Do you know the bigger problem in this video?
It's not that the stupid guy talked down on a fellow man.
The bigger problem is that almost every girl has been with a guy like the stupid guy. This is the dominant archetypes, actually: dumb, cowardly, low-self-esteem bros whose self-worth revolves around women's validation.
Now, if the average girl has been with one or two of these kinds of men, it means that her perception of men is largely an aftermath of her experiences with bros of this nature and is therefore flawed.
And it doesn't end there.
Women know, for sure, that pandering is a weak-bro move. And women naturally never submit to a weak masculine frame.
But where their major experience of masculinity is with this type of man, they automatically assume that such is natural and typical.
And so, if the men they have been with, by their frame and dispositions, do not deserve submission, then other men do not deserve submission either.
This is largely why most modern women frown at the idea of submission.
They have been with men who do not trigger in them a sense of submission.
Because submission does not come naturally. And it is stupid to assume so.
Submission is a response to a masculine frame that exudes self-worth, value, superiority in reasoning, and emotional control.
Most modern men do not have these things.
And most modern women assume this is typical of men in general, hence the criminalisation of submission as a concept by modern women.
But I have said enough.
Good luck. Or, congratulations.