Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

June 22, 2015 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux

03:35:01

3004 Pickup Artists, Hypergamy and Ostracism - Call In Show - June 17th, 2015

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hi everybody!
	Stefan Molyneux from Free Domain Radio.
	I hope you're doing well.
	It is time for our Wednesday evening fireside chat where we throw in the kindling of intellectual errors and come out with the pure ash of rational thought.
	That probably should be a less destructive metaphor in hindsight.
	Mike!
	All right.
	Up first is David.
	David wrote in and said, when is a good time to change someone's mind?
	We live in a society where I feel that most people don't want to argue with each other because both sides know they are not prepared enough or have enough time to convince the other person.
	Or all are in a too awkward place to argue.
	How could they?
	Both of them just want to hang out with their group of friends at a bowling hall or have a movie night, not spark a fuel debate.
	where if things heat up, too much will ruin the good time the group wanted to spend together.
	So how many people seem to be afraid of arguing, thinking that potentially losing a friend of a discussion of faith and political view is not worth it?
	Where I live, people are so deep into this idea of why can't we all be friends by never arguing with each other and respect our unquestioned opinions.
	Can you balance the coexistence and friendship with arguing and debate?
	That's from David.
	Welcome.
	Welcome, David.
	How are you?
	Thank you.
	I'm doing very well.
	So what kind of topics are we talking about here?
	Well, it's something that came up in my mind half a year ago when...
	It's actually something I've noticed several times where...
	I'm not supposed to put this mildly...
	Thank you.
	I'm sorry.
	I don't know which show you think you're on, but the idea that you need to put things mildly on this show is something you might want to cast.
	I am not one of your jumpy bowling friends.
	Let's put it that way.
	All right, all right, all right.
	I just think that having a...
	That so many people are convinced that it's okay to think whatever you like.
	And no one is supposed to somehow think ill of you because of that.
	It's okay to be this way.
	It's fine.
	But you believe in rabbits being the almighty gods.
	It's completely irrational.
	Or stuff like that.
	Just anything.
	And the point being, whatever it is, that I want to have an impact on my surroundings as well, because I'm inspired by you, Steph.
	And I would like to have discussions and talk with my friends as well, to see if, you know, to argue and such.
	I just try to find the optimal way of discussing and trying to change someone's mind.
	At least I have a discussion.
	But if I'm just going to write to someone, hey, you want to come over to me and talk about politics?
	You would imagine the response, right?
	And you wouldn't want to, personally, if you wanted to ask out a guy or someone to go to the theaters, you wouldn't then suddenly try to sneak in some difficult or personal question about maybe feminism and start talking about that.
	Hey, we're watching theaters.
	Geez, can we just have a good time, right?
	Why does this matter to you?
	Well, it matters to me because it has an impact on our society.
	I want to have an impact as well on you.
	I hope you understand what I'm trying to get at.
	I certainly, certainly do.
	I just wanted to make sure I understood where you were coming from before I let rip.
	I have a few examples.
	For example...
	About half a year ago, I went on a date with this girl at a restaurant.
	After about half an hour in, and we were eating our lunch, then she said, oh, but that's, I guess, just because I'm a bit leftist.
	And then it just hinted, something triggered in my mind.
	I just became immediately curious.
	I just wanted to know more.
	Like, wait, how much leftist are you?
	And what do you mean?
	You're like a big government?
	You're like a small government?
	What do you mean with a bit leftist?
	What she means is, I like free stuff.
	No, but you don't really know that for sure.
	Until you ask.
	All right.
	Because everyone has their own mind about things.
	But what happened is that we became curious, but we know exactly where it was heading.
	And we were out.
	The point of this meeting was we were out on a date.
	We were supposed to get along, but we were on two sides.
	Two different sides here.
	And we were immediately curious and we knew where we were heading.
	And if we continue to head towards that direction, then it would not end up as a good date.
	What?
	What do you mean it would not end up as a good date?
	A good date is where you find out the truth.
	Well, you would also like to have a good time, right?
	No, no, no, no.
	Not good time.
	Not good time.
	Find truth time.
	Because if you end up with some woman who's a leftist, it means that she's very big on state power.
	It means that she thinks it's perfectly legitimate for women to get, or men, to get resources from the state, which means divorce.
	Divorce.
	Alright, well...
	She comes from a feminist tradition or a Marxist tradition or both, and it means that she's going to have all of the crap that goes along with the general lefty feminist Marxist position, which is that males are disposable, men are pigs, and you're going to end up in a miserable marriage, you're going to get your ass divorced, and you're going to have lawyers coming after you with crossbows filled with dildos.
	So, yeah, no, that's a good day.
	A good day is, like, let me, I'll give you sort of a counter thing, right?
	So, years ago...
	I engaged a lawyer to go over an employment contract because I needed to figure some stuff out about it.
	And she was a very smart and very attractive lawyer and we had some good chemistry.
	And anyway, so she started telling me about how she took two weeks off in the summer to go out and And help leftists in Central America and this, that and the other, right?
	And I was like, oh, that's a shame, because that It's an ideological divide, my sperm dare not cross.
	That is, like, my sperm, look at that egg like Paris through the D-Day hailstorm of Saving Private Ryan, lead-filled death.
	And just didn't...
	No, couldn't do it.
	Couldn't do it.
	I mean, there's just no way.
	Okay, but how about this?
	I have another example, and it's not about dating or relation, but more about friendship and coexistence.
	So, for example, I live on the countryside in a very scarcely populated area.
	You know, there's not a whole lot of people here.
	A great use of the word scarce and sparse together, scarce.
	I like that.
	I remember that.
	There's not a whole lot of people here, so you need to know how to get along.
	And there are a lot of...
	Great people here, you know, nice people, good personalities.
	But suddenly, you know, they have these some, you know, just stupid ideas about things.
	Some of them do.
	Or maybe, not even that, but, you know, things that I would like to talk about, but they have no interest in talking about it whatsoever.
	And especially...
	Sorry, sorry.
	I have to discharge a statement from my head just to make sure I can continue listening.
	David, do you mind if I just do this?
	Go ahead.
	I bookmarked where you were.
	So there's an old saying that used to be, a woman used to say it, but sometimes men used to say it, which is, lips that touch wine will never touch mine, right?
	In other words, I'm not going to get involved with a guy who's a drinker, right?
	And for me, it's lips that blow the state.
	I will never mate.
	So I just wanted to get that off my mind.
	Now let's get back to your scarcely populated people who didn't want to talk about anything deep or interesting.
	Nice poetry right there.
	So...
	When it comes to personal interest in, for example, hobbies, sharing the same hobbies with people, if you want to go paddling or fencing or something, you want to do it with people you share that interest with.
	But suddenly, there is a complete divide on other things.
	Look, I think I get the picture.
	I don't mean to cut you off.
	Yeah, yeah.
	When you have stuff that's fun to do with people, you want to do fun stuff with people, but you are interested in having a positive effect on the world, and so you run into people's hostility towards anything deep, right?
	Yes.
	Right.
	Now, do they shy away from controversial topics because they're dumb or because they're cowards?
	There's really the only two options, right?
	I've had...
	I've had a group of friends over at my place, and we've watched a movie together, and then suddenly the one woman who is there, a girlfriend, one of our friends, said, you know, it's a bit...
	I'm a feminist.
	But there's another guy who has sympathy with...
	With nationalism and right-wing it, you know, he suddenly clicks, like, immediately curious.
	I want to talk about this.
	But we're watching a horror movie, for Christ's sake.
	Well, why would you want to merely watch a horror movie where you live a real-life horror movie by watching a right-wing or a feminist go at it?
	I was thinking the same thing.
	You know, that's that old internet meme of like, hey, there's not enough popcorn in the world for the length of this fight, right?
	Yeah, but what happened was that...
	They immediately wanted to...
	Both of them were really curious.
	You could see it on them.
	They wanted to ask these certain questions, but they know exactly where it was heading, and they just tried to draw back, hey, hey, okay, okay, okay.
	And then the others were neutrals, hey, let's not talk about this.
	Let's just come on.
	Let's just settle, move along, watch.
	But...
	Personally, I get it.
	I mean, I feel like you're telling me the same story over and over again.
	You kind of hypnotize me in some manner, David, that I'm not aware of.
	All right.
	I get it.
	I get it.
	What's your inputs?
	Well, okay, so let me ask you this.
	I mean, what if you just have fun friends and then friends with brains, right, and integrity?
	Like, you can have friends, you just go on a bowling league and you shoot the shit and, you know, throw some balls and stuff, right?
	Right.
	And then you can have friends who have passion, depth, meaning, curiosity, ethics and all that kind of stuff, right?
	I mean, what's wrong with divvying them up, right?
	Something that really got me thinking about this was one video you had about half a year ago as well.
	Where you talked about only having friends with those whom you can agree with in a deep level or so.
	And those are the people, you know, the real friends.
	Those are the people you should be with.
	Yeah, I don't like friendships where I have to hide who I am.
	Yeah.
	I mean, that's not a friendship, right?
	No.
	I mean, you can't be honest and you're managing people and you're silencing yourself.
	You know, people, you banned me from a message board.
	That's censorship.
	It's like, hey, you want to know censorship?
	Go talk to your friends.
	Yeah.
	I mean, it's just what you're engaged in.
	It's massive self-censorship.
	Let me not be who I am.
	Let me not be honest with you about what I'm thinking and feeling because it's going to upset you.
	Yeah.
	Let me self-erase.
	Let me self-slaughter my highest ideals.
	Let me take the best part of myself out back, shoot it in the head and drive a truck over it so it doesn't upset you.
	And, you know, some of my friends are, you know, having this on steroids where they have to dumb themselves down.
	Oh, what's on steroids?
	Just trying to dumb themselves down, put it, you know, be politically correct and, you know, just trying to be as friendly as possible even though they severely disagree with some people and what they do and such.
	Because, just in my region, I don't know if this is on other places as well on the...
	It is everywhere.
	...community and it's a diverse community when it comes to beliefs and political views.
	And you bump into the same people over and over again.
	And if you want to be together or talk about things, if you want to find plenty of people that you agree with, you're going to have to go a certain distance.
	Yeah, so you are embroiled in the fantasy that you can change people into thinkers.
	So your question was, how do you change people's minds?
	First of all, you can't.
	No button.
	There's no button.
	Yeah, that was what I was hearing.
	Because if they are open to your mere influence, they don't have minds to begin with, right?
	And so you cannot, the only people whose minds you can change are people whose minds aren't worth changing.
	You know, they'll just go anyway, the wind blows, right?
	They'll just go with the flow and...
	It doesn't take any effort to swim with the current, right?
	So, the only people whose minds are worth changing are the people who are capable of thinking.
	Now, if you have a common and agreed-upon methodology for resolving disagreements, then no disagreements can break your friendship.
	I'll say this again.
	This is very important.
	If you have a common and accepted methodology for resolving your disagreements, no disagreements can break your friendships or any of your relationships.
	Any of your relationships.
	In fact, disagreements will only make your friendship stronger.
	Right?
	There are no two scientists who both agree to follow the scientific method whose disagreements will make them not scientists anymore.
	Now, if one of them starts reading tea leaves or examining chicken entrails or, I don't know, phoning Oprah, then you have a problem.
	Because one of them is following the scientific method and the other one isn't.
	So, if you have a commonly agreed upon methodology, your friendships cannot be harmed.
	It's bulletproof.
	Now, hang on.
	So, the key thing is not to argue about politics.
	The key thing is to say, how do we argue?
	How do we have disagreements so that we're not shying away from this third rail called disagreement?
	how are we going to resolve disagreements in a way that is going to make us not afraid of disagreements people shy away from disagreements because it's like a grenade thrown on the ground right everybody runs away because nobody knows how to resolve any of this stuff or to put it in another way they know how to resolve it but they don't want to do it because everyone is going to say who's got any brains at all well it has to be reason and evidence has to be how we resolve these disputes right yeah
	and and anybody who says no it shouldn't be reason and evidence it should be irrationality and faith that that resolve all of these disputes well then you're talking to a person who's openly crazy Most people have this veneer of sanity and then you dig down and, you know, you hit the tripwire of crazy and suddenly you lost your eyebrows.
	And so the key thing is to work on a common methodology.
	And so if you can say to people, what's interesting is that, you know, I've noticed that we all shy away from these debates.
	We all shy away from these disagreements.
	And why do people think that is?
	I think it's because we don't have a way of resolving these disagreements that make sense, right?
	There's a way of resolving disagreements over...
	Who gets what, which is called price, right?
	If I have something and you want it, well, you can make me an offer, you can ask me to give it to you or whatever, but if I don't want to give it to you, you can make me an offer and we can resolve it.
	Price is the objective methodology for determining who gets resources in a bid for something.
	If you and I put in bids for a house and you bid more, you get the house probably and all that.
	So right now, the government has become more and more powerful and so The cliche of anarchy has been loosed upon the world.
	Society has become increasingly brutal because now everybody runs to the government.
	And as a result, philosophy has withered, right?
	Philosophy is not something that's very necessary when you have the government ordering the shit out of people with a billion weapons.
	Just, you know, be like Anthony Robinson going to give Awaken the Power Within lectures to people in a concentration camp.
	Motivation don't matter that much if you're not in a state of freedom.
	And how do you rationally resolve disputes doesn't really matter.
	Because for the past couple of generations, we've just been running to the government and saying, well, I don't know how to convince people.
	And so I'm just going to run to the government and take this shortcut called people now have to do what I say.
	As Joe Biden said about Obamacare, hey man, law, stroke of the pen, law of the land.
	Pretty fucking cool.
	Well, it is, if you don't mind a Mack truck backing over Socrates' grave over and over again.
	And so, there is no common methodology because people have abandoned reason and evidence when it comes to the resolution of social disputes, and why wouldn't they?
	You just run to the government.
	You don't need to reason with people if you have thugs who'll beat everyone up who disagrees with you.
	So just run to the government.
	So if you can get people interested in how a methodology works, like how do we resolve disputes?
	But you can't jump straight in, I think, and saying, well, let's just have debates about politics when nobody knows how you can possibly resolve these things.
	Does that make any sense?
	It does.
	And I have a question.
	Could you give an example of how you could apply this in reality?
	Could you give an example of how you can practically apply this?
	I agree on a methodology with people.
	Sure!
	I mean, why don't you pretend to be a feminist?
	Hello?
	Yeah, I mean, I don't want to roleplay both sides.
	I could, but you're in the show too.
	So why don't you pretend to be a feminist and I'll pretend to be, say, me.
	Okay.
	When I wake up, it's my morning mantra.
	I stare in the mirror and say, Steph, today it's really important to do a good job of pretending to be you.
	Anyway, so you would say something like, I'm a feminist.
	And I would say, well, that's interesting.
	And it is.
	And I would say, what does that mean?
	And what would you say?
	Well, it means that I hate men and I want more feminism.
	No, no, no.
	Give me what a feminist would say, right?
	I mean, not what a feminist would honestly say, but what a feminist would say.
	Oh, this world is unfair towards women and men are earning so much more money and there is rape everywhere in all cultures and we need more rights.
	I mean, women If men are violent in their homes, then they should never see their child.
	Blah-de-blah-de-blah.
	Have you ever ridden the bus?
	I mean, the microaggressions are everywhere.
	I mean, I'm getting leered at.
	That guy, he spread his legs, showed off his package.
	It's like he was taunting me.
	Oh yeah, the microaggressions.
	No, I get it.
	Men have to deal with...
	Yeah.
	Men have to deal with war, but gosh, poor women with their microaggressions.
	All right.
	Okay.
	And I would say, well, I get where you're coming from.
	That's certainly an interesting perspective.
	Do you believe that the solution to the peaceful problems of women, right?
	Because if a woman is being violently aggressed against, she has the right of self-defense.
	She can put the man in jail for assault.
	So we already have solutions.
	For those, right?
	For violent situations.
	And those solutions are generally, at least in terms of the law, are equally available to men and women, right?
	Like a woman comes and punches you up or whatever, right?
	So, with regards to the aggression against women, we have laws against that.
	My question is, do you think that the problems that don't involve violence Let's say that women are underpaid.
	That doesn't involve violence.
	Nobody's got a gun to their head, right?
	It's just they're underpaid and of course everyone is.
	Everybody wants to be paid a billion dollars a second.
	Do you think that the solution to the non-violence problems that women are facing should be dealt with peacefully or should we use government power to deal with those non-violent problems?
	I've heard on this data, when I asked some of the questions, That dealt with government.
	Like, hey, are you in support of a big government or a small government?
	So then it's like, I don't know.
	I don't know what that means.
	Oh, David.
	Yes?
	You know we're supposed to be doing a roleplay, right?
	Oh.
	Did you forget?
	Damn it.
	Okay.
	Fine.
	Where was I? Do you want me to repeat my question?
	Yes.
	Okay, so if you want to change people's minds, David, the first thing you need to do is listen.
	Do you understand?
	You can't change anyone's mind if you don't listen to them, right?
	Like we started off this conversation, I spent a good 10 minutes or so or more listening, right, and asking questions.
	Yeah.
	So if you have a problem with listening to people, then you're going to have a significant problem trying to change their minds, right?
	I don't mean to be a nag, I'm just trying to give you a tip.
	Word to the wise, right?
	Yeah, sure.
	Okay, so pretend to be the feminist, and I would say, for the nonviolent social issues that women are facing, do you think that they should be resolved through reason and debate and conversations and arguments, or should we bring the government and all of its power of arrest and imprisonment or should we bring the government and all of its power of arrest
	Hmm, well, since I think we need to use a little violence against people who are armed and dangerous, and...
	No, no.
	I'm sorry, Ms.
	Feminist.
	I'm talking about the non-violent aspects.
	of women's complaints.
	The violent aspects of women's complaints are already dealt with through law.
	But do you think that the non-violent aspects of women's complaints, like being underpaid, not getting enough maternity leave, maybe not getting enough into STEM fields, these are not people with guns, right?
	These are people who, you know, maybe underpay women as feminists and so on.
	Do you think that for the non-violent aspects of women's complaints, should we Resolve those differences with reason, argument, evidence, conversation, or should we bring in the power of the state and its laws and its prisons?
	Well, since people don't understand reasoning and facts, I think we should use the power of the government to make them understand.
	Wait.
	Use the power of the government to make them understand?
	So, your argument here would be...
	Mike, did you want to come in with what a feminist would say in your mind?
	Well, you see, Steph, the problems are systematic because of issues of long-term subservience of women and violence against women.
	It's a systematic effect, and we need to take corrective measures now to unroot and correct the systematic effect that has been present for decades and centuries.
	No, that's great.
	It's great that you're using an S-word that's not structural, but in this case, systemic.
	Don't get truncated with me, Steph.
	No, no.
	Okay, so I'm trying to sort of ask a question, Mike Feminist.
	I'm trying to sort of ask a question, which is, there are certain aspects of women's complaints that are violent, right?
	That the violence is being enacted against women.
	And I'm asking about the ones that are non-violent.
