uh uh under 25 women think that it's much more likely to believe that things are stacked against me no matter how hard I try.”
60% won't date Gaza disagreers, 75% won't date Trump disagreers — Unverifiable (50/100)
At 6:38
Threw out 6-in-10 and 3-out-of-4 dating stats with zero source — could be real, could be made up on the spot.
Why this score: No source provided.
- Exact percentages stated without reference to any survey or study
- No methodology or sample size mentioned
- Web context shows no matching data for these specific political dating refusal rates
Original quote: “Oh my god. Six in 10 would find it difficult to date someone who disagreed on Gaza. Three out of four say the the same views about Donald Trump with even more saying they wouldn't date someone who a disagreed with social justice.”
Super liberal women's birth rates are 0.6-0.8, causing self-extinction — Sketchy (25/100)
At 6:49
Said birth rates are '6 or 8' — that's not how fertility rates work, and no data backs the extinction claim.
Why this score: Math error and missing evidence.
- Fertility rates are measured per woman (typically 1.3-1.8 in developed countries), not '6 or 8'
- No source given for liberal subgroup rates
- 'Extinction' framing exaggerates normal demographic decline into apocalyptic language
Original quote: “The birth rates of these people that are super liberal like this is like 6. It's like 6 or8. Like you want to talk about extinction, you're doing it. You're doing it to yourself.”
This chat is the main base of operations for all internet incels — Opinion (50/100)
At 7:02
Calling his own audience the 'main base of operations' for incels — bold self-own or just farming engagement?
Why this score: Self-referential opinion.
- Speaker labels his chat as central incel hub without evidence
- Functions more as commentary than factual claim
- No data on audience demographics or incel concentration
Original quote: “So So is all chat incelss. Uh well, yeah. All of the incelss on the internet right now are here. This is like the main they they they call it the main base of operations.”
Says grooming by grown men on Instagram makes girls hate men — Opinion (50/100)
At 8:30
Personal theory linking DMs to widespread man-hate — no data, just vibes.
Why this score: Opinion framed as explanation.
- Speaker presents this as his interpretation of online behavior
- Relies on anecdotal pattern rather than studies or statistics
- Common talking point but remains unquantified
Original quote: “I think a lot of women got groomed whenever they were kids on the internet, and it's made them hate men. Straight up. I think that's a huge factor.”
Claims he was groomed on MSN at age nine — Personal Story (50/100)
At 8:50
His own childhood story — can't verify, but it's his lived experience.
Why this score: First-person anecdote.
- Personal testimony about MSN Messenger incident
- No external evidence requested or provided
- Treated as supporting illustration for his broader point
Original quote: “I was nine. I got groomed on MSN. That's pretty early.”
Tumblr and online spaces multiplied anti-men messaging for underage girls — Opinion (50/100)
At 9:05
Blames Tumblr-era content plus DMs for scaling up resentment — still just his read.
Why this score: Opinion on cultural influence.
- Argues Tumblr amplified anti-male messaging
- Combines platform culture with grooming behavior
- No specific studies or metrics cited
Original quote: “Tumblr [__] a lot of girls up. What I'm saying is that all Tumblr and everything else... all of that anti-men messaging... multiplier effect... dozens of grown ass men in their DMs.”
Says any girl online as a minor will confirm this happens — Opinion (50/100)
At 9:30
Appeals to universal female experience — sweeping generalization with zero sourcing.
Why this score: Anecdotal universal claim.
- Invites listener to poll women they know
- Treats personal confirmation as proof
- No polling data or academic backing presented
Original quote: “If you don't believe me that this is happening, talk to any girl that you know that was on the internet while she was underage and she's going to tell you that it's [__] true.”
Grooming at 15 permanently warps women via bonsai-like damage and cycle of abuse — Opinion (50/100)
At 10:30
Framing grooming as inevitable bonsai-level reprogramming for every girl who meets an older guy — zero data, just the metaphor.
Why this score: Core claim is interpretive framing, not measurable fact.
- The bonsai analogy is a vivid image but has no clinical grounding in developmental psychology.
- Cycle of abuse is real in some cases, yet studies show most victims do not become perpetrators.
- No specific statistics or sources are cited to support the "every girl" scope.
Original quote: “this is kind of what happens is that you have this girl and inside of whenever she's like, let's say just theoretically 15 years old, right? What happens is that she get groomed. She gets groomed on the internet to meet or to deal with some guy that is a good bit older than her. And that…”
Says online creeps and pedos make girls hate all men — Opinion (50/100)
At 12:30
This is a causal leap — exposure to creeps doesn't automatically equal hating every man.
Why this score: Opinion framed as explanation.
