“I’m not that guy that stands here and goes, ‘I’m allowed to use this word.’ I’m the guy that wants to have this conversation with people. Because to me, that’s intelligence.”
~ Dean Blundell ~
This episode takes a single loaded word and uses it to pry open a much larger question: what does it actually mean to be deliberate about how you move through the world? Nick Paro brings Dean Blundell — the Toronto broadcaster, Save America movement contributor, and self-described emotional support Canadian — into a conversation that starts with the word “pussy” and ends with disability rights, and never once feels like it drifted. The throughline is restraint as strength. Blundell’s case is that men who insist on their right to say anything have mistaken volume for power, and that the harder, more masculine move is to weigh the consequence and choose. Listeners walk away with a usable framework: not a list of banned words, but a way of asking why a word is in your mouth in the first place.
The opening exchange reframes language as a question of audience rather than entitlement. Blundell, who is 53 and spent fifteen years in morning radio, is candid that words he once used freely — the slur he won’t repeat, the casual “that’s gay” — are gone from his vocabulary, not because someone forced him out of them but because he read David Letterman in Rolling Stone years ago and decided he didn’t want to “throw another log” on anyone’s already-hard journey. His refusal to grandstand is the point: he doesn’t believe in free speech as a thing without cost, because “there’s a consequence for everything you say and you do.” If a word is costing him reach, dropping it isn’t censorship — it’s just the smart play. That, he insists, is what intelligent masculinity looks like in practice. Nick sharpens it from the male side, noting that it isn’t his place to police how women use their own anatomy in language, but it is absolutely his place to talk to men about the words that aren’t theirs to weaponize.
The middle of the conversation is where the two genuinely diverge, and to their credit they let the disagreement breathe rather than resolving it for comfort. Nick, who describes himself as culturally Jewish, presses Blundell on Gaza — citing Lawrence Winnerman’s argument that what’s happening rises to the level of a Holocaust, and stating plainly that he reads it as genocide, a purposeful campaign toward a Jewish-only ethnostate. Blundell won’t go there, and his reason is methodological rather than evasive: he distinguishes between what he knows and what he’s qualified to adjudicate. He’ll call Netanyahu “human garbage,” Ben-Gvir a genocidal extremist, and the whole far-right faction a hostage-taking of every Jew worldwide — but the legal term “genocide” he leaves to the Hague and to people like Nick who have skin in the game. It’s a live demonstration of the episode’s thesis: two men holding incompatible conclusions without either trying to bludgeon the other into agreement.
Underneath the topical sparring runs a quieter, more durable argument about character. Blundell keeps returning to Marcus Aurelius and the four stoic virtues — courage, wisdom, temperance, justice — not as decoration but as a working filter for everything he publishes. “If I’m wrong, tell me I’m wrong,” he says, framing changeability as strength rather than weakness; he is “unmovable unless the data is proper.” His self-described superpower is the discipline of not caring about what he can’t control, a posture he traces through Mark Manson and back to Viktor Frankl finding joy on the far side of the Holocaust. The danger he names is its inverse: the willful ignorance and “false masculinity cosplaying as alphas” that he calls the real pandemic in North America — people with the whole of human knowledge in their pocket who choose discomfort-avoidance over learning. Intelligence, for Blundell, is simply refusing to be one of them.
Nick closes the interview with the show’s signature device — four questions drawn from the “I’ll Make a Man Out of You” chorus from Mulan — and Blundell’s answers double as a self-portrait: swiftness as urgency, the typhoon as virtue lived “militantly,” the raging fire as contained discipline, and the dark side of the moon as the one thing he isn’t, because there’s no mystery to him at all. The episode lands its final, unscripted turn when Nick breaks his own rule against end-of-show promotion to spotlight a call to action: a campaign he built with Nieta Greene’s Disability Community for Democracy against what they’re calling Crip Crow — Stephen Miller’s reported push, via a DOJ memo, to undermine the 1999 Olmstead decision that ended forced institutionalization. It’s a fitting coda for a conversation about choosing your words carefully: when something matters enough, you spend the capital. Dean Blundell makes a compelling addition to the series precisely because he disagrees well — proof that the better-humaning project isn’t about everyone arriving at the same answer, but about the kind of man you have to be to stay in the room.
Submit questions, feedback, and artwork for Notes of the Week with Nick and Walter:
Call your public servants on important issues:
Join the efforts to unmask law enforcement and de-flock the States:
Service members can get un-biased information on legal vs illegal orders:
Learn empathy forward, human centered, experiment based Leadership & Growth Courses for Higher Ed & Non-Profit Professionals:
I’m Nick Paro, and I’m sick of the shit going on. So, I’m using poetry, podcasting, and lives to discuss the intersections of chronic illness and mental wellbeing, masculinity, veteran’s issues, politics, and so much more. I am only able to have these conversations, bring visibility to my communities, and fill the void through your support — this is a publication where engagement is encouraged, creativity is a cornerstone, and transparency is key — please consider becoming a paid subscriber today and grow the community!.