	Like, let's say a woman feels underpaid.
	Should that be dealt with through negotiation?
	Are women going to be able to just say, well, I'm going to make decisions or get better trained or ask for more money or shop around or whatever to get better paid?
	Or should we bring the power of the government in to force employers to pay women more?
	A feminist would probably say that being underpaid is a form of theft and therefore using the state to correct the theft would be moral and valid.
	Oh, okay.
	So if you don't get as much money as you want, the general principle would be, so if you want a certain amount of money and you don't get it, then that's stealing.
	Is that right?
	Not if there's systematic effects that show that women are paid 73 cents on the dollar compared to men in similar positions.
	Well, no.
	There's a principle you're saying if you don't get enough money, if you don't get enough money or if you don't get the money that you want, the difference between what you want and what you get is theft.
	Because men would love to get paid more, obviously, right?
	Everybody would love to get paid more.
	So if I think that my house is worth a million dollars, but people only offer me $750,000, they've stolen a quarter million dollars from me.
	Is that right?
	It's tough with the house analogy, but if people in my similar field are getting more money than I am, and I can show that other women alongside me are getting paid less than these men, it's systematic discrimination because of gender.
	But how do you know that?
	Hang on, hang on.
	I would say to the feminist, but how do you know that?
	You're jumping to a conclusion that it's systematic bias based upon gender or sexism, but how do you know that?
	I mean, the mere fact that one group gets paid less than another group is not proof of discrimination.
	Oh, that's true.
	But when you look across the board and look at the groups in large quantities and people in similar positions, if there's less earnings, you can look at that and say it has to do with gender because that's the commonality.
	Well, is that the commonality?
	In other words, are we saying that one gender and another gender are both making the exact same life decisions, working the exact same hours, having the exact same availability to their employers in the same fields?
	Well, I may want to have kids, but that shouldn't be counted against me.
	I'm sorry?
	I may want to have kids, but that shouldn't be counted against me.
	I work just as hard as the men.
	No.
	Statistically, that's not true.
	Statistically, mothers work much less than non-mothers, which is why mothers get paid less than non-mothers.
	You win.
	Right.
	So, I mean, the point is that...
	of the state to deal with non-violent situations.
	Like, I don't agree that you should use the power of the state even to deal with violent situations because you have to pay for that through taxation, which is the initiation of force and all that, right?
	But, um...
	Getting people to understand that when they bring the government in, they're bringing force into the situation.
	They're bringing the initiation of violence into a situation.
	And if a woman is going to say, yes, men who pay women less than what the women want should go to jail.
	Well, you have to extract that as a principle, right?
	Because people will always try and say, well, it's women this, or men this, or blacks, or Hispanics, or whites, or whatever.
	They're trying to say whatever the prejudice is for that particular group, pro, pro, or con.
	But try to extract the principle, David, from what they're saying.
	Because if people can't think in terms of principles, they can't think.
	They're just manipulating prejudice in the case of like, well, these poor women are getting paid too little blah-de-blah-de-blah, right?
	And, you know, I've been a manager of both moms and single people.
	It's not the same.
	And I don't blame the moms.
	I think it's great.
	They got a 501.
	Got to get out of here.
	Got to get to the daycare and all that.
	I mean, I'm a dad.
	How many books have I written in the last six years, right?
	It's just the way it is.
	You can't be as committed a worker and a great parent at the same time.
	Can't be.
	Can't be.
	Because, you know, fixed amount of time in the day.
	But if you can get people to understand that...
	Asking people to say no government to deal with violent crime, that's tough.
	And that takes a lot of conversation.
	That's like a huge...
	It's one of the last barriers.
	That and the goddamn roads.
	But that's one of the last barriers to go down.
	But having people say, look, there's a situation I don't like.
	Right?
	There's a situation I don't like.
	And somehow, like on public transit, I mean, okay, so men might spread their legs a little on...
	The bus.
	Okay, yeah.
	And women will often put their shopping bags there too.
	And how is it a microaggression for a man to spread his legs a little bit on the bus?
	And by the way...
	Balls need air.
	They do.
	You know, they need some room.
	I mean, if you haven't had, you know, this big bag full of squirrels stuck between your legs for your entire life, then yes, it's going to be a little confusing.
	You know, why do men adjust themselves?
	Because it's uncomfortable.
	Because, you know, you sit down and suddenly one of your You know, one of your marbles gets stuck under an ass cheek and is like, oh, I just had a tree fall on my genitals.
	I'm afraid I'm going to need to move.
	And it's like, sorry.
	Testicle management is one of the challenging aspects of male existence.
	It's why men are so good at basketball because it's what we do.
	It's why we're so good at playing snooker.
	And it is just what we have to do.
	And, you know, sorry that we have to spread our legs sometimes because otherwise if we cross our legs, Our voice goes up to John Anderson Heights and, you know, we interfere with our ability to continue the human race.
	But why is it that a man spreading his legs a little bit on the bus is a microaggression, but a woman wearing so much perfume that your eyeballs are slowly draining down your face in tears of scent-based reactive allergic reaction is...
	It's not a microaggression.
	I mean, the amount of makeup that some women put on is just, it's horrendous.
	You know, it's like they just emerged from Paris Hilton's purse.
	And that somehow is not a microaggression.
	But anyway, I mean, that's neither here nor there.
	But trying to get people to understand that There are things that are violence-based and that, you know, we need a very strong response to that.
	And, you know, the way that the government works with police and so on has always been a way that we deal with these things as a species in general, for the most part.
	Having people to understand that there are complaints that involve violence and there are complaints that involve preference.
	So, having people understand, like a feminist to say...
	I want guys thrown in jail who don't pay women what I think women are worth.
	Well, that's talking about the initiation of force.
	And if people want to use force to resolve disputes, don't pretend that they're not using force.
	So don't have debates with people who say the solution is a government law, because they're not interested in debating.
	They're interested in getting your agreement With their use of violence, right?
	So if people say, well, we should solve the problem of poverty with welfare, do you agree?
	And I'm like, well, what does agreement have to do with it?
	You want to use force.
	You know, it's like, I want to rape you.
	Do you agree?
	Don't ask me for my agreement.
	Because if you're saying rape, then don't ask me to sanction your use of violence by my agreement.
	If I agree, it's not rape.
	And if I don't agree, it's not going to stop you.
	Right?
	So the important thing is to get people to recognize when they want government to do something that's not deal with immediate force issues, then People need to understand that.
	As I've talked about for many years, they need to see the gun in the room.
	The gun of the room is the power of the state.
	And if there isn't already a gun in the room, like they're talking about rape, theft, assault, and murder, then they're the ones bringing the gun in the room.
	They're the ones pointing guns at people.
	Now, there are two types of people in the world.
	And one, when you point out that, you know, let's say a woman says, well, we need laws, equal pay for equal work.
	And those laws have been around in America since the 60s.
	And if they say, you know, we've got to force employers to pay women what I want them to pay women, or we have to force people to admit women into STEM fields or whatever, and then you point out that they're initiating the use of force, they're advocating people get thrown in jail for not giving them what they think people deserve.
	And some people will say, oh God, that's horrible.
	I can't believe I never thought of it that way.
	And they'll immediately back down from that position because they're decent human beings who have a conscience.
	And then there's most people who just double down and say, yeah, too bad.
	Employees aren't paying what I think women are worth, so they should go to jail.
	And those people, I would not attempt to remotely cover up the crimes that they are advocating.
	I'm not going to pretend to debate with people whose answer is a gun.
	I mean, I'll talk about welfare with people and give them the facts, but if they're still like, well, you know, welfare, we've got to have it, and it's like, well, then you're not interested in a civilized discussion.
	You just want to use violence.
	Because you're not bothered by the use of violence, you're seriously emotionally disturbed.
	Sorry, go ahead.
	Yeah, I feel that we drifted a little away from my original thoughts in question, and it's that I want to have an impact on the people around me, and there are people who are emotionally attached to their beliefs without really any reasoning.
	And what I wonder is that, is it worth discussing and arguing with them?
	Can you change their mind about something that they're emotionally attached to?
	David, how did we drift away from your topic?
	Well, this...
	I'm open that we did.
	I just don't understand how we did.
	I think I've been pretty much talking about whether you can change people's minds and how to do it.
	Sorry, go ahead.
	Because this isn't only about the state.
	It's also about perhaps even religious views, and that hasn't really necessarily to do anything with the state.
	Wait, is your issue that I didn't deal with every conceivable argument that you might have, and that's why we haven't dealt with your topic?
	I gave you an example.
	I didn't say you could only talk about the state.
	I gave you this particular example, right?
	Okay.
	So, is your issue that I didn't deal with every conceivable argument you might have with people?
	I wanted to talk a little about the religious views as well and not just the political side.
	Those are the two things.
	I originally wanted to cover, but yeah, I should have mentioned that.
	Hang on, so did we drift from your topic because we only did half your topic?
	Well, okay, no.
	Thank you.
	No, I want to provide a good service in these calls, and I certainly don't want to hijack your questions for any kind of agenda that I have.
	And I said that you have to get people to agree on a methodology, right?
	And so when we started talking with the pseudo-feminist, right, we were trying to figure out, here's a methodology, and the methodology should not be that we use force to resolve disputes that aren't violence-based, but we use reason and evidence, right?
	So I was sort of giving an example of how to extract a principle from that.
	And I'm not sure how that is drifting from your question.
	Okay, well, poor use of words.
	Excuse me.
	Well, so is it worth discussing and trying to change someone who's emotionally attached to something that is potentially I feel like I've not been saying anything or you've had the mute on or something.
	Okay, so you're asking me is it possible to change people's minds who don't use reason and don't listen to evidence?
	And what have I said about three times about that?
	No.
	So why are you asking me the question?
	I mean, I'm annoyed.
	That doesn't mean you're doing anything wrong.
	I'm just telling you like I'm annoyed.
	But I need to sort of understand why.
	There's something that's going on for you emotionally that is making you passive-aggressive, pushback, not listening, provocative.
	There's something that's happening emotionally with you that I'd rather talk about than pretending we're talking about the surface stuff.
	So when I give you these sort of responses, what happens to you emotionally?
	Well, I'm really nervous.
	But did you become more nervous during the course of the conversation?
	was fairly constant, I think.
	Because it has to do with people that I consider very Not the closest friends that I can share everything with, but, you know, good friends.
	And it's just that some of them are so inconsistent in some respects that I feel like, well, I would like to talk about it, to maybe help you out.
	And I think that would maybe improve your life on a maybe deeper level, but I'm not really getting to that stage.
	And I wonder how What's the best way to get to that stage?
	So, are we back at the beginning of our call now?
	I asked you about your emotions and you've given me this abstract thing, right?
	I'll step in because you're not able to connect at this level yet.
	So, David, people pretend to be confused when they don't like the answer.
	People pretend not to listen when they don't get what they want.
	So what I'm saying is causing anxiety in you, which you don't want to acknowledge.
	And as a result, you are upset with me and you're not getting the answers that you want.
	And what that means is that the answers that I'm giving you, you feel are going to provoke significant conflict with your friends and you don't like that.
	You want to try and find a way to have deep and meaningful conversations about things that matter in the world without upsetting irrational people.
	Yes.
	So I'm giving you clear answers, develop a methodology, work on principles and so on, and you're fogging out because you don't like where that leads, right?
	I was just hoping that maybe there was more to it.
	What do you mean more to it?
	More to what?
	Nah Just A really Really clever What you did answer, what you did give me was pretty clever, and I guess that's the best way of doing it.
	You're fidgeting again.
	At least.
	You don't have to do any of this.
	You don't.
	Right?
	You don't have to bring any rationality to irrational people.
	It's not a law of physics.
	You don't have to lift a finger.
	You will end up being a parasite on the work of people like myself.
	And this is not directed at you, David, but at your friends.
	Do you mind if I just give a short little thing about that?
	Go ahead.
	Right.
	So all these people, all you people out there who are like, ooh, I don't know.
	I get kind of uncomfortable when we start talking about things that are important.
	I get kind of uncomfortable when the topic of religion or politics or philosophy or virtue or truth or anything.
	I get uncomfortable.
	I want to go bowling.
	It's inappropriate.
	I don't like it.
	It's improper.
	It makes me feel bad.
	It makes me feel anxious.
	I don't like it.
	All those people, let me tell you what you are.
	What you are are parasites.
	You are parasites because a lot of people do a lot of hard work to try and make a free world.
	A lot of people sacrificed and did a lot of hard work and took on a great deal of danger, ostracism, personal discomfort, legal risks, you name it, to get you things like freedom of speech and freedom of religion and freedom from slavery.
	And freedom from war, to some degree.
	And a lot of people really worked very hard to make your life so great.
	Was ending slavery comfortable?
	No.
	Was ending the aristocracy comfortable?
	No, it was not.
	It wasn't.
	And so a lot of people go through a lot of discomfort to make the world a better place.
	And all the people who were on the receiving ends of those hard-won gifts, nobody's saying you have to do exactly the same thing.
	Nobody's saying you've got to be a martyr and you've got to go get a thousand lashes because you blogged about agnosticism in Saudi Arabia.
	Nobody's asking you for that.
	Just a little bit.
	Just a little bit of, yeah, you know, I stand for freedom of speech.
	Just a little bit of like, yeah, you know, I think that the free market shouldn't have a whole bunch of guns pointed at it to make it fair because some people don't get the money they want.
	You don't get to rob a store because you didn't get paid enough and you don't get to point guns at big.
	Just a little bit.
	Nobody's saying that you gotta go and speak the truth to the medieval Pope and get locked up like Galileo or get set on fire like about 8 billion scientists in the Middle Ages.
	Nobody's saying you've got to do all that.
	Just a little bit, a little bit, a little bit will help a huge amount.
	No, people don't want to do that.
	It's uncomfortable.
	It's uncomfortable.
	So everyone else has got to do all this fucking work to clear the land for these people.
	You know, men and women go in and hack down these trees and brave these bears and clear the land for people.
	And they're like, oh, this is great.
	Look at all this clear land.
	I'm going to build a bouncy castle of fun.
	I'm going to...
	Oh, look at natural swimming pool.
	I'm going to swim.
	This is great.
	And then some of the men come back from clearing out the next section of land.
	Not women's rights, not slaves' rights.
	Now we're doing children's rights.
	Coming back, sweat and bare claw marks on your chest in those really great Wolverine style.
	Always in this attractive pectoral style, right?
	And sweaty and bug-bitten and snake-bitten to come back from clearing the next area for human beings to go and inhabit.
	The Frontier's men and women are out there, clearing it out, making it clear.
	And come back and say, whoa, this place kind of running to see it a little here.
	Like, would you guys mind some weeding?
	You just do a little weeding.
	Nobody's saying you don't have to come out here where the bears are.
	You don't have to like bring down fucking mountain lions with your bare teeth.
	Like, we get it.
	That's not for you.
	Just maybe a little bit of weeding.
	You know, things are kind of going to seed around here.
	It's great you got the bouncy castle.
	It's great you got the swimming pool.
	I'd like to swim too, but busy clearing the next section of human ethical landscape for you people to inhabit.
	Just do some fucking weeding.
	Would you mind?
	And people are all like, I don't know.
	You know, weeding, first of all, I just did my nails.
	And, like, weeding, I could totally...
	It hasn't happened yet.
	I can totally see getting, like, a split nail from the weeding.
	And, you know, the other thing, too?
	Like, I did a little makeup.
	And weeding, it's, like, hot out.
	And I don't want to sweat because I get these, like, rivulets.
	They're totally uncomfortable.
	And what if it goes and bleeds down into my...
	Into my top.
	I mean, this is silk.
	You cannot get that out of silk.
	I don't want to get raccoon eyes, you know, like I'm Annie Lennox singing Queen songs.
	I don't want to do that because it's weird and gross looking.
	So, you know, if you could, like, after you clear the next hundred acres of, like, sequoias and poison ivy and snakes and stuff, like, if you could just come back and Take care of those weeds.
	We'll be over here under these parasols.
	And listen, darling, if you don't mind, would you also be a deer?
	I'd also like a mint julep.
	So after you go, take down the bears and rip up the next hundred acres of trees by the roots and make it habitable for people like us.
	If you could come back here, do a little weeding.
	Also, I think there might be something that's dead in the pool.
	I'm not touching that.
	My God, I don't have enough sanitizer in the world to clean that off my fingers.
	If you could clean out the pool, do some weeding, bring me a mint julep, okay?
	That would be special.
	Thanks, doll.
	Right?
	This is what people are like.
	Just do some fucking weeding.
	The majority of the work has been done.
	Just do some weeding.
	Just beat back some of the crazy, politically correct, idiot, nonsense, jerkwads.
	Just keep them off.
	Keep the weeds off.
	Major work has been done.
	There's no aristocracy.
	There's no slavery.
	You know, women have been emancipated.
	The majority of the work has been done.
	You know, just push back at the annoying gnats of political correctness.
	Yeah, how about that?
	Push back on a government program or two.
	Sow a few seeds of doubt.
	Just some weeding.
	And they won't.
	Because it's uncomfortable.
	You know what's uncomfortable is going off into the wilderness armed with only a toothpick and trying to take down the grizzly of the state.
	And when I say toothpick, I mean microphone.
	And this idea...
	That, oh, you know, I don't want to talk about these things because it makes me uncomfortable.
	I don't want to.
	Like, I don't want to look into maybe why some police officer shot someone because, you know, I might get a counter-narrative that makes me uncomfortable.
	I mean, I don't...
	It's like, no, no, just do...
	We're not asking you to sacrifice yourself.
	We're not asking you to make this your life's mission.
	We're just saying do some weeding while we're off clearing off the next section of land for human beings to expand into called...
	Child rights.
	Sexism, great.
	Racism, great.
	Understood, opposed.
	Childism, prejudice against children, seeing children as non-humans.
	We're working on that.
	But we can't work on everything.
	We can't go and clear the next hundred acres of the grizzlies and the bears and the cougars and the lions.
	We can't do that and weed and pick the dead shit out of the swimming pool and bring you a goddamn mint julep.
	Can't do it all.
	So get off your fucking asses and go do some weeding while we clear off the next thing.
	People won't do it.
	It's uncomfortable.
	People might say bad things about me.
	We get a bunch of parasites.
	And I think the moral pioneers of humanity get a little fucking tired of carrying these parasites.
	Do some work.
	Help out the species.
	Pay a little forward.
	Contribute a little bit.
	Put down your nail files.
	Put down your Xbox controllers.
	Contribute something to the progress of the species.
	I get it.
	You're not a warrior.
	Great.
	That doesn't mean you have to be a fucking dishrag.
	Just a little bit.
	Couple of Facebook posts.
	You know, spread a little FDR. Spread a little whatever it is that gets people thinking.
	Spread the opposite of FD. I don't care.
	Do something to help the species out a little bit.
	Don't just hang on the backs of everyone else's labor and say, well, I don't like to talk about these things.
	They're controversial.