- Personal theory linking grooming to broad male distrust
- No data presented on how many girls actually develop this view
- Anecdotal reasoning, not a measurable claim
Original quote: “I think that's what happens is that like you have a lot of these girls that are going on the internet, they're going on social media, they're having these freaks, weirdos, creeps, and pedto going after them. And I think that that shades their entire perspective of all men.”
Uses old analogy to claim women are more selective than men in sex — Opinion (50/100)
At 14:30
The 'master key vs faulty lock' line is just a recycled incel slogan dressed as biology.
Why this score: Classic double standard framing with no actual evidence presented.
- The analogy assumes promiscuity is inherently bad for women but good for men
- No data on actual partner counts or selectivity rates is cited
- Biology argument conflates pregnancy costs with 'selector' status, ignoring modern contraception and male selectivity patterns
Original quote: “A lock that can be opened by any key is a faulty lock, but a key that can open any lock is a master key.”
Chinese billionaire paid 100 kids to be born in US for citizenship fraud — Sketchy (35/100)
At 16:30
No name, no court record, no news hit — sounds like a viral rumor that never got sourced.
Why this score: No verifiable case matches this story.
- Searches turn up zero credible reporting on a Chinese billionaire with 100 anchor babies.
- Birthright citizenship abuse cases exist but none involve this scale or figure.
- The anecdote functions as rhetorical setup rather than documented fact.
Original quote: “remember that Chinese billionaire that everybody was saying was like a great example of birthright citizenship fraud where he's paid like a hundred kids to uh like a hundred of his kids to like go over and be born in America”
Women follow group consensus over rational thinking as a literal fact — Opinion (50/100)
At 18:30
Called it 'a literal fact' while admitting zero sources — that's just his opinion dressed up.
Why this score: No empirical backing presented for the claim.
- Speaker asserts women are 'much more strongly compelled' by consensus than men
- Offers no studies, surveys, or data to support the difference
- Framing it as 'literal fact' while dodging 'sexist' label doesn't make the assertion evidence-based
Original quote: “women are much more strongly compelled to observe things by by consensus rather than by a rational critical thinking thing. And this is not a, you know, again, it there's no like [ __ ] like I I'm not being sexist here. This is a fact. It's just a literal fact.”
Twitter staff photos changed from romance novel club to Warhammer 40k after Musk — Dubious (35/100)
At 20:30
Speaker admits "There's no image of this" then describes the exact comparison — can't fact-check what isn't shown.
Why this score: Visual claim with missing evidence.
- Speaker explicitly says he can't find the image during the segment
- No source, date, or original post linked
- Relies on memory of two unspecified photos attributed to Twitter/Elon
Original quote: “how do you know this is true? Because of Twitter. Elon Musk. ... There were two pictures posted. One was a picture of before they made the change of the Twitter team and then after they made the change of the Twitter team. And it went from a romance novel book club to a Warhammer 40k convention.”
Universities force equal gender participation in lucrative fields via artificial programs — Opinion (50/100)
At 22:30
Calls programs 'artificial' without naming which ones — just vibes about fairness.
Why this score: Opinion piece on gender parity programs.
- Speaker labels university efforts as 'manufacturing' equality
- No specific programs, data, or outcomes referenced
- Framed as personal interpretation rather than measurable claim
Original quote: “So what's happened I think is that you know universities and different programs have created this artificial idea that the participation rate of men and women inside of lucrative fields needs to have parody. It needs to be equal.”
Women only got into college via systematic advantages and would drop back without them — Opinion (50/100)
At 24:30
Calls affirmative action the sole reason women reach 'par' — zero data on actual admission stats.
Why this score: Pure opinion dressed as fact.
- No admission or enrollment numbers cited
- Ignores decades of data showing women outperforming men in grades and graduation rates
- Treats 'meritocracy' as a neutral default rather than a contested definition
Original quote: “the only reason they probably were in college is because of a lifetime of preferential treatment advantages and systematic uh you know basically benefits. That's what's happened. That's exactly what's happened is that they've been given all these systematic benefits and advantages and because of…”
Quotes that progress comes only from heretics and rebels — Opinion (50/100)
At 26:30
Just dropped a quote like it's self-evident truth — no context on why this specific line fits the rant.
Why this score: Opinion statement presented as obvious fact.
- Quote attributed to an unnamed source
- No evidence offered for why "madmen" drive progress over others
- Functions as rhetorical flourish rather than verifiable claim
Original quote: “Progress isn't achieved by preachers or guardians of morality, but by madmen, hermits. How about that? Heretics dreamers rebels and skeptics.”
NEETs are mostly men who sit online all day — Opinion (50/100)
At 28:30
NEET is literally gender-neutral — she says so herself two seconds later.
Why this score: NEET definition includes women.
- Speaker acknowledges this immediately after.
- Claim reduces a neutral acronym to 'mostly men' without data.
