Rachel Wilson (Podcast)

Kait sits down with Rachel Wilson, author of Occult Feminism and the woman who told Joe Rogan's 1.75 million viewers that feminism was never a grassroots movement. The episode is an autopsy performed by two women: Rachel brings the historical receipts, Kait brings the psychological data, and the body on the table is feminism.

Same frame as the Rollo episode: an investigation, not a debate. Kait's audience is mostly men and already sympathetic to the thesis, so nobody wants to watch two women argue. They want to watch two women calmly document the damage. Kait plays the examiner who makes Rachel prove everything, which keeps Kait's empirical brand intact while Rachel delivers the fire.

Act 1, the paradox. Women are the freest, most educated, and highest earning they have ever been, and by the happiness data they are more miserable than in the 1970s. The standard explanations do not survive contact with the numbers. Rachel's thesis enters as the only explanation left standing.

Act 2, the hidden history. Feminism as an operation, not a movement: the socialists, the con artists, Margaret Sanger and eugenics, the CIA and Gloria Steinem, who funded it and what the funders got out of doubling the labor supply. Kait keeps her on names, dates, and documents.

Act 3, the occult claim. The book is called Occult Feminism and Rachel says witchcraft is not a metaphor. This is her most incendiary and most differentiated material, and it maps perfectly onto Kait's dark, investigative aesthetic. Kait presses her for the three strongest pieces of evidence and asks what would falsify the thesis. Whether viewers buy it or not, this act is the clip engine.

Act 4, the deprogramming. What the way back looks like for the woman who realizes it at 33, what Rachel teaches her own daughters, and what men should do with this information. Ends on the vindication note Kait's audience comes for.

Why this framing. Rachel is at peak relevance (Rogan, Feb 2026). Her claim-led appearances outperform (Pageau 3.9x, Jack Neel clip at 37 views per sub) while her name-led ones underperform (Crowder 0.6x, JRE Clips 0.5x). Women-on-women feminism content is breaking out (Dr. Daf 3.15M, 13.7x), and Kait's last upload (Women Are Starting to See The Damage, 3.1x) is the natural lead-in. The Jack Neel episode is already Kait's editing reference, so packaging, edit, and guest converge on one identity.

Production notes. 45 to 60 minutes. Open on the happiness data, not on Rachel's bio. Kait holds the skeptic-examiner posture in Act 3 so the occult material lands as investigation rather than sermon. On-screen citations for every historical claim; this episode will get fact-checked by hostile viewers, and surviving that is part of the appeal.

Verify before filming: the female happiness decline is published research (Stevenson and Wolfers, The Paradox of Declining Female Happiness). In the 1970s women reported being happier than men, and by the 2000s that had reversed. Steinem's CIA-funded work is documented and she acknowledged it, it was the Independent Research Service in the 1950s and 60s. Every historical claim needs an on-screen citation or it gets cut.

Cold open (Kait voice, third person, over archival b-roll):

Women today are the freest, most educated, and wealthiest they have ever been.

They are also, by every available measure, less happy than their grandmothers. One woman spent years tracing that contradiction back to its source, and what she found was not a movement. It was an operation, with founders nobody mentions, funders nobody questions, and a spiritual lineage nobody wants to say out loud.

I sat down with Rachel Wilson to open the file on feminism: who actually built it, who paid for it, and why the women it promised to free are the ones it hurt the most.

[CTA / LINK]

Kait sits down with Rachel Wilson, author of Occult Feminism and the woman who told Joe Rogan's audience that feminism was never a grassroots movement. Together they trace the hidden history of feminism, from the research on declining female happiness to Margaret Sanger's eugenics ties, the CIA's funding of Gloria Steinem, and Rachel's claim that the movement's roots run into witchcraft. This is not a debate. It is two women calmly documenting the damage.