	While enjoying the fact that you have some economic, social, and political liberties because other people were willing to talk about things that were uncomfortable and do a shitload of uncomfortable things to give you some freedom.
	And what do you do with that freedom?
	Do you at least thank the people?
	Do you support the people?
	Do you donate to the people doing that?
	Do you get behind them?
	Do you defend them?
	Do you advocate for them?
	No!
	A lot of people don't.
	A lot of people don't want to do anything that's uncomfortable.
	Well, if everyone was like you, we'd still be in caves having bears sit and fart on our asses half the winter.
	So, If you want to help them out of being parasites so that they can contribute to human freedom, rather than just consume human freedom, just eat it up, people didn't fucking die and get burned at the stake and get thrown in jail so that they could go bowling!
	The best among the species didn't work and sweat and sacrifice, So that they could not have to grope too far to get their Wii controller when it falls under the couch.
	Human beings of unbelievable intelligence, commitment, virtue, and integrity did not sacrifice their lives so that everyone down the road could let tyranny creep back because they don't want to be uncomfortable.
	That is lazy.
	That is entitled.
	That is ungrateful.
	That is selfish.
	That is short-sighted.
	And that takes the greatest gifts of history and squanders them for the sake of, oh, well, I don't want people to frown at me.
	Well, the people who gave us these freedoms had to deal with a lot more than internet trolls and social frowns.
	And I don't know what has happened to the spine of the species.
	You know, the old saying that a civilization rises in hobnail boots and falls on silk slippers.
	But I'm telling you this.
	There are not enough strong, stern, and moral souls in the world currently To save humanity from the drift towards fascism that is occurring out of the inertia, laziness, selfishness, and desire for comfort alone that characterizes the vast majority of the species.
	Why do we have bullies in society?
	Why do we have people who scream sexism and racism and Why do we have bullies in our society?
	Why do we have the death of reason in our society?
	Why is it just a matter of screaming at people and hurling invective at people and lying about people and slandering people?
	Why is it that we have bullies in society?
	Because bullies are the demons created by the vacuum of courage.
	By the absence of courage, nature abhors a vacuum, nature abhors cowardice.
	When a culture becomes cowardly, it summons the bullies.
	The bullies are here because we want them here, because we'd rather be bullied than stand up for ourselves.
	We'd rather be screamed at than speak words of reason in a calm and gentle voice, or a loud voice.
	And so all of these people who are afraid of conflict and afraid of upsetting people and afraid of getting frowns and afraid of being disapproved of, well the bullies smell that fear and that is food for the bullies.
	That feeds and strengthens the bullies and the bullies will grow and the bullies will grow and the bullies will grow and the bullies will yell and scream and get more powerful until people get that it's easier and better to be uncomfortable now than it is to be enslaved later.
	Easier to go to the dentist now than have your teeth come out one by one Angela's Ashes style later on.
	It's easier to do some sit-ups now than get diabetes later.
	And it's easier to have courage and talk about things that are uncomfortable now than it is to be enslaved down the road.
	Because the bullies ain't gonna stop.
	That's what they do.
	That's how they roll.
	That's how They roll like a snowball coming down the side of a snowy hill, getting bigger and bigger, and starting with one flake, and ending up something that can level a whole town.
	And so, yeah, David, you've got some friends who find it uncomfortable to talk about important things.
	And what they are is parasites, feeding off the remnants of freedom fought for by far better people.
	And I'm sorry if they're uncomfortable, but they sure as hell are enjoying the fruits of the significantly greater discomfort of those who fought for freedom in the past and those who are fighting for freedom now.
	They love all those freedoms, but they won't contribute one goddamn thing to them.
	In fact, they stand in the way of every conversation that might lay bare iniquity and immorality and clear any possible path to a freer future.
	They're in the way.
	And they're parasites.
	And we cannot let them stop us.
	Wow.
	Wow.
	Great speech.
	Make him uncomfortable.
	Make him uncomfortable.
	Or don't.
	Right?
	I mean, again, nobody has to do a goddamn thing, but at least recognize the consequences of not doing anything.
	The consequences of avoiding deep issues is people say, the bullies, all they do is they sniff.
	They're like shots with blood in the water.
	They sniff for that which you want to avoid.
	Oh, do you want to avoid something?
	Great.
	That's the button I can push to get you to do what I want.
	What are you afraid of?
	What do you most don't want to have happen in your life?
	Oh, is it discomfort?
	Is it disapproval?
	Oh, okay, great.
	Fantastic.
	That's how I'm going to control you.
	You know, Andrew Breitbart used to say, you walk towards the fire.
	You don't walk away from the fire.
	It's coming either way.
	You walk towards it.
	If the whole world's going to burn, there's nowhere to run.
	You've got to walk towards the fire with your house.
	And Every time you run away, the bullies get stronger.
	Every time you avoid a topic, the bullies get stronger.
	Every time you back down, you...
	Right?
	It's the old quote that Churchill had about appeasement.
	Appeasement is the hope that the crocodile is going to eat you last.
	The bullies, the power hungry, the monstrous within human society, they will not stop.
	They will never be full.
	They will never have enough power.
	They will never have enough control.
	They will never be satisfied.
	Ever, ever, ever.
	They can encase you in concrete and have it hardened around your body.
	You'll still have too much motion for them because you might be able to breathe.
	And they will hate your last dying heartbeats as being outside of their control.
	The monsters of sociopaths, the control freaks, will never stop.
	They will never stop.
	Stalin did not wake up one morning and saying, well, I think I've had bad enough.
	Let's liberalize these fuckers.
	Let's have a free market.
	Let's, you know, none of that shit happened.
	People were all excited when Khrushchev decided to speak the truth about Stalin.
	But all he was doing was burying the previous mafia boss and reducing allegiance to Stalin so that he could have more allegiance for himself.
	He still said to the West, I will bury you, banging his shoe at the UN and doing all sorts of crazy shit.
	Brezhnev.
	Was he big on liberalization?
	No.
	Nothing happened until social collapse.
	They will not stop.
	This is what people don't understand.
	Or maybe they do deep down.
	It's really always hard to tell.
	They will not stop.
	And if they can get us to avoid speaking of essential, important philosophical issues, moral issues, issues of reality, issues of integrity, issues of courage, if they can get us to stop talking about these things with each other because there's disapproval in the air, we're doomed as a species.
	We might as well have them clap on the manacles now and hang us from the walls.
	Because we're done.
	We are fucking done.
	We are fucking done.
	If disapproval is enough, if social awkwardness is enough to have us shy away from essential topics of the ultimate final defense against tyranny, we're done.
	We are completely done.
	The short, multi-couple of century experiment of Western freedoms, of a free market, of freedom of speech, of freedom of association, If we are now uncomfortable and won't do anything to defend that or talk about it or push back at the encroaching waves of tyrannical absolutism, we're done.
	That whole experiment is going to pass.
	It's done.
	And if there was an afterlife, all the people who literally, literally gave their lives for the cause of human liberty, People who fought with words, which is sometimes even harder than fighting with weapons.
	People who were ostracized.
	People who were slandered.
	People who were attacked.
	People who were lied about.
	People whose reputations were smashed.
	People who were harassed.
	People who were thrown in jail.
	People who were sent to war.
	All of those people have given us this unbelievable gift.
	And it's like a father...
	He dies handing a gold bar to his son, who then goes and loses it in a crap game.
	The father says, after death, well that was pretty fucking pointless, wasn't it?
	I gave my gold to an idiot.
	And the people who bought us these freedoms, I'm conscious of them.
	You know, one of the first videos ever made was Bohemian Rhapsody, and they've got every dial of special effects.
	They crank it up, and there's one where they just mirror, right?
	Like when you stand in front of two opposing mirrors, it just flows away.
	And I see all these people behind me who suffered enormously.
	My ancestor, William Molyneux, who was best friends with John Locke, the philosopher, they feared imprisonment.
	Speaking about mere economic liberties and political liberties too.
	They had to hide.
	They were terrorized, terrified.
	That's the suffering that has given us the freedoms that we have.
	And what do you think of this army of heroes that stands in the giant vestibule of a noble history behind us?
	What do you think when they look...
	They look upon this landscape of liberty that they fought and bled and died and killed and wrote and feared to give us.
	The gold that they bestowed upon us that they suffered so much to bring to the surface and hand out to humanity.
	What do you think they think when they look upon the landscape?
	of humanity at the moment and see what is happening to the freedoms, the escalating power and size of the state, the rise of the spectral army of bullies and slanderers that has arisen since the 1960s who now dominate and terrorize the landscape.
	What do you think?
	What do they think of their suffering?
	Because they did not live to see the freedom that they wished to bestow upon others.
	And the freedom and the gifts with which they gave humanity have been so astoundingly prodigious.
	Everything that we're talking about, everything that we live, everything that we breathe, this very technology that we use to communicate, comes out of the free market, comes out of the pushback against aristocratic ownership and state control, state power, central planning, mercantilism.
	All of it was pushed really hard back.
	By historical heroes of great moral courage and import.
	And now, what have we done?
	What have we done with the gifts that they have given us?
	And those of us who see and those of us who understand and those of us who get it are saying, we got this great gift from the past.
	We were lucky to get it because 99.9% of humanity didn't get it in the past and doesn't even get it in the present.
	We got this unbelievably great gift and all it needed was some weeding.
	It did not need to be fought all over again.
	It just needed some weeding.
	It just needed pushback against the Marxists and the socialists and the warmongers and the Democrats and the Republicans.
	It just needed pushback against the women who wed the state and divorced sanity.
	It just needed some pushback and if it had happened early and if it had happened hard, It would never have flourished.
	We would not be living in this world where everyone is scurrying from all the bullies and the screamers and the slanderers and the liars.
	But now it's going to be much harder and it's going to keep getting harder and it's going to keep getting harder until we either win or we lose in an end times brinksmanship.
	Could have been solved early and relatively easily like You know, when Hitler took Alsace-Lorraine, as Hitler himself said, one French army had come in, it would all have been over.
	No war, no 40 million dead.
	Done.
	No atom bombs.
	But they, ooh, I don't know, that makes me uncomfortable.
	So, here you go.
	Here's Alsace-Lorraine.
	There's the Rhineland, there's Austria, there's Czechoslovakia.
	Ah, Poland, okay, that's too much.
	We can't do anything about it now, but here's war.
	And this idea that it's uncomfortable now, so we'll wait.
	I don't know.
	What is that?
	What is that all about?
	It's just hoping your mortal enemy has a heart attack?
	I mean, that's not going to work.
	It's discomfort now or disaster later.
	There are no other choices.
	There are no other choices.
	It's discomfort now or disaster later.
	And I was committed to this before I had a child.
	Now that I have a child, I have to think a lot further in the future as well as being influenced by everything that came before because I'm going to deliver as best as I can.
	I am going to fucking deliver a free will to my daughter.
	The fact that I also have to deliver it To the child of these parasites who choose stupid comfort over even mild, the mild, mildly strenuous exercise of a tiny bit of moral courage.
	I am somewhat regretful that I have to deliver moral freedom as best I can and political and economic freedom to the children of the parasites as well as to my own child, but there's simply no way around it because numbers, because math.
	And, I mean, if you look at Greece now, well, they could have solved the problems early, they could have solved the problems 20 years ago, and have an economy stronger than Germany at the moment, but they didn't.
	Because it's uncomfortable, you see.
	It's a little uncomfortable for politicians to go in front of the people and say, Hello!
	Math!
	Calling the last remnants of sanity in the population.
	Do you remember the math you did?
	That's part of reality too.
	And you've been living beyond your means.
	You voted for all this free stuff.
	You surrendered your freedoms in return for brides.
	The brides have run out and your freedoms are gone.
	I hate to tell you this.
	It's your own fucking fault.
	It's your own fault.
	I mean, Greece of all places.
	Reason, democracy, freedom.
	Remember all that shit?
	You kind of left that in the rear view, didn't you?
	Just for a little bit.
	Because, boy, wasn't it great to see all the confetti on those games in Athens?
	The Olympics?
	That was cool!
	Didn't you feel proud?
	Well now, you gotta pay for your pride, and it's not gonna be cheap!
	Old people, welcome to the delicious land of cat food.
	That's what you pay because when you ask the government to treat you like a pet, you end up eating like a pet.
	I can't change that for you.
	Because it's not the fault of the young who didn't even have a vote when you put all these crazy programs into place.
	Not their fault.
	You gotta pay.
	Sorry, you gotta double up.
	You gotta...
	There's no money left.
	They could have done this and it would have avoided all of this cat food scenario.
	A little pain then would have meant a whole lot better life now.
	But no, you see, they didn't want to be uncomfortable.
	Any politician who might dare tell the parasitic, mindless, zombie-headed masses any kind of rational truth that two seconds thought Would teach them without them even having to pull out a calculator or take off their fucking shoes to count their toes.
	Any politician who gives any kind of reality to the masses, they recoil!
	Oh my god!
	He told us a scrap of truth!
	Oh, hold me!
	I need an algorithm with puppy bear videos and a beanbag!
	No, what did they do?
	They elected a socialist to deal with overspending!
	Oh my god!
	I have too much cocaine.
	Pablo Escobar will keep it for me.
	That's going to be great!
	God almighty.
	No, they just elected someone else who's going to lie to them and tell them, don't worry, we'll work out a deal.
	And now, they have to go to the IMF and they say, oh, we can't possibly pay you the money that we owe you unless you lend us some money.
	And people are saying this extended pretend nonsense with a straight face.
	Because they didn't want to do anything that was uncomfortable.
	Nobody wanted to say to the old people, I'm sorry, you took out more than you paid in.
	And math.
	Remember how you told us when we were kids to do our math homework?
	It might have been helpful if you'd done a little bit yourself.
	Because you're taking out $4 in benefits for every dollar you pretend to pay in taxes.
	Where did you think that was going to end up?
	Because math!
	You don't get to fart on an abacus and turn it into infinity.
	Doesn't work.
	But no, nobody wanted to have those uncomfortable conversations.
	So now, you got 26-27% youth unemployment, 26-27% unemployment as a whole, 50% youth unemployment, the old people Are living on six, seven hundred euros a month and their kids are living with them because they can't get any jobs.
	Ten percent of the Greek economy is going to pensions.
	Greeks retire in their fifties because, you know, it's sunny.
	I mean, what's the point of working when it's nice out?
	Those Germans could work because it's snowy.
	And yeah, so you either learn from reason or you get reamed by experience.
	There are no other choices.
	So, make your friends uncomfortable if you want to pay it forward, if you want to do right by the world, and if you want to add your energies to the moral progress of mankind and avert the disaster.
	See, everybody kicks and screams at the ethicist, but boy, it's the ethicist who knows what happens if he doesn't make them uncomfortable.
	Right?
	I mean...
	I don't want to go to the gym.
	It's uncomfortable.
	Yeah, it's uncomfortable.
	And it's boring as hell.
	I did 40 minutes on a bike machine today.
	It's boring!
	It is, of course.
	But the consequence is what?
	Is what?
	Oh, look, I broke my leg climbing the stairs, right?
	I mean, that's no good.
	Osteoporosis.
	Yay!
	Brittle bones, right?
	I'm an astronaut.
	So, the ethicist knows the consequences of surrendering to the discomfort at the moment.
	Yeah, it's uncomfortable if you're addicted to sugar and fat to not eat as much of it as you like, which is now why, for the first time in history, an American woman now weighs the same as an American man did in the 1960s.
	Clucking in at 166 pounds, it's a future of catastrophic diabetes, hypertension, heart disease, and a massive fat giant jugular bat sucking off the emotional financial resources of the young.
	I give you the American bloated female fish.
	Can't fit through doors.
	Have to have double doors.
	We need bigger seats than airplanes.
	And oh my god, we can't get them into the elevators anymore.
	We have to change all those numbers too.
	Because it's uncomfortable.
	And so, yeah, of course you have to have Obamacare.
	And of course the public sector servants aren't going to give up their free healthcare.
	They've got an entire life of sitting with their giant asses on little motor scooters designed to, well, if I don't get my giant healthcare free, free, I'm doomed.
	Ah, anyway.
	So, A, you don't have to do anything, but if you don't, you just join a whole bunch of parasites who feed off and interfere with all of us who are trying to keep people safe from disaster.
	And B, if you do decide that you want to help people out, you're just going to have to grit your teeth and say, I'm sorry you're uncomfortable.
	It's for your own good.
	Right now, I feel calm.
	Thank you.
	Not nervous anymore.
	That really was a satisfying speech.
	Well, you know it's true, right?
	I mean, so there's calm because you're free of the illusion that you can have your cake and eat it too, that you can change people for the better without making them uncomfortable.
	Yeah.
	I remember there used to be a cartoon called Bloom County.
	By a guy named Berkeley Breathed.
	Which is a pretty funny name.
	Anyway.
	And there was this penguin who wanted to lose weight.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Things I always thought I'd say in a philosophy show.
	There's a penguin who wanted to lose weight.
	And he's like...
	I can't remember.
	It was something like, I'm on the all asparagus and Alka-Seltzer diet and that way I can eat as much as I want and asparagus and Alka-Seltzer and I don't have to exercise and I'm still going to lose weight.
	And the guy, one of his friends was like, what about just like eating less and exercising more?
	And he's like, no, no, no, no, no!
	Alka-Seltzer and asparagus!
	And you get this calm, and I think that's what you're talking about, Dave.
	You get this calm and you go, okay, eat less and exercise more.
	I get it.
	There's no magic.
	There's no button.
	There's just the usual common sense stuff that everyone's been talking about forever.
	and the illusion that I can have my cake and eat it too, I've let go of, I've re-entered reality, and reality is a soothing place.
	Thank you.
	All right, this man, I've got to move on to the next call, but I really appreciate you calling in, and let us know how it goes.
	Thank you.
	Yeah, sure.
	Alright, up next is Phil.
	Phil wrote in and said, on an FDR message board post, the caller wrote, ostracizing someone for moral reasons doesn't harm the person doing the ostracism, but ostracizing someone for aesthetic reasons absolutely harms the person doing the ostracism.
	Does Stefan's refusal to endorse or embrace hypergamy and his encouragement to ostracize people who defend and or engage in hypergamous behavior cause great harm to his audience?
	That's from Phil.
	Hello, Phil.
	Nice to meet you.
	Thank you, Stefan.
	Nice to meet you, too.
	Phil is an alias.
	I appreciate Mike for allowing me to use an alias.
	Can I call you Elias?
	Elias is much better as an alias, because if I need to rap something, I'm pre-rhymed.
	Yeah, there you go.
	The first thing I will say is that before I started listening to your show, like about 18 months ago, I was on a very bad trajectory in terms of my future.
	And your podcast gave me so much clarity on my childhood, the way that my parents were treating me, even today, and the way that my niece was being treated today.
	I don't know how good my future is going to be, but it will be because of you.
	You were the person who started this all.
	Well, not because of me, but I appreciate being a source point, but it's going to be you.
	You do the work, right?
	I'm just yammering away.
