3287 Single Mother by Choice - Call In Show - May 10th, 2016
Question 1: [1:40] - “I've been thinking the past couple of years about becoming a single mother by Choice (I know, all single mothers are by choice or at least by a string of bad choices, but I see this as an examined, purposeful choice) I saw your videos about single moms and they really have my wheels turning - what other things should I be considering in this decision? I'm sure there are things I haven't yet considered.”“A little about me and my situation: I'm 31, finishing my undergraduate degree in two weeks, and will be going on to grad school this fall. In two years I'll have a Master's degree, and would wait a couple years after that before trying to have a child. I've wanted to have a child for several years yet have no desire to be in a long term romantic relationship. I've struggled a while with that but finally came to the realization that I'm aromantic - but that doesn't decrease my desire to have and raise a child. I think that as long as I wait until I'm in a stable place in life and go about it ethically, being single shouldn't exclude me from having a child. I'll be financially self-sufficient and won't have a string of surrogate fathers in the child's life. I would love to hear your perspective on this subject.”Question 2: [51:32] - “I’m coming from the USSR and seeing our family’s property been confiscated twice due to the success and the jealousy of the people around you. We have a saying in Russia ‘tell everyone you are doing bad otherwise they will steal it from you.’ I feel like a lot of young people out there have no idea what the socialism is and how bad it could be for the entire civilization. I feel emotionally drained every time I fight people around trying to prove them wrong and I feel like all the fighting is taking me away from my personal freedom or goals; how can I line up my goals along with helping people see what a true nightmare socialism is?”Question 3: [1:29:34] - “In a free market, what should be the limits of what you can own, as to maximize liberty? With the abolishment of slavery, we understood that human life should not be subject to propertization. Does this extend elsewhere, and how could we justify either position rationally? My foremost object of interest would be land in an economical sense (that is, landmass and natural resources). Doesn't complete procurement of land trespass on future generations freedom? I think it is pretty clear that the radical viewpoint in either direction leads to bizarre situations. Where do we draw the line, and how do we justify this?”Freedomain Radio is 100% funded by viewers like you. Please support the show by signing up for a monthly subscription or making a one time donation at: http://www.freedomainradio.com/donate
Well, yes, we've talked about single moms from time to time on this show, but generally it's been after the fact, like after they've already become pregnant.
What about beforehand?
What about a woman who is considering mulling deeply over the option of becoming a single mother by choice?
What could we say to her?
Well, you'll find out.
Oh, just before I get to the next part, freedomainradio.com slash donate.
Do come and sign up for a subscription.
freedomainradio.com slash donate.
So we talked to the potential single mom-to-be, which was a great conversation, and then talked to a fella whose family fled from Russia after having its property confiscated twice because of socialism.
He feels like he's yelling down a deep well of despair when it comes to trying to convince people in the West how dangerous, how destructive, how vicious socialism is.
What is he going to do?
What is he going to do?
It's tough.
You know, it's tough.
You know, people don't take the red pill often by choice, but you can't administer it by force.
So we talked about that.
And I don't know, do I talk enough about vaginas?
Probably not.
I mean, is there really any way to do that too much?
But what is the relationships between vaginas and And property rights.
I'll leave that puzzling and exciting mystery for the third caller and I to discuss.
Are there limits of what you can own or how much you can own so as to maximize liberty?
Stefan Molyneux from Freedom Main Radio.
Follow me on Twitter at Stefan Molyneux, FDRURL.com slash Amazon for the affiliate link, FDRPodcast.com for the podcast sharing.
Thank you so much for listening and supporting this show.
This is why we do what we do.
Alright, up first is Megan.
Megan wrote into the show and said, I've been thinking the past couple of years about becoming a single mother by choice.
I know, all single mothers are by choice, or at least have a string of bad choices, but I see this as an examined, purposeful choice.
I saw your videos about single moms, and they really have my wheels turning.
What other things should I be considering in this decision?
I'm sure there are things I haven't yet considered.
Here's a little bit about my situation.
I'm 31, finishing my undergraduate degree in a couple weeks, and will be going to grad school this fall.
In two years, I'll have a master's degree, and would wait a couple years after that before trying to have a child.
I wanted to have a child for several years, yet have no desire to be in a long-term romantic relationship.
I've struggled a while with that, but I've finally come to the realization that I'm aromantic, but that doesn't decrease my desire to have and raise a child.
I think that as long as I wait until I'm in a stable place in my life and go about it ethically, being single shouldn't exclude me from having a child.
I'll be financially self-sufficient and won't have a string of surrogate fathers in the child's life.
That's from Megan.
Well, hi, Megan.
How are you doing today?
I'm good.
Thank you.
Good.
What's your degree in?
Anthropology is my undergraduate degree, and my graduate degree will be in medical anthropology.
Like bone stuff?
No, not quite.
That's forensic anthropology.
Medical anthropology is the study of how people experience their medical culture, medical care.
I'm sorry to be ignorant, and I'm a guy with a degree in history, but is that a job thing?
Do you get a job with that?
Yes.
Many people in the field would go into academia.
So teaching and research, I intend to do more of an applied position where I would essentially make sure that people are experiencing their medical care to the best, you know, to its fullest, essentially.
You mean like a patient advocate?
Yeah, patient advocate, working with physicians, clinicians to make sure that there's A competency as far as culture goes.