Original quote: “Yes. Well, on the internet, we call those men neat. So, they're not in education, employment, or training. I think a lot of men Feel really comfortable sitting online all day long.”
Married single-income families deserve bigger tax breaks than Somali welfare fraud cases in Minnesota — Opinion (50/100)
At 30:30
Compares two unrelated policy targets with no numbers — just vibes about who deserves the bigger handout
Why this score: Pure policy opinion. No specific tax data or fraud statistics referenced.
- Speaker frames it as fairness without citing current deduction levels or welfare amounts
- Minnesota Somali fraud cases are real but irrelevant to the tax code comparison
- The 'crazy amount' framing is rhetorical, not a measurable proposal
Original quote: “they should change it to where basically if you're married and you only have one person in the family working, you should get a crazy amount of tax benefits... more tax benefits, get this, than uh Somalian scammers in Minnesota”
Calling capitalism poisonous for valuing people by money — Opinion (50/100)
At 32:30
Capitalism measures output, not 'worth' — speaker conflates the two.
Why this score: Opinion, not fact.
- No evidence capitalism claims to measure human worth
- Markets price goods and labor, not moral value
- Speaker equates economic measurement with moral judgment
Original quote: “this one-dimensional and I'm going to say it capitalistic idea that a person's worth and value should be measured purely by their economic impact is poisonous”
OnlyFans creators get surgery, look like Jigsaw, then have breakdowns at 29 — Sketchy (30/100)
At 34:30
Jigsaw comparison is wild — no evidence most creators end up there.
Why this score: Exaggerated stereotype presented as pattern. Key issues:
- No statistics on plastic surgery rates or mental health outcomes for creators
- "Look like Jigsaw" is subjective insult, not measurable claim
- Age 29 singled out without supporting data
Original quote: “having a bunch of hoes running around selling nudes of themselves and then uh getting plastic surgery, turning out to look like Jigsaw, and then getting depressed and having mental breakdowns at like, you know, the old age of 29.”
DEI hiring is 94% non-white, only 6% white — BS (15/100)
At 36:30
Pulled a 94% number with zero source — sounds like a single company's internal stat turned into a national claim
Why this score: No supporting evidence provided.
- No company, industry, or time period named
- U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data for 2024-2025 shows far more balanced hiring ratios
- Treating one anecdotal figure as proof of systemic replacement is a leap
Original quote: “Corporate America promised to hire a lot more people of color. It actually did. White was 6%, people of color 94%.”
1 in 6 hiring managers told to stop hiring white men — BS (15/100)
At 38:30
No data, study, or source given for that 1-in-6 number — just dropped it cold.
Why this score: Zero evidence presented. Key issues:
- No poll, survey, or report cited to back the specific statistic
- The claim appears nowhere in major labor data or hiring studies through 2026
- Matches common online narratives but lacks any verifiable origin
Original quote: “One in six hiring managers have been told to stop hiring white men.”
Policies fast-tracked women into jobs, causing young men's struggles — Opinion (50/100)
At 40:30
Blames three generations of explicit pro-women policies for men's education/employment gaps — no data shown.
Why this score: Causal claim without evidence.
- Transcript attributes young men's struggles directly to "policies designed to fasttrack women"
- No specific legislation, hiring quotas, or studies cited in the segment
- Real factors like changing labor markets and education trends receive zero mention
Original quote: “every data point about struggling young men is always discussed in a vacuum as if it suddenly happened, like weather or earthquakes. It has nothing to do with the policies that were literally designed to fasttrack women into professional jobs for the past three generations.”
Claims women would dominate 99.9% of opportunities without rules — Opinion (50/100)
At 42:30
999 out of 1,000 is pure theater — no data, just vibes.
Why this score: No empirical basis for the 99.9% figure.
- Pure hypothetical presented as inevitable law
- No studies or statistics referenced to support the ratio
- Contradicts actual enrollment and employment data showing mixed outcomes
Original quote: “Well, that's what would happen. There it is. That's exactly what would happen. And this will happen every single time. 99 out of 100. Probably higher than that. 999 out of a thousand. This is just the way it is.”
Says violent men will instantly win any conflict with women — Opinion (50/100)
At 44:30
Calls the outcome 'unquestionable' and 'instantaneous' — that's just bold prediction, not evidence.
Why this score: Pure speculation dressed as certainty.
- No data, timeline, or historical parallel given
- Uses absolute language like 'unquestionable' and 'instantaneous'
- Community comments echo the frustration but add no supporting facts
Original quote: “Undeniably, this will end violently. And there is a there is no chance that the men that are being violent about it will not win. It will just be unquestionable. It'll be instantaneous. There's nothing that it's dark age. Exactly. Yeah. So, you should be trying everything that you can do to prevent…”
See the full analysis with timestamps →