	Yeah, I absolutely do the work, but you were the catalyst, you were the beginning, and so I know that a lot of what I have to say is critical, and I know that I'm taking the position that you're wrong about certain things, but my position does not diminish my respect for you as a man, nor my sense of how sincerely you try to help other people.
	No, I appreciate that.
	And I certainly would not consider it a mark of respect for you to avoid helping me improve my thinking.
	That would be enabling bad mental habits.
	That would not be what I'd want at all.
	Right.
	I will begin with a weird short statement, which goes, if you and I were discussing something really, really important that we needed to get to the truth of the matter about, and I just casually said, Stefan, I just and I just casually said, Stefan, I just have this aesthetic preference for confusion and ambiguity when we're investigating this truth.
	Would you let me get away with that?
	I don't know, but I, Elias, I'd rather talk about The question that you wrote in with, because there's some stuff I don't understand about it.
	So before we get to the theoretical, if we could deal with what you wrote.
	Okay, so the number one aspect I want to discuss is hypergamy.
	No, hang on, sorry.
	What I got a couple of days ago, so I get the questions a couple of days before the show, which gives me some time to sort of mull them over.
	So I have to start with what you wrote, just because that's what I... Okay, so you wrote, ostracizing someone for moral reasons doesn't harm the person doing the ostracism.
	But ostracizing someone for aesthetic reasons absolutely harms the person doing the ostracism.
	I don't understand that.
	Well, what do you mean by ostracizing?
	I feel like there's two different types of ostracizing.
	One is the voluntary decision...
	Sorry, I'm sorry.
	I apologize for interrupting because I thought you were explaining something else.
	Sorry, please go ahead.
	Okay.
	There's two types of ostracism.
	The first is voluntarily deciding not to associate with anyone.
	And the second is trying to sully someone's reputation or trying to present that person as below you in some way.
	Wait, so do you mean like slandering someone or trying to harm someone's reputation?
	Yes, that is a form of ostracism.
	How do you see that?
	Because...
	If two people are making a different argument or if two people disagree over something, if someone beforehand sullies the reputation of one of the speakers, it prevents or at least hampers people from discovering what the truth actually is.
	Why would you use the word ostracism for that?
	I think it's called poisoning the well in logical terms.
	Like, this guy is a jerk, this guy is a racist, and so on, right?
	So why would you listen to anything he says, right?
	I mean, it's a common...
	Logical fallacy that is put forward by people who don't have a good counterargument.
	You know, like, I can't disprove what you say, so I'm just gonna throw shit at you and hope people turn away because it smells bad.
	Yes, I understand that.
	I'm sorry.
	Were you confused by my use of ostracism?
	Well, I just wanted to know what you meant by ostracism.
	Ostracism is kind of, it's funny because it's one of these words that seems kind of very volatile.
	But it's really not.
	I mean, it's just saying, like, if you quit a job, you're ostracizing your employer.
	If you break up with your girlfriend or your boyfriend, you're ostracizing them.
	If a woman doesn't want to go on a date with me, she's ostracizing me, right?
	She's just choosing not to associate with me.
	And we do this all the time.
	You know, I mean, I got three bad meals at that restaurant.
	I'm never going back.
	Hey, welcome to ostracism, right?
	I mean, so choosing not to associate with people.
	Ostracism is a very...
	Heavy word for that, but it happens all the time in the world.
	You know, people make friendships, they break friendships, they go out, they break up, they patronize certain establishments, they don't.
	I mean, and then they stop for whatever reason.
	And so ostracism, which is just choosing not to associate with someone.
	A divorce, of course, is when there's ostracism within the family.
	So ostracism is, it's a word that people use when they don't like it when someone...
	Dissociates with them, right?
	Ostracism as opposed to, well, they broke up with me or whatever, right?
	But anyway, so I just wanted to know what you meant by ostracism.
	Now, ostracizing someone, I think I understand what you mean, Elias, when you say ostracizing someone in terms of like slandering their reputation so that people don't want to listen to them.
	That is attempting to get other people to ostracize the person.
	Is that right?
	Yes, exactly.
	Okay, so it's contributing to ostracism, but slander is not directly ostracizing someone, but it's done with the hopes of getting other people to ostracize that person, right?
	Yes, definitely.
	Okay, got it.
	Okay.
	The other key point in my question is hypergamy.
	No, no, no.
	We're just starting with ostracism.
	So you said ostracizing someone for moral reasons doesn't harm the person doing the ostracism, but ostracizing someone for aesthetic reasons absolutely harms the person doing the ostracism.
	I'm not sure what that sentence means.
	I mean, I have an idea, but I don't know.
	Right.
	So if someone is behaving immorally or if someone is spreading lies, you're supposed to ostracize that person.
	I'm not sure what you mean by supposed to.
	You're morally obligated to.
	Morally obligated?
	I'm not sure what you mean.
	Or if you don't ostracize that person, then it is a negative reflection of you.
	Again, so now, morally, right, so in terms of the way that I talk about it, right, there's those three layers that are in UPB, which is universally preferable behavior, my free book on ethics at freedomainradio.com slash free.
	So the first is good and evil, right, and which has to do with the use of force.
	The second is aesthetically preferable.
	Which can be universalized, but can't be enforced with violence.
	And the third is neutral.
	And so when you're talking about ostracism, if somebody lies to you, then lying is aesthetically negative behavior.
	In other words, it's bad, but you can't shoot someone for lying to you, right?
	So it doesn't involve morality in terms of good and evil.
	So you're not morally obligated To not see someone or not spend time with someone who's lying to you.
	Because how would you enforce that moral obligation?
	People are morally obligated to not strangle me, which means I can use force to shoot someone and kill someone who's trying to strangle me.
	So there's a very clear moral obligation, don't strangle me, which I'm perfectly justified in using force to prevent.
	So, if you say, well, you morally, you have to not see people who are lying to you, well, how would that be enforced?
	Because when you start saying morally obligated, that's a very heavy and big statement, at least the way that I've worked with ethics.
	Okay.
	I would not say that, you know, that guy lied to you, so you have to not be his friend or I'm going to shoot you, as opposed to, you're not supposed to strangle me, and if you do, I'm going to shoot you, right?
	Those two would be very different situations, right?
	Right, understood.
	My language is too strong.
	Right.
	And I'm not trying to nitpick.
	I just I really want to be clear because this is your first sentence that you wanted to talk about.
	So obviously, it's the most important thing or a very important thing for you.
	So ostracizing for aesthetic reasons harms the person.
	So tell me what you mean by harming the person.
	I should have been more clear on that.
	I don't know if this is true, but I feel like there are situations where I bring forth a very true argument that makes people uncomfortable, just like you described in the last call.
	And instead of people focusing on whether my argument is true or false, they instantly get uncomfortable and then move to ostracized.
	And that type of response, if my argument is true, actually harms that person because I presented them with an opportunity to accept something true that they didn't find comfortable.
	And by accepting that truth, they would grow or self-improve.
	And the moment they ostracize in that moment, well, then they are harming themselves by not accepting that truth.
	So, if you say, look out, I mean, to take a trite example, if you say, look out, there's a piano falling above you, and somebody says, I don't like your accent.
	Right.
	And then the piano falls on them, they're like, well, your prejudice against me telling you the truth has now caused you to have a piano as a hat and be dead, right?
	Yes, exactly.
	Okay.
	All right.
	And so that's the harm.
	Okay.
	So you are very confident, of course, that the arguments you're putting forward are true.
	So can you give me an example of a true argument that has caused ostracism in you or for you?
	Okay.
	I will.
	Before I begin, this is my best representation of what happened during a meetup group for FDR members.
	Sorry, just because the other people aren't here to give their side, I wonder if you could give something that doesn't involve people we might actually be able to get in touch with, just because if there is something that, you know, it's not fair if their positions are characterized and they're known in a community and they don't have a chance to respond.
	So I wonder if you could talk about something from your personal life?
	Hmm, from my personal life?
	It can't only have happened with one FDR meetup group in New York, so I'm just wondering if there's Something that's happened in your personal life where you've experienced ostracism as a result of you bringing truth to people.
	And the reason being that if it's only happened in one meetup group, it can't really be that big an issue, right?
	But it must have happened in other places for it to be the most important thing to talk about.
	I feel like it's happened all my life, but when I go back in time, The only things that are available are the only memories that are available are the ones that have happened recently.
	Wait, are you saying like over how long a period?
	Six to eight months.
	Are you saying that six to eight months, the only negative feedback you've gotten from your truth telling is from an FDR meetup group and everything else has been fine?
	Yes, I would say that.
	Well, Dan, you're doing good.
	I mean, wow, I got to kneel at the feet of you because, I mean, if you're able to bring radical, alarming, unsettling truths without really experiencing any negative social consequences, you must be, like, fantastic at doing this.
	I'm skeptical, right?
	I don't know you, but I'm skeptical that six to eight months you've been talking radical truths to people.
	And you're among families and friends and work colleagues or whatever, and you've not experienced any negative consequences.
	That's quite startling.
	With work, I'm a small business owner, and I don't talk to...
	So I don't have any coworkers, and I don't talk to my clients about FDR just yet.
	Like, that's one of those things I want to bring up later.
	Wait, hang on.
	Sorry, sorry, sorry to interrupt.
	Sorry to interrupt.
	Wait, so you...
	What do you mean you don't talk about FDR? I don't mean that you should.
	I would assume that you would talk about philosophy or truths that you've got because you brought up sort of hypergamy and so on, which is something I've talked about, but it's not a big topic in this show.
	It's certainly not the most controversial or anything like that.
	So is it that you would talk with people about FDR stuff or FDR topics?
	Is that right?
	And so that's where you'd get the most negative feedback.
	No, I will talk to people about male-female relationships and hypergamy, and I will get a lot of negative pushback.
	But not over the last six to eight months?
	Over the last six to eight months, I've gotten a blend of a lot of positive feedback and a lot of very strong negative feedback.
	So it's been 50-50.
	Hang on, Elias, I just asked...
	Sorry to interrupt, I'm getting confused.
	I asked you if you'd experienced any negative...
	Have you had any negative experience with your truth-telling over the last six to eight months and you said no outside of the FDR meetup?
	Right, right.
	And now you're telling me that over the last six to eight months you've experienced some significantly negative feedback.
	I'm baffled.
	No, only at the FDR meetup.
	Okay, I'm going to try this again because I don't think you're hearing what I'm saying.
	I asked you if, and I'm not trying to catch you, if there's something I've misunderstood, just set me straight.
	So you wanted to talk about an FDR meetup, and I said, well, let's talk about something else for the reasons that I gave.
	And I said, what are other examples where you've brought truth to people and have experienced negative feedback or whatever?
	And you said, well, nothing else in six to eight months, right?
	And then I said...
	And then you said, well, I bring up hypergamy with people, which is my truth-telling, and I've experienced some significantly negative things, negative feedbacks over the last six to eight months.
	So I'm trying to figure out what that means.
	Like, have you experienced negative feedback for you bringing the truth to people over the last six to eight months?
	The answer that you've given me in the space of, like, five minutes is both yes and no.
	Right.
	It is...
	In my personal life, I don't get a lot of negative feedback whenever I bring up hypergamy to people.
	But at certain FDR meetup groups, there was a very negative pushback.
	And I understand how you don't want me to represent what happened without giving them a chance to defend themselves.
	But I also will say that if you don't let me talk about what happened, then I'm kind of stuck here.
	So, are you saying that the only...
	Because, I mean, as far as I understand it, you're not a young man.
	You're not middle-aged like me, but you're not a young man.
	And so, how long have you been talking about hypergamy and male-female relations with people?
	About nine months.
	So, you're pretty new to this whole communication about challenging topics, or did you communicate about challenging topics before that in other areas?
	In other areas, I do remember.
	I know I've always been that type of personality that challenges what people say, but when I go back beyond nine months ago, it's just all blank.
	I feel like I've been putting so much energy over this last nine months into this whole hypergamy thing that everything else beforehand just doesn't matter or just isn't emotionally available for me.
	Okay, so you're bringing up hypergamy and male-female relations.
	And you had no negative experiences of any significance, if I understand it correctly, outside of one FDR meetup group.
	Right.
	And, okay, so what have you been talking about with male-female relations and hypergamy that other people are accepting with no problems?
	The number one thing I will say is that you and I disagree with what hypergamy is.
	When I look up the Wikipedia definition of hypergamy, it says the act of marrying a person of higher social class, and it is also implied that when a woman seeks resources, that's what hypergamy is.
	Do you think that definition is accurate?
	Yeah, I mean, I don't know about the second one.
	I mean, we all seek resources.
	I mean, a man seeks resources when he tries to go and get a job.
	Does that mean he's practicing hypergamy?
	No, as far as I understand it, and again, I'm no deeply scholared expert in this area, but hypergamy is the woman's desire to marry up.
	To find a man who has the highest possible social status, prestige, access to resources, and so on.
	The highest status male that she can possibly get based upon her own appeal.
	She wants to get the man with the most resources.
	And the reason for that obviously is biological, which is that women are...
	Traditionally have been disabled for decades, giving birth to and breastfeeding and raising little children, which, again, having had first-hand experience now for six years is a very time-consuming endeavor.
	And so a woman wants to get as many resources as possible because that means that she can have the most children possible.
	In other words, or a way of putting it more technically from a biological standpoint is that The genes that trigger sexual arousal in women based upon the status of the men and the higher the status, the more arousal, those genes are the most likely to be selected for the most reproduction is probably the best way to put it.
	So yeah, women want to marry up.
	Women want to breed with a man who has the greatest resources under one condition.
	Okay.
	Under one condition.
	And that condition is that those resources are scarce.
	Yes.
	And this goes into the R versus K reproductive strategy thing, which I've talked about before.
	Basically, very, very briefly, the R reproductive strategy is pursued by animals where there's an abundance of resources and predators they cannot fight, right?
	So why do rabbits reproduce so frequently and mice and things like that?
	Because they're never going to run out of grass to eat because they're going to be preyed upon by owls and wolves and foxes and so on.
	And so there's not really hypergamy in the way of like, well, boy, I've got to get a man with lots of resources because the resources are everywhere.
	And so your reproductive strategy when you are in an excess resource environment is to just breed as much as possible and to invest very little into your children.
	And so hypergamy kicks in in particular when resources are scarce and when the quality of a man has a direct bearing or the quality of the male has a direct bearing on the availability of resources.
	So for wolves, very hypergamous species, because the quality of the male wolf as hunter has a direct bearing on the amount of resources he's able to bring to the female wolf and the pups.
	Hypergamy is strongly correlated to scarce resources that male skill can have an effect upon, if that makes sense.
	Yes, that does make sense.
	I would say, though, that the world has changed.
	All of those conclusions that you have illustrated are from Observing humanity for a very long time.
	But in 1950, women had access to birth control.
	And from there, they also had access to labor-saving devices through technology and also the ability to gather resources for themselves through EasyJobs.
	And so, in my opinion, for the last 65 years, this is the first time in human history where women are free to choose what they want, to reflect on what they want.
	And so, my understanding of hypergamy is that we are still hypergamous now.
	It's just that it's not about marriage anymore, it's about sex and it's about emotional connection.
	And so the best way I can summarize it is that women will divide men into two different classes.
	The first class of man is not really going to be a good father, but he looks really, really nice and he has like this aloof kind of distant personality that's intriguing, but she knows that he's not going to be a good father in the long run.
	Like that's the first type of guy.
	Sorry, to be technical, that's our reproductive strategy.
	In biological terms, it's called the dad versus the cat.
	And there have been studies that show that women prefer more strongly masculine features, guys with beards, when they're ovulating.
	There's a peak in women's interest in hyper-masculinized men, as I'm sure you're aware, when women are ovulating.
	And that's because women want to hedge their bets because society can change, right?
	If you're in a hypergamous society, it would be an agricultural society.
	But however, agricultural societies are subject to vagaries in weather patterns and floods and tornadoes and armies and so on.
	So women need to have children who have the capacity to either go R or go K depending on Socio and environmental cues starting from conception onwards.
	This is why stress in women tend to produce more promiscuous children because that's the R reproductive strategy and stress on the mother's body during pregnancy produces more R because it's assumed that there are stressors in the society.
	In the environment, which means that there's less control, which means breeding more is the best way to reproduce.
	So yeah, to put it coarsely, as I'm sure you're aware too, it is the argument of the alpha fucks and the beta bucks, that the woman wants to have sex with the alpha, but then wants the beta to pay for the raising of the children.
	And in many ways, That is a very good strategy for female genes.
	It's not a great strategy for male genes, in particular the beta genes, right?
	Well, that depends on how you look at it.
	If you think the beta's genes are permanent, that he can't improve and that he can't improve his position, then it's tragic.
	But if you believe that the beta's genes can improve their position, then it's just an opportunity.
	I'm sorry, Elias.
	I'm sorry to interrupt.
	I'm not sure what you mean when you say the beta's genes can improve their position.
	I mean, if you're raising another man's children, that's a dead end for you genetically, right?
	Absolutely.
	But the point is, was it possible when he was younger to acquire certain personal habits that made him appear or be more alpha?
	And if it were possible, and if he chose to avoid those options, then he is partially responsible for being in his predicament.
	Oh, yeah.
	I get all of that, for sure.
	I mean, but the fundamental change, I mean, people talk about birth control and labor-saving devices and I don't think that has any effect on hypergamy whatsoever.
	The only thing that has an effect on hypergamy or the only thing that has an effect on the dads versus the cats equation for women is risk, right?
	So why was it that women tended to maybe they'd flirt a little bit with the cats but they'd end up marrying and have children with the dads?
	because society did not support women who had children with men who didn't stick around.
	Absolutely.
	Right?
	Those women would put their children up for adoption, or if they raised those children, and you can see this in Downton Abbey, which is meticulously researched from a socio-historical standpoint, at least as far as I have been able to see.
	So there was massive social pressure on women to not have sex with a cat, but rather to wait for the dead.
	And I get it.
	I mean, it's like there's this old Woody Allen movie, I can't remember which one it is, where he talks about this woman who was fantastic in bed and utterly insane.
	Yes.
	Right?
	And, you know, the hot crazy chick is a well-known trope in the male lexicon of dating, right?
	You know, the hotter she is, the crazier she is.
	And so sexual attraction gives people great power and power tends to corrupt.
	And so the way that society used to restrain the desire of women to have sex with alphas and have betas raise their children was to ostracize the women who had sex with alphas or cats, right?
	And that's gone because the welfare state now pays for it all.
	And so, There is no shortage of resources for women who've had children.
	And the whole point was to starve women of resources if they had children outside of marriage.
	In other words, the woman would have to get a commitment from a man to marry her and then she could start having kids.
	But that's not necessary now because the welfare state throws tens and tens and tens of thousands of dollars per year at women and gives them subsidized housing and free healthcare and free schools and all this kind of crap.
	And so the lid on women's irresponsibility has just been lifted.
	And this is why this has become such a grotesque tragedy, is that the welfare state creates a...
	an R environment and thus promotes R strategies, right?
	Because R is what happens, the R reproductive strategy, have as many kids as you want and don't invest much in the kids and the dads don't have to be around.
	That is what human beings naturally tend towards, both genetically and in particular epigenetically.
	That's what human beings tend towards in a situation of limitless resources and fiat currency and debt and the welfare state creates the illusion of limitless resources, which is what destroys the K selected family, right?
	Where it Which is fewer children, a slower development to children and higher investment in raising children in each individual child.
	I don't think that matters fundamentally, because that just allows a woman to choose when she has children, but the pill doesn't make children free, and it certainly doesn't make children a profit center.
	That requires the welfare state.
	Right, I agree with you.
	I agree with you on all of that.
	My perspective, though, is that a young beta male can self-improve if he just understands what hypergamy is and embraces it by conducting himself accordingly.
	But what do you mean by improve?
	I'm not sure what you mean by that.
	He can become more alpha in order to, I don't want to say keep women in line, but that's like what I'm getting at.
	If a man improves himself as a catch to women, the more of a catch he is, the more options he will have, and that will enable him to explore which women are morally good and upright versus which women aren't.
	Yeah, so I get it.
	So if you get an MBA from Harvard, or I don't know, whatever is big in the business world these days, then you have more choice about where you work.
	So if you add to your value as an employee, then you get more choices, and you can negotiate harder, and you can get a better job.
	Yes.
	And so my position is that if men want to have a sense of what women are like, or if they want to have a sense of what the truth is about themselves and their relationships with women, they have to embrace hypergamy.
	Like, they have to physically work out.
	Because if they don't work out...
	Hang on, hang on, hang on.
	Look, wait, we just went from being a quality partner to a...
	To a man to work, sorry, being a quality partner to a woman to, well, that's just working out.
	I assume that that's just the beginning.
	I mean, I like to work out and I'm a big fan of working out and all that, but I don't think that you mean that fundamentally.
	I think you'd start off with, you know, be responsible, be ethical, be consistent, be someone who has some financial resources or some value in a financial sphere, be somebody who's loyal, who's trustworthy.
	You know, that is, I think, going to raise...
	stock price with quality women, right?
	Whereas if he's just like, well, I got six packs, isn't that just going to get shallow, dumb women to want to have sex with you?
	Yes.
	But the problem is if the really philosophically strong, morally correct, deeply emotional, highly empathetic person does not have six pack abs, then a woman will notice that whether she's quality or not.
	And she will Wait a minute, wait a minute.
	Are you saying that if you don't have six-pack abs, a quality woman will count that as a big strike against you?
	I will say that if you do not have six-pack abs or if you're not working to acquire six-pack abs, if you're just walking down a street and a quality woman is looking at you, you will look just like everybody else who does not have six-pack abs and is not philosophically of high quality.
	Well, okay, first of all, I think you can tell a lot about a person's intelligence just about their gait, right?
	I mean, how they walk, how they move, their eye contact, the liveliness of their eyes, and so on.
	There's a lot that can happen in terms of somebody figuring out whether you're a quality person or not.
	And, you know, I don't know if you walk down the street regularly without a shirt on, But I don't think that necessarily...
	I mean, I don't think there's anything wrong with six-pack abs.
	I think they're fine.
	They're sort of a mythical beast past 40 for the most part for me.
	But anyway, there's nothing...
	It's fine, you know, if you want to do that many sit-ups.
	But I don't know that that's...
	It's interesting to me that that's the first thing you'd go to is like a six-pack.
	Well, it's the first thing I go to because it is fundamentally true that having a really strong body is just universally aesthetically preferable to not.
	No, no, no.
	Biologically, it's complicated.
	It's not that simple.
	I mean, what you're talking about is our reproductive strategy, which only goes for genetic fitness and doesn't care about parental involvement.
	The rabbits just have sex with the genetically fittest fathers that they can find, and they don't care about the moral qualities of the father because it's just reproductive, right?
	Whereas if a woman is K-selected, right, I mean, if she's going to have fewer kids but invest resources, she's going to want a dad around, and the six-pack is only of fundamental attractiveness to the R-selected mating strategy.
	To the K-selected mating strategy, the K-selected woman says, wait a minute, this guy's got to be spending two hours a day in the gym and is pretty body obsessed in order to get that physique.
	And he's put that time into developing his physique, which he's not put into developing other things like his character or his earning potential or his virtue or these kinds of things.
	You would automatically look at a man with a very healthy body and assume that he's not philosophically strong?
	Well, I just made a case.
	I mean, if you want to counter-argue it, but just putting a question mark at the end of a statement is not the same as making an argument.
	There's opportunity costs, right?
	So you have a six-pack, is that right?
	No, I'm only working on it, and I've only been working on acquiring it for six months.
	And how many hours a day or a week are you spending trying to acquire a six-pack or working out as a whole?
	Working out as a whole, it is an hour a day like five times a week, so it's five hours.
	Well, no, it's not just five hours because you have to go to the gym, you have to change, you have to shower, you have to do the laundry associated with having all that gym wear, get sweaty and all that, right?
	So it's not just five hours, right?
	No, it is five hours because I don't do gym.
	I do bodyweight exercises and so every workout that I do is in my home.
	And so I deliberately chose this workout program because it would be in my home and would give me good results without having to do the whole drive to the gym thing.
	Okay, so you've got 20 hours a week pretty much invested in this stuff, right?
	Sorry, 20 hours a month.
	Yeah, 20 hours a month, four hours a week, five hours a week.
	Five hours a week, you said?
	Yes.
	Okay.
	Well, I think that's great.
	You know, so that, I mean, if, I mean, I've certainly known guys who are doing like three hours a day in the gym.
	Sometimes I knew a guy who did four hours a day in the gym and he looked magnificent.
	Yeah.
	But he hadn't read a book in three years.
	Sorry?
	Yeah.
	And that becomes crazy.
	Like that becomes a trade-off.
	Like it becomes an obsession that prevents him from pursuing other things.
	Yeah, and I mean, I tried to do like an hour to an hour and a half every other day.
	So I, you know, I'm not gonna kvetch on you.
	I mean, that seems reasonable, you know, to stay healthy and all of that.
	So that's great.
	Great.
	Now, what are you doing in terms of developing your character and personality if you want to attract a quality woman?
	My exploration of hypergamy and of pickup artistry in general has been to get a really strong sense of what women biologically find attractive.
	Which women?
	Hang on, hang on, hang on.
	Sorry.
	Which women?
	K-women or R-women?
	Both.
	Both?
	No, no.
	I don't think that works very well.
	I understand.
	What I believe happens is that a lot of- I mean, I got this image of you as a wolf trying to have an orgy with a bunch of rabbits.
	I just- I'm sure there's a kink somewhere out there.
	I'm sure there's a subreddit for that somewhere out there, you know, like, wolf-rabbit-orgy-sex with pictures.
	But I don't know that it works hugely well.
	No, it's trying to maximize my ability to create sexual arousal in women, whether they are selected or case selected, and then being able to talk to them, whether through pick-up artistry or through philosophical questions or blend of both, to determine their character.
	Okay, so can you give me an example of pick-up artistry?
	So let's pretend that I'm a woman and you're coming up to try and pick me up.
	Okay, so this happened to me personally.
	I was driving into a McDonald's to pick up, you know, like a coffee.
	And when I pulled up to the window, the woman gave me an involuntary smile.
	And I know what that smile means.
	Like I know that that was instant sexual attraction.
	Like I knew it.
	And I know that the honest thing is to just say, you know, hey, would you like to go out with me?
	But my own perspective is that women don't find that attractive.
	Like it's not fun for them to just be honestly asked whether they want to be accompanied on a date or not.
	And so my rule always is to try to create some emotional intensity using an aloof, challenging perspective.
	So what I did was I pulled in and I saw her do that involuntary smile, and my radio was off, so there's no music happening at all.
	And so what I did is I put on this really exaggerated, sour, angry expression, and I asked her straight up, are you laughing at my music?
	And she was legitimately confused, and she just repeated back to me, am I laughing at your music?
	Wait, so you pretended to...
	Sorry, I didn't understand.
	So you lied to her, right?
	Because you were pretending to be aggressive and hostile towards her when that wasn't actually what you felt.
	When you call it a lie, you're imagining how you would feel in that interaction.
	But if she feels differently because she's looking at my facial expression.
	No, no, no, no, no, no, no.
	I'm a philosopher, which means that that how I feel in the situation, that doesn't have anything to do with it.
	Okay.
	You said, are you laughing?
	You put on a sour expression, a hostile expression.
	You said, are you laughing at my music?
	Yes, this is exaggerated.
	And you did not for a moment imagine that she was laughing at your music.
	Absolutely not.
	And I'm obvious.
	So you pretended to be angry and lied to her.
	Yes.
	Okay.
	Let's just be honest about, I mean, let's be honest about you lying, right?
	Because earlier on you were saying, well, lying is bad, right?
	Okay.
	Okay.
	So, okay, so I'm just trying to understand how this works, and I appreciate you sharing this with me.
	It's great.
	Okay, so you lied to her and you pretended to be angry when you weren't, and then what happened?
	So she repeats in a very legitimately confused voice, am I laughing at your music?
	And so my response was to turn my head to the side a little bit and half smirk and say, I don't know, when I pulled into this window, you were laughing at something.
	Now, you know that it's not a very fair situation because she's an employee and you're a customer.
	And if she's afraid that she's upset or offended you, she's afraid also that you might complain to her manager, right?
	Yes, but that's only if she takes everything that I say seriously.
	If I'm exaggerating it with facial expressions that suggest untruth, then she can participate in the interaction as if it's a game.
	Okay, so, alright, let's say that she doesn't, like, so, but it has to be believable enough that she believes that you're actually angry when you first say it, right?
	It has to toe the line of being somewhat believable, but somewhat obvious that it's not believable at all.
	So it's a blend of, that's just what it is.
	Like, you're creating an emotional intensity through pretense.
	Okay, so you're pretending to be angry, and she knows that you're pretending to be angry?
	And then it just becomes a game.
	So, hang on, hang on.
	So, at the beginning, she knows that you're pretending to be angry when you say, are you laughing at my music?
	She knows that you're joking.
	Yes.
	Okay.
	She knows that I'm joking and I'm confused.
	Wait, you're confused or she's confused?
	The key is exaggerated facial expressions.
	Because if a person combines exaggerated facial expressions, it's the exaction that creates the sense of, this guy isn't being straight with me.
	So you're confusing her?
	And so if she uses...
	Absolutely.
	Okay, so you're trying to disorient her by giving her mixed signals.
	In other words, your voice sounds angry, but you're smiling?
	Yes.
	Isn't that sort of crazy?
	Like if somebody snarls at me and accuses me of something negative, but they're smiling at the same time, don't they look kind of crazy?
	Um, you're a guy though.
	She's a woman.
	When men present mixed signals like that, like it draws them in.
	They are biologically designed to find that interesting.
	Okay, so then, so you say, are you laughing at my music?
	And she said, what do you mean?
	Am I laughing at She was legitimately confused.
	I smirked and turned my head to the side and I was like, I don't know, when I pulled up to this window, you were laughing at something.
	Right.
	And her response was to open up like a flower, like she understood, like I saw it click in her mind, that this was completely a game, that this is me hitting on her.
	became completely open and she got this huge smile on her face.
	And then she toned down the smile and she leaned over in the window and she's like, I don't know, maybe I'm just a happy person.
	Okay.
	And if I wanted to ask her out, I would have said something like, I don't know, maybe you are a happy person, but what I think you need is for someone to teach you not to laugh at other people's music because it wounds their soul.
	Somebody needs to teach you not to laugh at other people's music.
	That sounds a little sinister.
	No, sinister when a guy hears it.
	When a woman hears it and knows she's being hit on, it's just funny.
	Somebody needs to teach you a good lesson.
	So a guy would experience that as threatening, but a woman experiences that as sexy?
	Yes, or at least interesting.
	It doesn't mean she's going to have sex with you that day, but it does mean that she's interesting.
	Okay, do you mind if I ask you a quick question?
	Go ahead.
	How old was this woman?
	Um, it was hard to gauge, but I would say 28 to 30.
	Okay, so she's 28 years old.
	Oh, let's say 30, because I know you're in your late 30s.
	So I'm glad you didn't say 20, because that would be pretty sad, right?
	So she's 30.
	You're in a car, and she's working at McDonald's.
	I know.
	Dude, you're a small business owner, a very intelligent fellow, right?
	And she's 30 years old, and she's working at McDonald's.
	Yes.
	And you want to go out with her?
	No, I wanted to practice my flirtation skills the moment that I saw her smile at me like that.
	I asked you for an example of pickup artistry, and you found, as a guy in a car...
	Who's got some trappings of wealth and success, I assume.
	I mean, I assume it's not like a pedal car or something like that, right?
	A bumper car.
	Right, so you have trappings of success, and you're flirting with a woman whose life has taken such a tragic arc that she's 30 years old and working at the pickup window in McDonald's, which is like IQ 85 stuff, if you're lucky.
	And I assume that as a small business owner, you've got an IQ of 110, 115.
	So you're two standard deviations above her in intelligence, likely, and you're taking great pride in being able to manipulate her?
	No, I'm taking great pride in knowing that I was able to create that emotional intensity based on the articles that I have read that says that that kind of thing works.
	Well, yeah, if you've got...
	Listen, I'll tell you this in general.
	If you're two standard deviations higher in intelligence than someone, you can pretty much fool them and manipulate them quite easily.
	But, you know, it's like me saying, well, you know, I'm a real tough guy because I beat up a guy who's two standard deviations smaller than me.
	In other words, he's like, I don't know, five foot tall, right?
	And so the idea, like...
	This is a very low-status woman, right?
	Maybe she's doing her PhD and working at the counter at McDonald's, but you are basically saying, as a really smart guy, I can fool a really not smart woman.
	And I'm just not sure how that says you've got game.
	Okay, fine.
	So if I take a second example, this woman is very, very intelligent, very, very well raised.
	I would say that she probably has an IQ of like 130.
	When I met up with her for dinner, I extended my hand across the table to say, let's hold hands in the restaurant, even though it was a first date.
	And when she looked at me, she looked me dead in the face and she's like, it looks like you're begging for something, but I don't know what it is.
	Oh, is that what she said?
	Oh, no, that's what her look said.
	No, that's what she said.
	Oh, she said, it looks like you're begging for something, but I don't know what it is.
	Was this your first date?
	Yes.
	That's incredibly rude.
	It is, but at the same—well, no.
	If I choose to interpret it as rude, then I can respond as if it's rude and I can disengage myself from her.
	But if I assume that it's funny and then engage in a behavior that says, no, this is funny, let's go with it, then we each invite each other to participate in it as if it's a game.
	And so my response to her was an exaggerated, angry face saying, girl, why did you have to say things like that?
	You know, it's one thing if you're just ignoring my hand, but now that you said that, now I've got to turn my hand over, right?
	And so I turned my hand over, leaving it there, you know, in the let's not hold hands in the restaurant position anymore.
	And so then after like seven or eight minutes of really deep philosophical conversation, I turn my hand back over to say, hey, let's hold hands in the restaurant.
	And she looks at my upturned hand, gives me this half smirk, and she's like, I'm going to give you an orange.
	Would you like an orange?
	And at that point, I left.
	Because it was funny.
	Because...
	Wait, I don't get the orange thing.
	Oh, there were oranges on the table.
	And so because there were sliced oranges on the table, when she saw me turn my hand over again, she said, I'm going to give you an orange.
	Would you like an orange?
	I still don't see why that's funny.
	Maybe I'm missing something.
	Well, no.
	The point is that if you interpret it as rude, Then you kind of box yourself in and say, oh, you're being rude to me and I don't like it.
	And then if her intention was to just have fun in the moment and you tell her she's being rude, well, then you don't have an emotional connection with her and then you have to leave her and she has to leave you.
	But because I interpreted her intentions as friendly and funny, I was able to participate in In the conversation with a false sense of being offended, because that signals funniness in the moment.
	Oh, so if she's being playful and you're playful back, I mean, I don't, okay.
	But I don't see how that's pickup artistry.
	I mean, that's just, I mean, I wasn't there, obviously, right?
	I don't know if she did it with a big laugh or whatever.
	I would find like, what you've talked about in both situations is like a power play.
	Because if you're reaching across the table, then you're reaching for her.
	And then she says, looks like you're begging, she's elevating herself and putting you down in the same way that when you alarm the woman.
	By driving up and saying, are you laughing at my music?
	You're putting her on the defensive.
	In other words, you're elevating yourself and putting her down, right?
	So this jockeying for power, this jockeying for dominance, I don't think that's going to lead to a quality relationship in the long run.
	In other words, if you set up the stage where I find women are really attracted to me when I jockey for dominance with them, Boy, wouldn't it be great to spend a lifetime with a woman like that?
	I think I'd rather chew my own ass off.
	I think that would be a pretty exhausting life to have.
	So I'm still trying to figure out how you're getting the high-quality K-women out of this.
	What will happen is, it's what I was saying before, that my personal assessment of you is that you are alpha.
	You are alpha.
	When I look at diagrams of what hypergamy is in modern times, you are alpha.
	You master them all.
	You have physical fitness.
	You have lifestyle.
	You have more than enough money to get by.
	You devote yourself to the truth and you help people.
	And you've always just had this natural sense of how to talk to women.
	It is obvious from the way that you present yourself in your podcast that you've always been alpha in this way.
	So when you as an alpha individual say, well, I never had to resort to all this trickery and power play and all of that, and I've had quality women.
	I didn't say that.
	Hang on.
	Hang on.
	I'm not sure who you're talking to now, but I didn't say that.
	Did I? Sorry?
	No.
	Did I say I've never had to resort to this kind of trickery?
	I don't think I've said that.
	No, but it's an implication.
	No, no.
	You said that that's what I said.
	Sorry.
	No, and I meant to say that you imply it in all of your podcasts.
	I don't think that I've ever said I've never had to play any games with women.
	I don't think I've ever said that it doesn't matter how you present yourself to women.
	I think I've said teasing can be fun and playfulness can be a lot of fun.
	I think that...
	I'm always sort of, you know, when someone says, well, this is what you said.
	And I said, well, no, no, I never said that.
	And then they said, well, that's what you implied.
	It's like, hmm, I don't know.
	I think you might be bringing more of yourself than me to that part of the interaction.
	Understood.
	Would you make it a rule that if a man wants to understand the truth about himself and the nature of women that he has to work out?
	Simply because women as a whole are more attracted to men who have strong bodies, whether they're case-selected or are selected?
	I mean, I don't know.
	I mean, if you look at Tom Likas, you know, Tom Likas, you know, looks like a boiled hen, and he gets tons of women.
	I mean, I think Larry King, who looks like a garden gnome in suspenders, has been married many times and has young...
	I don't know if Donald Trump does a lot of sit-ups.
	Danny DeVito used to get lots of women.
	So I don't know.
	I mean, just saying, well, workout equals female attractiveness, I don't know.
	I mean, it's hard to say.
	I'm not saying that there's a bunch of chubby tasters among the fairer sex, but the range of what people find attractive can be kind of wide.
	And I think that in general, women are very well attuned to figuring out what a man is going to bring them in terms of resources, at least the case-selected women.
	And K-selected women, as far as I've talked about it with really high-quality women, basically they'll look at a guy walking past who's built like a brick shithouse and nothing but abs and viper shoulders all over the place.
	They've got the cobra back, right?
	And, you know, basically it's like, yeah, that could be fun for a weekend, but that's no one to settle down with, right?
	High maintenance, right?
	And the reason they say that is because that is a sexual mating display For R-selected women, and these are all K-women.
	And so they say, yeah, I can do R for a little bit.
	It's easier for K to dip into R than for R to become K, because it's a devolution rather than an evolution.
	And so they'll look at that and they'll say, well, there's a guy who spent a lot more time in the gym than he has spent working overtime.
	And there is this sort of reality that women are very aware of the trade-offs that men are bringing to bear when they present themselves.
	And this is why An ugly guy in a Lamborghini or a fat guy in a Lamborghini can do just as well, if not better, than some built guy living in his mom's basement or whatever.
	And that's because the time, focus, and attention, if you put a huge amount of work into your body, there's opportunity costs that you're not pursuing in other areas.
	And also, the women of quality know for sure that you're trying to attract women.
	Who are going to look more at your body than your mind.
	In other words, they know that a very built male body is an advertisement for R-selected women, that you want the R-selected women, and so the K-selected women, they'll be like, eh, you know, could be fun for a weekend, but I mean, that's not one you'd get serious with.
	It sounds like you're asserting that it's impossible for a man to be physically built, philosophically sound, of high character, and know how to just naturally talk to women at the same time.
	Like, it sounds like you're saying that that's all impossible.
	Dude, come on.
	Listen, I just made a case.
	And now you're saying, well, it sounds like you're saying this.
	I just said something, and now you're going to an imaginary conversation, right?
	You know I just said something.
	You can respond to something I said, or you can make up something that you think I'm saying.
	I'd actually prefer it if you want to have a conversation that you respond to what I said, even if you disagree with it, especially if you disagree with it.
	But making up something you think I might be implying is not having a conversation with me.
	I disagree that it is wise for a woman to assume that a man who looks a certain way cannot possibly be philosophically sound.
	She can generalize...
	Did I say that?
	Did I say that?
	It's impossible?
	No, you didn't say that it was impossible.
	So why don't you deal with what I said rather than what you think I might be saying?
	Okay, so you said that...
	This is what I said.
	I said women know that there are trade-offs involved, and they know that a man who's putting huge amounts of work into his body is not putting into other things, and the fact that he's focusing so much on his body means that he's more likely to be trying to get an R-selected woman.
	I said nothing about possible or impossible or absolutes or anything like that.
	I don't agree with the generalization.
	I think the generalization itself is prejudicial.
	Okay, would you like to make an argument or are you just going to use the word prejudicial?
	I think it would be in a woman's best interest to allow that man to talk to her first and then get a gauge for how intelligent and how philosophically sound he is rather than just assuming he's not philosophically sound nor intelligent because he's spending that much time in the gym.
	Why did I ever say that the woman would not talk to that man?
	No, but you presented a case-selected woman as someone who will look at that man and say, well, there are trade-offs in all of that, and I could be with him for like a weekend.
	Which would involve conversation, right?
	Not necessarily.
	She can just look at him and make an assessment.
	Wait, wait, hang on.
	Are you saying that she'd spend a weekend with him and they would have no conversation at all?
	No, what you presented is a monologue in her head that happens before he has even spoken to her.
	Right, so she's willing to have a conversation with him and she might be willing to have a weekend with him, but he's probably not a good candidate for settling down with it.
	Oh, okay, so that's how you presented it.
	Like, you presented it as a monologue that happens in her head, so you presented it as a conclusion she makes before she even hears him say anything.
	Look, I mean, and we all have to make life decisions based upon social cues, right?
	The homeless guy out front of an office I work in might be an investment genius.
	He might be.
	You know, clean him up, send him to business school.
	I mean, he might just be that Will Smith character in some damn movie where he's just like he's homeless, but he's a business genius.
	Might be.
	But I don't see a lot of business people pulling homeless people into their offices and making it a big project.
	We have to make decisions based upon incomplete information.
	We cannot invest massive resources in everyone hoping that they're somehow the wild exception to the bell curve of probability.
	You know, the woman with giant false eyelashes, a purple wig, massive double D artificial boobs, And a miniskirt might be a genius philosopher.
	I don't like that comparison.
	No, I get it.
	I'm not trying to compare you to that person.
	I'm just saying we have to draw some conclusions based upon or we have to make decisions based on incomplete information because time and resources are all finite.
	I'm not comparing you to such a caricature, right?
	No, you're not.
	And we all have to make these decisions.
	So the guy who lisps And has peroxided hair and works in a hair salon and listens to pet shop boys obsessively and, you know, and speaks in this outrageously gay manner.
	He might be straight.
	He might be.
	But I don't think it's crazy to say, I'm going to go with gay.
	That doesn't mean that you wouldn't be aware that it might be wrong, you may be incorrect, right?
	He might just be really flamboyant or British.
	But we all have to make decisions.
	Maybe the person who's covered head to toes in tattoos and piercings and whatever, maybe that person has, you know, deep abiding Buddhist self-knowledge and spirituality and is as calm as a sedated rabbit.
	But we all have to make decisions.
	You know, maybe the guy who shows up for the job interview in a scuba outfit Is a business genius, right?
	But we all have to make decisions based upon incomplete information.
	And I'm tired, and it's not your fault, right?
	Because it's just something that happens all the time.
	I'm tired when I say, well, this is how, in general, we would have to make decisions based on that.
	And you say, well, there could be exceptions.
	It's like, well, yeah, there could be exceptions.
	The homeless guy might be a business genius.
	The guy showing up to work in a scuba gear outfit might be a fantastic employee and so on.
	But we don't have eternity and an affinity in which to apply resources and explore every conceivable possibility and opportunity.
	So we have to make decisions based upon incomplete information.
	And yeah, the guy who's got the six-pack and who spends hours, not you, but spends hours a day in the gym or whatever, and that's obviously his major focus, maybe he would be a great...
	Person to settle down with and so on.
	Fantastic.
	But if I was a quality woman and you told me about how you scared and confused a 30-year-old woman working at McDonald's and considered yourself some great lover because of that, I'd be like, what?
	I don't understand it.
	I can push over a kid that doesn't make me a heavyweight champion.
	Do you think a man who is very philosophical but chooses to be overweight harms himself by being overweight?
	Well, I've made this case before in a show.
	I think not only does he harm himself, he also harms the cause of philosophy.
	Because philosophy is supposed to be about self-knowledge and wisdom.
	And I think that being obese is basically saying...
	It's like Freud with his 20-cigar-a-day habit.
	Even after he's had a dozen operations for cancer of the jaw, he continues to obsessively smoke his cigars, pulling this inexcusable bullshit of saying when people say, well, wait a minute, maybe the cigar represents...
	No, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
	It's like, well, if it's just a cigar, then put the fucking thing down because it's killing you.
	Right?
	I mean, so I think that if you do have, if you do focus on self-knowledge and the deferral of gratification and wisdom and moderation and things, then I think being obese means that you're not being very good at philosophy.
	And so, yeah, I think those are markers.
	I would assume that somebody who is obese and claims to be a philosopher is probably not working in the area of self-knowledge and is not able to apply the Aristotelian philosophy of moderation and the mean to his own plate.
	What about a man who's not obese but doesn't work out and is just obviously physically weak?
	Well, I would assume that that person is making particular choices that I would, you know, I mean, so maybe this person is like so obsessed with coming up with a unified field theory that he's spending all this time whiteboarding and thinking and obsessing and maybe the gym really interferes with that, in which case I'm like, yeah, go for it.
	You know, I mean, I can see why somebody might want to make that trade-off.
	In the same way, if somebody is really focused on making money, And that requires, like, for whatever, they're an accountant or they're a business magnet, and that means a lot of sitting down, then, you know, they're going to be overweight, but that's not philosophical.
	I wouldn't say, well, boy, they must have a really bad ability to make money because they've got office butt.
	You know, I mean, they're focusing on making money and not focusing on going to the gym.
	And I might think, you know, for general, happiness may be a bit more balanced, but, you know, that's what they're focusing on.
	I agree with that.
	My position is that if we accept that women find certain body types attractive, and if we accept that they find certain financial positions attractive, and if we accept that they find certain flirting styles attractive, then we have no choice but to pursue all of those things.
	Are you saying that women as a whole find...
	All of this stuff attractive?
	I don't get how women as a whole are going to find something attractive.
	I mean, biker chicks, I've seen them, right?
	Biker chicks like guys who have thighs like garbage cans and, you know, like wear skull caps and little leather waistcoats that look like they're about to explode out of them.
	And those biker chicks like the biker guys, and then the Bay Street lawyer women, they don't like those guys.
	I don't know where you're grouping all women together in what they find attractive.
	Well, okay.
	The moment you tell me about the biker girl finding certain men attractive, I just automatically assume that she's really, really ugly and she does not have a really well-developed personality.
	And so because of that, she cannot attract a higher value man.
	And so she settles for the biker dude who is her equivalent.
	Wait, are you saying that all biker girls are ugly?
	Well, if you say that the majority of men with really muscular bodies are not really devoting themselves to intelligence, then I think it's perfectly fair of me to say that the majority of biker chicks are not exactly devoting themselves to personal hygiene and developing a sense of femininity that men find attractive.
	Well, to be technical, I didn't say that they weren't devoting themselves to intelligence based upon my knowledge of IQ and genetics.
	I'm not sure that it's possible to devote oneself to intelligence.
	I just said that there's opportunity costs.
	But do goth girls, right?
	So goth girls like a particular style of anemic-looking Robert Smith-type man.
	And when I was a kid, skinny rockers was like the big thing.
	And Brian May, who's like this giant spider with...
	Like snakes for fingers.
	And he weighs, you know, all of 12 pounds soaking wet, you know, 13, actually 35 pounds if he gels his hair.
	But, you know, Freddie Mercury was skinny and didn't work out and he was considered to be a real sex symbol.
	Back in the day, of course, You look at somebody like Humphrey Bogart, who was a skinny, non-exercised smoker guy, was considered to be a huge sexy man for women.
	I mean, these things all change, right?
	I mean, so when men used to work outdoors and outdoor work was lower paid, a tan was considered unattractive.
	So, women used to try to be as pale as possible because it meant you could spend your life indoors, which meant that you had money, which meant that you had intelligence, which meant you had smart eggs and all that, right?
	And then when men began to work inside, then being able to have the leisure to go outside and go on vacation and get a tan became...
	A sign of wealth and suddenly a tan was in.
	When food was scarce, being slightly overweight or significantly overweight was considered attractive.
	Now that food is plentiful, then being underweight is considered attractive.
	When physical labor was the norm, then muscular men were showing low status.
	But now that you have to pay for a gym membership in general and you have to have the leisure to be able to exercise because most men are working in offices, now muscles have become Attractive, because it's now a sign of higher status to have muscles, whereas, you know, 50 or 75 years ago, it was a sign of lower status.
	Like, having muscles was a sign of lower status.
	So, I don't know that you can say, well, this is what women like, or this is what women don't like.
	I mean, whatever shows higher status for particular...
	Reproductive strategies.
	And remember, these reproductive strategies are all a big bell curve, right?
	Lots of women are kind of in the middle, willing to go both ways, at least according to Katy Perry.
	And there is much more stuff on the extremes.
	I'll be done in a second, then I'll be quiet for a while.
	But this, so there are women, of course, and there are even case selected women who at the moment of ovulation are going to look for our selected characteristics, short term mating strategies.
	Higher testosterone, because higher testosterone, testosterone inhibits the immune system.
	And so having higher testosterone shows that you're strong enough to, even with a depressed immune system, you're still healthy and all that.
	And of course, what you're doing is you are showing a dominance in your being willing to If you discombobulate and confuse women, you are showing dominance.
	In other words, you're showing, I'm not a pussy beggar, I'm not a white knight, I'm not what they call a mangina or a simp or all these kinds.
	You're saying, listen, I'm a dominant person relative to women.
	Women will find that attractive because that would signal that you would go out and get resources for these women, right?
	That you would then be dominant and aggressive with other And therefore you would get resources for the women.
	And so I don't think that you can say this is what women find attractive as a whole, because it changes very much depending on subculture.
	You know, there are some African tribes where having a vastly elongated neck is considered the height of sexual attraction.
	And so women, you know, put these hoops around their neck and become these giraffe women and then they can't even get around without these hoops.
	In the Victorian age, they're having this incredibly narrow corset.
	Sorry, this incredibly narrow waist.
	And so they'd have these whalebone corsets that would crush women's internal organs and reduce the strength of their abdominal muscles to the point where a lot of them died during childbirth Just because they'd worn these ridiculous corsets that give them these 18-inch waist and rot away their abdominal muscles so they can't push when it comes time to having a baby.
	So what is attractive?
	I don't know.
	I mean, I think you can say, well, women find this attractive or women don't find that attractive.
	But if you think you're referring to all women, I think you're sadly mistaken.
	I think you'd be surprised at how much selection you're bringing to bear on the equation.
	Okay, that's it.
	I'll be quiet because I had a long speech, but go ahead.
	Thank you.
	My own personal sense is that this time is unique.
	This is the first time.
	Like, women have never been more free.
	And so when you go back in time to African societies or when you go back in time to Victorian societies, you had a lot of women that were caged.
	But today they're free and they want everything.
	I know that a lot of men, myself included, I was like this for the longest time, I would feel intimidated and sad at the fact that women wanted everything.
	I felt rejected and left out and confused because I just wanted them to love me for my intelligence.
	And my philosophical rigor when I was acquiring it.
	But now I realize that everything that a woman wants, it's beautiful when I acquire it.
	Like there's a beauty when I work out.
	There's a joy that happens that I didn't experience before.
	When I add, you know, when I turn the number of squats I can do from 25 to 29, there's a joy in that.
	That's all mine.
	And so I know that men have this sense of being scared or of being rejected or being left out, but if a man pursues hypergamy or embraces hypergamy by understanding what the majority of healthy women want and pursuing it, he becomes better.
	I don't know the degree to which there are a lot of people in the world, or men in general, who don't want to better themselves along certain lines because they feel like they're betraying themselves.
	They feel like they're not being who they really are if they were to learn to work out.
	Or they feel like they're not being who they really are if they were to learn pickup artistry.
	I think men would be better if they stopped worrying about things like that and just pursued a workout program and pursued learning how to flirt with women.
	If they just pursued those things with gusto, without worrying about whether they're going to be rejected or not, they themselves would get better.
	What do you mean by get better?
	I don't know what that means in this context.
	With exercise, there is so much more joy to be had.
	No, no, no.
	Not exercise.
	There's lots of great reasons to exercise and I've been literally pumping exercise in this show for years.
	But in terms of like learning how to manipulate women into having a positive response, how is that making men better as a whole?
	It makes men understand that what they thought they knew about women was wrong.
	So again, you're putting all women into a big blob and judging them all as having the same desires and preferences.
	Or no.
	I'm saying that if a man assumes that women are a certain way and doesn't challenge that assumption by behaving differently, he doesn't know whether women really are that way.
	What way are all women supposed to be?
	Are you saying that my wife is exactly the same as some screechy skank who hits people with chairs in McDonald's?
	Are you putting them all in the same category and they're all one big blob?
	Absolutely not.
	I think that your wife is an apex woman.
	Your wife is the exact type of woman that every man, every philosophical man should want.
	Okay, then what you need to do is not say, this is what women want, or you can learn to understand women and so on, right?
	Because you're putting women into this big blob that says, well, this is, you know, once you understand this, you understand all women.
	And it's like, no, I don't think you do.
	Because I'm concerned that you're not recognizing the degree to which approaching women in a manipulative way, and I'm not saying it's evil, right?
	I mean, you're just playing or whatever.
	But approaching women in a manipulative way is Is not selecting a certain kind of woman, but you think it applies to all women, and that's not true.
	Women who are easily confused or who are manipulative themselves will be intrigued.
	Women with deep self-knowledge will look at you and say, he is a confusing, manipulative guy.
	That's a real turn-off.
	So this is why, if you want to do pickup artistry, it is going to filter the women who respond to you.
	It is going to filter the women who respond to you.
	And I think you're missing that because you're saying this is all women, and it's not.
	It's biologically driven.
	So you're saying it's all women again?
	Hmm.
	I do think that it varies across ages.
	So the younger the woman is, the more she'll want that give-and-take, that power struggle.
	Unless she's 30 and working at McDonald's.
	But yeah, okay.
	Right.
	But when she gets older, then she'll want less of that.
	So when she gets older and wiser and smarter, then it doesn't work.
	Well, no.
	If you want to look at it optimistically, then when she gets older, smarter, and wiser, then it doesn't work.
	If you want to look at it pessimistically, it's the moment that she loses her looks and can no longer compete with younger women who are prettier, that's when she suddenly wants a man who doesn't behave that way.
	I feel like the truth is somewhere in the middle.
	So all younger women respond to this manipulation.
	Most of them do.
	Okay, so not all.
	That's all I'm saying.
	Not all.
	Because when you start saying all women, you got upset with me earlier, and I can understand why, but you pushed back when you said, but there are exceptions to this, right?
	Yeah, some guys work out and have great self-knowledge.
	You can't say that's all guys.
	And I'm like, that's fair.
	That's true.
	I wasn't saying that, but it's true.
	There are exceptions.
	And so what I'm pointing out is, let's say that 90% of young women, I don't know if this is true or not, but let's just say 90% of young women are too clueless to even know that this is a manipulative crap that's being pulled on them.
	And they respond to it like they manipulate back, right?
	So what you're doing is you're selecting out the discriminating, intelligent, self-aware young women who are going to look at you and say, what?
	Some guy in his late 30s is trying to use some lame pickup crap with me.
	Like, what a loser, right?
	You're selecting those women out of your dating pool.
	I don't agree with that because I think that when women are younger, they for the most part do not have the social wisdom to know that those things are true.
	And so my argument would be that if I were to just not hit on women in that age group in this particular way, then I would be abandoning those women to a man who would hit on them that way.
	And that man is not nearly going to be as philosophically rigorous as I will be.
	Are you saying you're manipulating them so that less philosophical men don't get to manipulate them?
	Thank you.
	I will say that if a woman who is young, who is smart and intelligent, but is not intelligent enough to recognize that certain pickup artistry techniques are bad, is not hit on by someone like me, she's going to be hit on by someone else.
	So you're helping them?
	If she wants to be helped, she can be helped.
	If not, she won't be.
	Now, do you think that if this young woman grows up with a father who's not manipulative, who's honest and curious and open and connected with her and doesn't jerk her around or pretend to be something he's not or isn't confusing or whatever, right?
	Do you think if a young woman grows up with a father like that, and that has been her experience for 20 years of dealing with men, that you come along with this smoke and mirrors crap that she's not going to just see that immediately?
	It's like, well, that's ridiculous.
	I'm not sure.
	I accept that that's a strong possibility, but I don't know if that's true in every case.
	Okay, let's say it's more likely.
	I mean, my daughter spots manipulative people like that, and she's been doing it since she was four.
	Yes.
	Right, and doesn't want to have anything to do with them.
	So what I'm pointing out is, again, your approach of lying, manipulating, misrepresenting, and confusing women works on women who are used to being lied to, confused, manipulated, and bewildered.
	It's attractive to them because that's the template that they have experienced growing up.
	You are selecting the most poorly raised women into your circle.
	And I mean, yeah, you can go fishing with dynamite, but don't call yourself an expert.
	But at the same time, when we study peaceful parenting, We conclude that very few people are parented peacefully.
	Like, when we factor in spanking and emotional abuse, then I don't know.
	Like, it saddens me.
	Like, I ask myself, what percent of children who are my niece's age were parented peacefully from birth?
	And my very depressing answer is, like, maybe 1%.
	Right, but that's my entire point.
	Is that because quality people are rare, it's not a good idea to use strategies that keep them as far away from you as humanly possible, right?
	It's like, you know, it's really hard to find a tiger in the woods.
	No, that's a bad example.
	Let me rephrase that.
	There's a bird out there that's incredibly rare and easily startled.
	I'm going to go hunt for them while yodeling through an air horn.
	Well, you're never going to find them because you're driving them away from you.
	The rarer they are, the more inviting you need to be to those rare people.
	And if you come across like manipulative and false and misrepresenting yourself and confuse it, like, let's say it's only 1%.
	I don't know the exact number, but let's say it's only 1%.
	Well, shouldn't you be doing everything you can to eliminate the 99% so that you can get to the 1%?
	Whereas I'm concerned that you're saying, let's...
	Make sure that we drive away the 1% so I can be as attractive as possible to the 99% that I don't really want.
	Well, no.
	To me, that hinges on the question, do you think the 99% of people are permanently damaged such that no interaction with a philosophically rigorous, virtuous man can change them over time?
	No, I think that they're at your level.
	That's why you want them.
	That's why you're selecting the good people out so that you don't have to feel behind them, that you don't have to feel low, right?
	Because you've got a ways to go.
	You're nine months into this conversation, so you're a babe in the woods, right?
	I mean, you're in your salad days.
	And I say this as a guy who's been doing philosophy for over 30 years, right?
	You're nine months into this hypergamy stuff, so you're new.
	So you've got a lot of growth to go.
	And look, I have a lot of growth to go, too.
	I've just got 29-plus years on you as far as this kind of stuff goes.
	And so you're young and you're early in this kind of thinking and so you're not ready for somebody who's been raised to think deeply and have self-knowledge and be honest and open and vulnerable and communicative and empathetic and sensitive and strong and courageous.
	You're just not ready for someone like that and so you want to hang around in the lower Or grow together.
	Yeah, that could certainly happen.
	But because you're leading them the wrong direction to begin with, the odds of you guys growing together are very low.
	Because you're starting off things by lying and manipulating, then thinking you're going to grow in wisdom and knowledge together is very unlikely.
	Because the women are going to respond the strongest to you.
	When you lie and manipulate them, the women are going to respond the strongest to you who are the most steeped in lying and manipulation.
	So you're like saying, let me find the most dishonest person in the room, and then I'm going to work with them to try and be honest.
	But if you're selecting for the opposite of what you want to achieve, your odds are getting there are tiny, right?
	Like, I mean, if you're a basketball coach, You can choose a tall person or you can choose a really short person.
	And then if you choose a short person, I guess there's a tiny chance they could become a good basketball player.
	But why not just start with the tall person and work from there?
	In other words, if you want to grow towards honesty, openness, and clearly you'd rather not be manipulative, but be honest in your relationships with people.
	So if you start with honesty and a woman is intrigued by your capacity for honesty, openness, directness, and not playing games, if a woman is intrigued and attracted to that, then you can grow in the direction of becoming more honest and open with each other over time.
	But you're selecting the exact opposite direction.
	So what do we do with the 99% of people who weren't raised peacefully?
	Well, are you asking me?
	I mean, I'm the guy putting out thousands of podcasts for free so that people can learn how to be raised peacefully and getting them into therapy and all that, right?
	I mean, don't ask me.
	I'm the guy doing just about the most on the planet to help with these things.
	I mean, you could ask yourself, but don't ask me.
	Okay.
	Sorry.
	So, it sounds like you're telling me to abandon those people who weren't raised peacefully.
	Well, no.
	I never said anything like that.
	And again, you're having a conversation with yourself rather than me, but because you're still very young in this stuff, you don't know that.
	What I'm saying is that...
	If you are honest with people, I'm not saying abandon everyone who's dishonest.
	What I'm saying is that you have, I think, a reasonable ethical obligation to bring honesty to people because it's the right thing to do and also because it has very beneficial effects for you.
	You don't get to ban confused and disoriented women with daddy issues, but you might get a chance to connect with someone of real quality.
	At the same time, those people are hyper-rare.
	Exactly.
	So you have to be as honest as possible so that you can find them.
	The hyper-rarity doesn't mean lower your standards.
	It means raise your standards.
	Honest people being rare doesn't mean lie to people.
	It means be honest with people so you can get rid of the liars and find the honest people.
	My cynical response is that the honesty that women feel When they're like 29, 30 is mostly driven by the loss of looks.
	Are you familiar with the idea that a woman's sexual peak is 23 and a man's sexual peak is 36?
	Well, I've heard the 23 thing that after 22 men's sexual interest in women declines.
	Yeah, I understand that.
	I also understand the frustration that a lot of people in the manosphere have with women where they've been trying to date these women from the age of 18 to 28 and they can't get the most attractive women because the women are off banging all of the disreputable guys, drummers that they can find.
	And then when they've been used up and tossed aside like a bunch of alpha discarded Kleenexes out the window, they're all like, well, I'm ready to settle down with a really good man now and I'm not that much into looks.
	And it's because their own sexual value, they tried to get an alpha using their highest point of sexual market value.
	They were unable to keep an alpha.
	An alpha was willing to use them for sex but wasn't willing to commit to them because they were too unstable, they were too needy, they were too without ambition, they were inert, they were merely attractive, which an alpha might do for a weekend but isn't going to do for a lifetime.
	And then when they've been used up and discarded and heartbroken and are filled with various bacteria and ancient sperm, and basically they've got enough man juice hanging up their caves like they're getting stalagmites and stalactites, then they're willing to settle down with the beta, at which point the data says, yeah, sloppy seconds I can live with.
	Sloppy 20 seconds, not so much.
	Do you understand the hypocrisy involved where when she was at her sexual peak, she was able to pursue whatever she wanted with reckless abandon and the society didn't fall apart.
	But when a man reaches a sexual peak of 36 and is not attached to anyone, the moment he starts dating women who are like 22, 23, the entire society surrounds him and says, no, you can't do that, man.
	You got to date women your own age, because if you start dating women who are younger and prettier, our entire civilization is going to fall apart.
	You know, our civilization is founded upon men like you marrying women in their 30s and ensuring that these women are well provided for into her old age.
	Well, I don't I don't know that anyone's ever said to me.
	I was a single guy in my 30s.
	I never got a lecture from any kind of shadowy patriarchy star chamber saying that I had to marry bitter women in their 30s for society to continue.
	I've never heard that, and I'm not sure where that's coming from.
	Where did you hear that?
	I feel like I read too many extremist blogs then.
	Well, have you heard it outside of extremist blogs?
	That's my question.
	Yeah, that is my question.
	I've heard phrases like age-appropriate.
	So, for example, as a 39-year-old, if I suddenly start dating a woman who's 25, a lot of people are going to have a negative emotional reaction to that.
	They'll say things like...
	Well, yeah, but look, I mean, hang on, hang on.
	Do you remember...
	I can't remember what wrinkled old wheelchair-bound multi-billionaire Anna Nicole Smith ended up hooking up with.
	I mean, do you remember that?
	I mean, did you look at that and think like, ew?
	Yes, I did, because it was a transparent acquisition of money.
	Right!
	And if a 39-year-old guy goes out with a 25-year-old woman, that's a transparent acquisition of vagina.
	Right?
	I mean, so it's you in the same way that Hugh Hefner...
	I mean, do you think that if Hugh Hefner wasn't Hugh Hefner, all these babes would be like, I can't wait to straddle this Nazgul.
	I mean, this is not going to happen, right?
	And so it's because it's such a trans...
	It's too obvious in its sexual politics, right?
	And so one of the reasons why...
	People have somewhat of a distaste for wide age ranges, is it's too obvious that you don't care about the woman, you only care about her fertility or her sexual attractiveness or whatever, in the same way that Anna Nicole Smith probably didn't care too much about this, you know, four days dead George Burns character that she married, because it's clearly just about the money.
	And so it's just kind of gross.
	And And also, marriages tend to work the best when people are closer in ages, for reasons that I'm sure are too obvious to go in here.
	So if you want a stable, long-lasting relationship, whether it's marriage or not, it tends to be that the closer in age you are, the better off it's going to be as a whole.
	So there's some pretty good wisdom in age-appropriate dating.
	I don't think that's true.
	I read a study that if you show men faces of women and if you show women faces of men and you ask them which faces do you find attractive, the men are always saying like 21, 22, but the women are always saying two years older than I am right now.
	I'm sorry, I don't understand.
	I don't understand what looking at pictures has to do with a relationship.
	I mean, unless you're having a relationship with a picture, which I guess a lot of people do, I guess more screens now than pictures when I was younger, I don't understand what you're trying to prove.
	There are studies that show that when age gets wider in marital relations, the likelihood of divorce increases.
	I would also say that you don't know whether that's because of their natural compatibility or whether it's because society drills into their head that that's bad.
	There is literally no...
	No, look, if people believed that it was bad, they wouldn't get married.
	I mean, they get married because they believe that it's good.
	And I don't think that that would suddenly change after they married and cause them to get divorced.
	Hmm.
	That is interesting.
	If a guy's racist, he's not going to marry someone of a different race and then divorce her later, right?
	I mean, if he's racist, he's not going to marry someone of a different race to begin with.
	Right, I understand that.
	But I feel like, to use the racist example, in a non-racial society, two people of different races can marry and be fine.
	But in a racist society, those same two people getting married are not fine because their society is racist.
	And we don't know the degree to which the racism of society caused them to split up.
	Well, yes, except that the split up occurs not when people are 40 years apart, right?
	What they used to call a May-December marriage.
	If I remember rightly, this is off the top of my head.
	I think it's when it's like five or six years apart.
	In other words, not at a point where people would say that's gross.
	But the differences in success rates of marriage with age spread occurs long before people would find it objectionable.
	So I think it's more to do with...
	Lack of similarity in life experiences and so on.
	Like, you know, as you as a guy who's almost 40 is how much are you going to have in common with a woman 15 years younger than you?
	How much would I have in common with a woman 15 years younger than me?
	Other than we both think she's hot.
	I like the non-commonality.
	To me, I like someone who is younger and happier because it's not like...
	Wait, wait, wait.
	Hang on, hang on.
	So if you like the non-commonality, then you basically flip a coin and you either go for a 25-year-old or a 55-year-old.
	Is that correct?
	I don't like the non-commonality in older women, though.
	Okay, so it's not non-commonality.
	It's youth.
	Come on, man.
	This wasn't even hard.
	Right.
	It's youth, prettiness, happiness, possibility.
	Okay.
	It's youth.
	And prettiness.
	I mean, I get that.
	Right.
	And of course, the other thing that is, to be fair, a 25-year-old woman who's single is in a different emotional place than a 55-year-old woman who's single.
	Right.
	Right.
	That's the happiness thing I was pointing out.
	Yeah, and of course, a car that's been on the lot for five minutes is different than a car that's been on the lot for two years, right?
	Right.
	There's a joy there.
	Well, yeah.
	I mean, just there's a...
	Yeah.
	Well, I don't know about joy.
	I wouldn't say that all 25-year-old women...
	Again, you've got this big blob thing going on, right?
	All 25-year-old women are joyful, but...
	Yeah, there's definitely an enthusiasm, and if a woman who wants to get married has not gotten married by the time of 55, that's a huge failure, right?
	Whereas a woman who wants to get married who's not married by 25 has not experienced that huge failure yet.
	Right.
	Plus, 55-year-old women can't have kids, so if you marry a 25-year-old, you've got some time with...
	With a woman who can give you kids, whereas a 55-year-old...
	Are you in a relationship at the moment?
	No, I just got broken up with last week.
	Was this a woman you picked up with using pickup artistry?
	It was a woman who I injected pickup artistry into the equation, yes.
	I wasn't only pickup artistry based.
	I was also very philosophical and open as well.
	Like, we discussed things like her childhood, and I was able to discuss those things with her in a way that you taught me.
	If you don't mind me asking, and you don't have to talk about it, how long was the relationship, by the way?
	It was three months.
	Okay, so it's not like massive tragedy, though it's certainly sad.
	And why did she break up with you?
	She found someone better.
	She found someone a little bit younger than me, much more happy, more established, and more caring.
	She told me a story about how he helped children in a specific way, and I was floored by how successful he was at that.
	So to me, she found someone better.
	And she says things like if I, you know, that I still value as a person.
	And if I had settled for someone worse than you, then I can understand how you would feel like this is a disservice to who you are.
	But I swear that he's better.
	And so with me, because I want to embrace hypergamy, I am sad, for sure, because she was the best woman I've ever been with.
	But at the same time, I'm energized because I met her when I was devoting myself to this change in personality.
	Well, look, I'm sorry.
	I mean, if she's the best woman you ever met, I'm genuinely sorry.
	That's very heartbreaking.
	And I don't mean to, you know, to dance on your broken heart, and I don't mean that at all, but I just wanted to point out that you're getting abs, and she dumped you.
	No, she...
	For a person that she found to be of more moral or substantial or philosophical quality, right?
	So the fact that you were aiming for abs didn't...
	Right?
	If you spend the time doing the stuff that this other guy did, rather than get nabbed, she might still be with you, right?
	No.
	She never lambasted my character.
	She never did.
	No, you said the other guy was a step up, like, kinder and more successful, right?
	Right.
	That doesn't mean I don't have any character.
	And it doesn't mean that my- I never said that.
	I never said that.
	I never said that.
	You've got to have conversations with me, not this guy in your head, right?
	I never said.
	It doesn't mean you don't have any character.
	What I'm saying is that you said that women find abs really attractive.
	And so you put time and effort into working out.
	And she left you for a guy.
	I don't know.
	Does he have more abs?
	Does he like extra abs?
	He has like abs on his elbow?
	Absolutely.
	No, he's much more physically fit than I am, and his job puts him in a better position to care for people.
	And so he's physically fitter than me, and he's younger than me, and he has better character than me.
	And so I'm sad, but I'm also not devastated.
	I would be devastated if she traded me for someone worse.
	To me, trading me for someone worse would be a sign that this whole pursuit that I'm doing isn't helpful at all.
	You know, I get it.
	It confirms the theory for you, and I'm not going to disagree with the theory.
	And were you in a monogamous relationship with her?
	We were not monogamous because we were far apart.
	It was a distance thing.
	No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.
	You were not monogamous because you chose not to be monogamous.
	There's nothing to do with distance and monogamy that goes hand in hand.
	Lots of people have monogamous long-distance relationships, right?
	Right, and I don't think...
	She's so intelligent and so attractive that I don't think she was willing to wait for me.
	She wasn't willing to wait for me to just acquire what I need to acquire and then move closer to her.
	She just wanted a joyous relationship now.
	And I was in no position to give her that joyous relationship now.
	And why?
	Because I haven't embraced hypergamy.
	That's my number one thing.
	Rather than exercising, I would pursue video games.
	Rather than pouring my time into growing my business, I would be avoidant.
	I feel an incredible sense of shame over the way that I spent my 20s and my 30s because I imagine the life that I could have had if I had embraced hypergamy earlier.
	Oh, you mean if you had got the kind of resources and status that would have gotten you the best woman as you see it, right?
	Absolutely.
	Absolutely.
	I'm just curious.
	What do you think kept that knowledge from you?
	Because, I mean, when I was a kid, I mean...
	Rich muscle guys were what...
	I mean, high status, like all the women loved all the high status guys.
	I shouldn't say that.
	You know what?
	I was just generalizing, accusing you of generalizing, and I apologize for that.
	But there was a significant proportion of women who got hot and bothered by, you know, jug-eared, funny-faced Prince Charles and stuff like that.
	And so when I was younger, the idea that...
	You know, playing video games was going to do something to make me more attractive to women would never have crossed my mind.
	I'm just curious, do you think it was hidden from you?
	And you're, you know, younger than I am by quite a bit.
	And why do you think that you spent a lot of time avoiding the knowledge of hypergamy, which, if hypergamy is female nature, then knowledge of hypergamy must be male nature, right?
	Yes, it is.
	Yes.
	And how to combat it, what to do about it.
	That is male nature.
	So how did you not get it?
	Like what blocks your male nature in your 20s?
	The way that I was raised as a kid.
	My A score is 4.
	I had a really bad childhood.
	There was also this sense of...
	It was the lack of guarantee.
	I could pour my energy into growing my business, building my body, learning how to flirt.
	I can build my energy into all of those things, but there's no guarantee that I will be happy with the result.
	Like, there's no guarantee that a good woman will be attracted to me, appreciate me for the effort that I'm putting forth, and love me for that effort put in.
	And so I let the illusion that the fact that there is no guarantee matter way more than it should.
	Way more than it should.
	So what do you think influenced you to be risk-averse in this way?
	My upbringing.
	My upbringing.
	No, I get that.
	You talked about your...
	I should be more specific.
	What in your upbringing?
	My own...
	My own father.
	Like, my father is the most risk-averse and bitter and angry man I've ever known.
	And he withdraws.
	Like, that has been his entire...
	That's him.
	He withdraws.
	Oh, and that's what you said with this woman that you were avoidant and also when you were younger, right?
	Say that again?
	Well, earlier, I can't remember if you were talking about your 20s or your relationship with the woman who left you last week, but you talked about being avoidant.
	Yeah, in my 20s, I was highly avoidant, highly depressed.
	And so how does the avoidance show off for your dad?
	What does it look like?
	Oh my God.
	I still get nervous whenever I see an appliance break because an appliance breaking when I was a kid would lead to father yelling, would lead to mother extremely upset to the point where we wouldn't be eating dinner for days because she would just refuse to cook.
	And so I am still...
	Yeah, it was horrible, Steph.
	It was terrible.
	So like an iron breaks or an iron doesn't start or something like that?
	Or like a car doesn't run well.
	Or a microwave is like overheating.
	A toilet is clogged.
	Like that sort of stuff would inevitably lead to an explosive fight because if my father couldn't fix it in two minutes, he would start yelling and yelling and yelling and he would drive the entire family against him.
	And what would he yell about?
	Like would it be unrelated stuff or...
	Yes, it would be blaming people for moving his stuff.
	For years, he still does this now.
	He will take a really important item and put it in a place where everybody goes.
	And he will leave it there for days, and he knows, because he's been married to my mother for a god-awful long time, that my mother will leave it there for a while, but eventually she'll just get tired of seeing the gigantic mess there, and she'll clean up everything.
	And so the moment she cleans up everything, he mystically needs the thing that he put over there, and that's a gigantic fight where he's blaming her, blaming us.
	And so I've seen that play out so many times in my childhood.
	That is his aggressive avoidance.
	Where he can't do simple things like keep a clean environment and solve problems with the enemy because he just can't.
	He just can't.
	And he's never going to change.
	I'm sort of reminded my mother...
	Mistakes, breakages, failures, people have a very visceral reaction to those.
	I mean, I remember my mom...
	When something didn't work, she would throw it.
	Nothing in this life works.
	It would become this hysterical thing.
	Some individual thing didn't work.
	I remember she'd turn on a light and sometimes you'd turn on...
	I don't think this is true anymore, but back in the 60s and 70s, you'd turn on a light and it would break and go out.
	It would make a little sound and it would just die.
	The filament, I guess, would break.
	Yes.
	And she'd be, like, sobbing, like, nothing in this life works!
	And it's like, and I remember just, like, even as a kid thinking, like, it's a lightbulb.
	Yes.
	Like, what weird, fetishistic, exaggerating, hysterical nonsense is going on here where suddenly the sun won't rise tomorrow because a lightbulb broke.
	Yes, I know.
	Whenever you tell that story, I identify with it because that was my father.
	Except instead of like just sobbing in the corner and most of the time leaving you alone, like I know that being left alone by a parent sucks, but compared, but with my father, he would always, you know, verbally attack my mother who would just snap.
	Oh yeah, no, that would come later because later it would be somebody else's fault that something broke.
	Exactly.
	Exactly.
	And so I empathize with that.
	Like I understand deep in my soul what you went through because I went through that too.
	And it's terrifying for kids, of course, because these are the people who are supposed to be keeping you safe.
	These are the people who are supposed to be keeping you secure.
	These are the people who are supposed to be the rock that you can lean on and the soft place that you can land.
	And they're freaking the fuck out over...
	Nothing.
	The toaster put off some sparks and suddenly it's like the end of the world.
	Exactly.
	And your response to that was to grow the greatest philosophical show in the world.
	I don't know that I can credit the show with my mom getting hysterical over light bulbs, but I'm sure that there's some element involved.
	Because I was always just astounded to look at this Giant infant with dyed hair.
	I was just astounded to look at this and say, what on earth could possibly motivate someone to be so hysterical over something so unimportant?
	There is something very important about the world that I simply do not understand and cannot figure out and I knew I needed to.
	Yes.
	You dug down deep inside and you said, this will not happen.
	That's what you did.
	You said, in my sphere, this will not happen.
	You've got a strong emotion in your voice right now, right?
	Oh, yeah.
	Because I know what it's like.
	Okay, so what's connecting with you then?
	Like, I compare the time that I wasted my life to the time that you didn't waste yours.
	Oh, I've done some wasting.
	Don't worry.
	I'm not super productive all day.
	I've done some wasting.
	Not to the degree that I have, sir.
	You sure?
	I played Spear of Destiny.
	Nah, I'm ashamed of like a lot of things I did.
	Like I'm ashamed of my avoidance.
	I'm ashamed of the time that I put into video games.
	I wish I had read more.
	Wish I had worked out more.
	Wish I had grown my business more.
	But it would have been very costly for you to do that, right?
	It would have been.
	People talk about this glass ceiling for women.
	I don't think that's true.
	I think the real sound barrier is breaking through the ceiling of our parents.
	Hell yes.
	Absolutely.
	Right?
	I mean, the moment that we blow past the limitations of our parents...
	That is the real sound barrier.
	That's where all progress comes from, like it or not.
	And that is where most people's bodies get shredded.
	Like most people who try and fly through that sound barrier just turn into red mist.
	And this is why we shy back from the sound barrier, the growth barrier of surmounting, of breaking through the ice of history that our parents' heights was the limit.
	Breaking through that like some I see BM coming out from a nuclear sub up through the pomofrost, up through the ice.
	That is the great challenge.
	And this is where we falter.
	There's this great movie with Harrison Ford, The Fugitive.
	I think he's standing on top of it.
	He's about to make this big jump and his hand shakes.
	And there's that...
	This falter.
	The movie with Steve McQueen or a guy's walking by with a glass of water or a glass of juice that Steve McQueen thinks he's going to give it to him and he just sort of half reaches out and then doesn't and there's this terrifying falter, this vertigo, this am I actually going to do it or not?
	And That is really a terrifying moment.
	That is the do-or-die moment.
	And we can spend a lot of time...
	You know, there's a line from my novel, The God of Atheists, where I say, as children, certain types of people, as children, they constantly lose their mittens and gloves and hats and scarves and boots and keys.
	And as adults, they can misplace entire decades.
	Yeah, it's nuts.
	And if you were raised by a hysterical, passive aggressive, reactionary, resentful, unmoved, unmotivated, bullying kind of personality structure,
	Then doing the opposite, breaking beyond that, going through that, passing through that great sound barrier that shreds most airplanes of the soul, that is a very, very difficult thing.
	And we can falter, we can stand before that and say, I don't even know I have to jump, but there's this incredible resistance to breaking through history and going to the undiscovered country, going to the land unexplored.
	Where not only is there freedom, but there is terror, and there is also hatred.
	Because your parents faced the same barrier, the same sound barrier, the same ceiling, and they faltered, and they fell back.
	And if you say, fuck it, after burner time, we are going through, baby!
	There's great resentment from those who have faltered before the great generational ceiling.
	And if you break through it and you burst through it and you show what will can do, what genuine will can do, because there is only free will where there is willpower.
	And there is only willpower when there is a rational measurement of costs and benefits, which is why philosophy and self-knowledge is the source, the foundation for the rocket of willpower that breaks us through the ceilings of history.
	And...
	Those who have faltered and fallen before us do not cheer our passage.
	Those who have failed to grow do not cheer our growth.
	And the huge amount of resistance and danger, historically outgrowing the tribe generally got you killed.
	There's a great sense of danger in surmounting the customs of the age.
	Because if you disbelieved in the gods of history, you generally were next up for human sacrifice.
	And if you disagreed with the standards of your society, your eggs would not be available.
	The eggs would not be made available to you.
	There's no baker's dozen for you to spray into.
	And so...
	That faltering, you say, in your 20s.
	That faltering before breaking through the limitations that everyone before you has failed to break through.
	Your parents have a history going back to the cousins of the apes.
	Of people who failed to break through the ceiling of history.
	Who failed to break through parental dictums and social norms and to think rationally and critically and grow beyond.
	So the fact that you would falter in your twenties is entirely understandable and I hope that you can find it in your heart to forgive yourself for that or to recognize That if it only took you 10 years to begin to break through what has not occurred in your gene pool for the past 2 billion, that's still pretty fucking great.
	It is.
	And, you know, there's a part of me that admires it, but I feel like breaking through is just the beginning.
	Like, it's just the beginning.
	There's so much joy.
	Which means that you can't praise yourself for justly earned accolades.
	So you're the kind of guy who's like, gold?
	Wait, where's platinum?
	Platinum?
	Wait, where's diamond?
	Diamond?
	Wait, where's unobtainium?
	It's four miles under the ground where people are down there arguing about geo-libertarianism.
	So don't make every finish line a starting block or the race will never end and your heart will explode and you will live a life of fretful, in the end, purposeless motion.
	Do you understand that if you've broken through parental limitations and you have surmounted history, you are probably the first in your gene pool to do it?
	And if the moment you say, well, that's just the beginning, it's like, wait, what, the last two billion years wasn't enough to celebrate the passage that they're moving beyond of?
	You just broke through the ice crust of history.
	You're the first of your fish species to walk on land, for God's sakes!
	Yeah.
	And you're like, but there are mountains!
	It's like, first on land, first with legs.
	Come on, Mr.
	Lungfish.
	Give yourself some props.
	But there's the moon!
	I haven't got to the moon yet!
	It's like, come on!
	Give yourself some props.
	Don't look at what is lost.
	Or if you're going to, look at what was lost relative to those who came before you.
	Who didn't win anything and who lost worse than you can even conceive of because it never changed.
	Because if you can take pride in breaking through the parental and cultural barrier, the ceiling, and how many people actually do.
	And how many people, when they actually do, don't want to immediately crawl back as if they can?
	The ice forms over you when you go through it.
	There's no return ticket.
	Doesn't come back.
	No coming back.
	Doesn't mean you can't hang out with people and so on, but you can never, ever be back through that ice in the way that you were before.
	So you've broken through.
	First in your generations, first in your gene pool to break through.
	And if you say, well, but I'm only at the beginning, it's okay to rest and applaud yourself.
	Because this kind of breaking through is the entire progress of the species.
	And so getting back to the theme, you...
	Made a good argument.
	We lost the feeling, didn't we, there?
	We just lost the feeling.
	And I'm sorry if I speechified too much, but when we were talking earlier and you were quite moved, what were you?
	I was moved because I do feel the accomplishment, but I feel...
	I think it's because I'm like, I'm going to be 40 soon.
	I feel like if I was like 24 and I felt like I had all this time ahead of me, I would celebrate it more.
	But as an older person who's just waking up, I feel the waking up.
	And I know that it's permanent.
	But I also feel like that sense that time is running out.
	That I gotta move.
	I don't know.
	It's 50-50.
	Or it's like 60-40 in favor.
	The negative argument is that because I've spent so much time with my niece, I've gotten...
	Some of the parenting experience with her and I can devote my time to making sure that she grows into adulthood with me at her side.
	Like that's the argument against.
	The argument for is that protecting his niece is not the same thing as having a child.
	And I'm going to assume that you don't do any of this manipulative stuff with your niece?
	No, no.
	With my niece, it's just straight up.
	I can't apologize.
	Good.
	See, now she's going to grow up.
	And when she grows up, what's she going to think of a pickup artist if you're straight with her?
	The boy that she's dating is the nicest guy I've ever met.
	And it's funny because she's in her teens.
	And you always get those fearful stereotypes that they're going to chase a really alpha asshole guy.
	And I met this guy and he was like really well respectful and he was nice and I giggled to myself and my initial instinct was to make fun of her choice a little bit but I thought about him like well no good for you.
	Good for you girl.
	Good for you making this choice.
	You've been an influence in her life from the beginning is that right?
	Yes.
	Yeah.
	And you've been straight with her from the beginning.
	Is that right?
	I wouldn't say from the beginning.
	There was a lot of anger.
	But you haven't been manipulative and contradictory and all that, right?
	No, not at all.
	No, I've always been as honest as I possibly could.
	And so do you see where this leads?
	This is what I'm pointing out to you.
	And I'm trying mightily to try and get you what you want in life.
	You want a great woman, right?
	Absolutely.
	Right.
	So, with your niece, you were straight and honest with her, and that has conditioned her to expect straightness and honesty from a man, and so the boy she's dating is straight and honest, right?
	Yes.
	I hope they last.
	Right.
	Do you see why I'm telling you to be straight and honest and not manipulative?
	I do.
	So that you can show up like this guy does to your niece?
	I do.
	My...
	I hear the argument.
	I have a small disagreement, and that is that the majority of women were not raised the way my niece was.
	And so the majority of women are trained to respond to the manipulativeness that I display.
	Oh my god, oh my god, oh my god, oh my god!
	I have to say this again.
	Oh my god, oh my god.
	Okay.
	I want you to punch yourself in the dick because you're not listening with your ears.
	Your dick is like snaking up, forking out, and jamming itself in your ear holes.
	Dick punch right now.
	Would you tell your niece to reject the man, the boy that she loves, because not a lot of boys are raised in that way?
	Thank you.
	No, I wouldn't.
	Right!
	But if my niece weren't raised this way, and if she were attracted to these types of men, I wouldn't have the ability to make her not be attracted to those men like she would be.
	Okay, forget this theoretical if your niece was a different human being.
	Forget that.
	You're just bullshitting me here.
	You're not getting the most important thing for your life's happiness.
	In the future.
	Look, you're so scared of the passage of time, my friend, that you're willing to lower your standards for the pretense of love, which is manipulating low-quality women, right?
	You're like, oh, God, I'm so hungry, and I don't know when I'm going to eat again, so whatever's left on the buffet, I'm grabbing.
	The argument that you're giving...
	Look, the number of boys...
	Who are decent and honest as teenagers is not huge, right?
	But your niece, because she was raised in a decent and honest way, has now managed to find this decent and honest guy, who I can guarantee you did not come up and say, hey, are you laughing at my music?
	No, it's funny to imagine him doing that.
	It is.
	It's sad.
	But this is what you're doing, which means that you're keeping women who were raised like your niece far out of your life.
	That's what I'm pointing out.
	And you say, oh, well, but they're rare.
	And it's like, but this is my whole point.
	Stop driving them away and then complaining that they're rare.
	I will think about that.
	I will definitely meditate on that.
	I will listen to this more than once.
	I have this vision of taking someone younger and we'll grow together.
	That's just how I see it right now.
	You know, there's...
	We make mistakes when we're in a hurry.
	When there's urgency, we tend to cut corners, right?
	I don't know if you do any work with software, but there's estimates that say it's 10 to 20 times harder to fix design problems down the road than it is to fix them in the design stage, right?
	Right.
	And people are like, oh, we got to make the sale.
	We got a book.
	We got a bill.
	We got a...
	Right?
	I went through all of this shit for years in business.
	And the reality is, it's like, pay me now, pay me later.
	Pay me a dollar now or pay me $10 later.
	But when you feel that sense of urgency about very important life decisions, that is a time where you need to sit down and plan really well.
	You know, if you can't find your passport, If you've got to leave to the airport, there's no point going through the basement and looking in the air.
	Like, you've got to sit and think, oh, God, where did I last have it?
	Where did I last use it?
	Where was my last trip?
	Where would I have put it, right?
	You've got to think and not just run around like a chicken with your head cut off when you're in a hurry and things are important, right?
	That's when you really need to think so that you can get what you want.
	Your window is tight because ideally, statistically, you want a woman who's highly educated, who has waited to get married, who doesn't have a kid, who doesn't have exes, who doesn't have crap, who's not wildly apart in age, but who's not older than you because you can't meet someone who's 40.
	You can't meet a woman who's 40 and then hope to have kids when she's 43.
	You might as well wait for the second coming, right?
	Yeah, it's not going to work that way.
	Yeah, so you're going to have to try and find a woman who's 34 and meet her and cultivate that.
	But trust me, she thinks that men like you are rare and you think that women like her are rare, so you've got to have the mating call called honesty.
	I mean, how the hell do the fucking crickets find each other?
	Until it sounds like your brain is getting...
	Some sort of Credence Clearwater Revival washboard thing going on 24-7, right?
	How do the frogs find each other?
	Ribbit!
	Right?
	That's how they...
	Why do birds sing so prettily?
	So they can fuck!
	Right?
	They're like rock stars.
	And so, you know, the Freddie Mercury mating call is, it's so easy!
	So, this is...
	You've got to have a mating call because it's hard to find the right person.
	Right?
	And so you're like, well, I've got to just cast my net as wide as possible.
	And I got to understand hypergamy and I got to understand how women work so I can get a woman, right?
	Not just any woman.
	It's like I keep saying, I have this vision of growing together with her.
	Agreed, agreed.
	Okay, so you're going to need to find a woman who's either starting to wake up like you are or who is capable of waking up, right?
	Right.
	Capable of waking up but hasn't thought about these things.
	Right.
	But right now, you are priming women and you are trying to get women to respond to you lying.
	How on earth is that going to get you a woman who wants to grow into truth with you?
	If you approach a woman directly and honestly and openly and sincerely, a lot of shallow idiot women, Will not be turned on.
	Good.
	Because that is quicksand which regurgitates nothing but the bones of divorced men.
	So, if you approach a woman directly and honestly and openly, straightforward, if she's intrigued by that, then you are on fertile ground.
	It's like that old joke about the drunk, right?
	A guy comes out of a bar and there's a A drunk guy looking around where the lamp is, right?
	The street lamp.
	And the guy's like, I can't find my car keys.
	This joke works when drunk driving was more acceptable, so nobody's recommending that, right?
	So any guy's like, oh, you know, it's like, oh, I'll help you.
	I'll help you look for your car keys.
	They look around car keys, look around for car keys, right?
	Can't find them.
	Guy says, so this is where you drop them?
	And he's like, no, I dropped them at the end of the street.
	It's like, well, why are you looking here then?
	Because this is where the light is.
	Yes, I'm familiar with that, Joe.
	I am.
	Yeah, so you've got to change your filter for women.
	You want a woman who's intrigued by honesty, not a woman who's intrigued by bullshit.
	You know, you don't want to get on a train and then say, I'm going to try and turn it around.
	You want to get on a train that's heading the right way, and then don't try and turn it around, because you can't turn around a train any more than you can make someone who's really intrigued and turned on by lying, you know, somebody who only wants oral sex from forked tongue, right?
	You can't get a woman who's really turned on by lying to want to follow you into truth porn, if that makes any sense.
	I hear the argument.
	I definitely hear it.
	I definitely do.
	I will think about it.
	I'll listen to this more than once.
	That's all I ask.
	Trying to get your penis what it wants, which is to make more penises.
	Anyway.
	Yes.
	Thanks, man.
	Will you let us know how it goes?
	I will.
	And like I said, you were the person who started me on all of this.
	And so I will always have great respect for you because whatever goodness my future has was started by you.
	It was started by your message.
	I hugely appreciate that.
	And let me also say, great call.
	Thank you.
	I appreciate you staying in the call.
	I appreciate you letting me be annoying.
	I appreciate your openness.
	I appreciate your receptivity.
	I appreciate your honesty.
	And I just hugely respect you for the call.
	I mean, I really, really appreciate it.
	Thank you, sir.
	Thank you.
	Thanks, everyone, so much.
	Look at that!
	We almost made it to midnight, but not tonight.
	So, sorry for those who are bumped.
	Please remember to help out the show at freedomainradio.com slash donate.
	This is the kind of work that we're doing, helping people to break through the cultural barriers to a rational, peaceful and free world that's just over the horizon.
	Click your heels three times, blink and we'll be there.
	So, yeah, freedomainradio.com slash donate to help out the show.
	Please, please, please go and subscribe or donate.
	We also take Bitcoin and Donkey coin, Dogecoin, and other whatever you've got.
	If you don't have any money, please share and help other people get exposed to philosophy.
	I hugely appreciate it, and I will talk to you guys soon.

▲