So whether the conflict in culture, you know, an outside culture versus our Western culture, you know, if there's kind of a conflict there with how they perceive their medical care.
Huh.
I guess I learn about a new occupation every day.
I didn't know that.
And I guess you would have to be fluent in the other cultures language, right?
Yes, yes.
And so I also want to work with gender competency.
So where non-binary genders, you know, where that's an issue as far as, you know, doctors that, you know, maybe are not aware of the different issues that go on with other genders, you know, to make sure to bridge that gap.
Oh, don't worry.
If you become a single mom, trust me, you'll be getting an advanced degree in gender competency with regards to your kids.
So basically, I'm just trying to sort of understand the position for reasons I'll get to in a sec.
But is it like you would convince Jehovah's Witnesses to get blood transfusions?
Is that sort of idea?
No.
But in that type of situation, if there was a conflict between What the doctors felt was appropriate treatment and what the patient felt was appropriate treatment to try to mediate that situation, I suppose.
Oh, so like if you're speaking to certain cultures, you might want to remind them that Western medicine is slightly superior to voodoo.
Or if you're talking to Chinese people, you know, ground up tiger balls will not increase your virility.
I mean, is it that kind of stuff?
Yeah, yeah.
Yes.
And it's to...
For instance, there's a book that pretty much all anthropology students have to read, and it has to do with a culture from Laos.
They're Laotian.
They think that they will heal their daughter by sacrificing pigs, and the doctors want to give her medication for her epilepsy.
And the parents don't speak English.
They don't know how to read medication labels.
And essentially the daughter was not getting the treatment that she, the Western treatment that she, that would have helped her.
But it's because the doctors are just like, here, here's all this medication, give it to her.
And they have no idea how to do it.
And then they're, they look like negligent parents when really they just, they're just don't know English.
You know, they don't speak English.
They don't know how to, Right.
So if they'd had a medical anthropologist involved, you know, they may have been able to maneuver the situation better and gotten the doctor better care.
So basically you'll be massive diversity overhead.
Yes.
Okay, just wanted to check.
I mean, they're here, right?
Or they're there.
So, but that's, you know, I mean, if there was a sensible immigration policy that your job would be maybe treating people rather than convincing people that superstition is inferior to Western medicine.
And of course, there is also the superstition in Africa that a lot of black males have, which is that if you rape a baby or rape a virgin, that will either cure your AIDS or Render you immune to AIDS or so...
That's the kind of stuff where you say, baby rape is not the way to go when it comes to AIDS prevention.
Right, right.
Okay.
All right.
Well, that's an interesting job.
I didn't really know that it existed.
And now, what does it mean to be aromantic, if you could help me understand that?
I mean, I get the general gist, but what's the experience?
Okay, so...
In general, the experience can range from being completely repulsed by any sign of romance, even in movies or anything.
My personal experience is I just lack the desire for it.
I just don't seek it out.
It's cute in movies, but for me, You know, I've been in relationships, and they've had a, you know, I've been in romantic relationships.
Essentially, they all kind of follow the same pattern.
You know, it's easy enough to say, well, that one was a cheater, that one was a jerk, that one, you know, on and on the story goes.
But then when I came to the realization that...
I'm the common denominator.
What's going on?
So I looked more into that and realized I'm not happy in a romantic relationship.
And it's not something that I seek for my personal life.
And what was your parents' relationship like?
Oh, they've been married for 40...
I don't know, 45-ish years.
I can't remember how many years exactly, but they've been married for 45 years.
And obviously, I mean, as any marriage goes, it's not always been happy, you know, always, but it's always been loyal and faithful and a good, solid relationship.
Are they in love?
Yes.
To me, from my point of view, it's more at this point, of course, just a comfortable companionship.
So it's not sexually or erotically or romantically charged?
No, not that I've ever noticed.
Now, of course, they were married for many years before I came along.
But I'm also the sixth of seven children, so...
Well, reproduction is not the same as romance.
No, I know.
I'm just saying if there had been romance in the beginning, you know, kids and life and everything can take a toll on that, I imagine.
Well, yeah, it doesn't have to.
I mean, if the desire is there and the romance is there, then, you know, kids are an expression of that rather than a denial of that, right?
Right.
Okay, so would you say that your parents' relationship is asexual or aromantic?
Yeah, I've actually never thought of their relationship or questioned their relationship in that way.
Wouldn't that be, I mean, you've listened to this show for a while, right?
Yeah, yeah.
Okay, I mean, and so you're aromantic, your parents have a less than fully passionate sexual relationship or romantic relationship.
But it never occurred to you to wonder if their relationship is aromantic?
I'm just curious where we are in terms of self-knowledge and curiosity, because that's how I'll calibrate the rest of the convo.
Oh, yeah.
No, I mean, it did not occur to me just because, you know, I have other siblings that are in fully aromantic relationships.
So I guess the logic of me being aromantic because my parents are aromantic Didn't necessarily follow because I have siblings that are romantic.
But siblings have high degrees of variability in their genetics, right?
Yes.
I mean, there can be up to eight points or more difference in IQ between siblings, so there's a lot of variation.
Okay.
All right.
And I'm going to assume that you didn't have any, what could euphemistically be called, premature sexual experiences?
Correct.
Okay, good.
You would be correct in assuming that.
No creepy stuff as a kid, right?
Right, right.
Okay.
And is it also fair to say, Megan, that you've not experienced a genuine full-body passion for a man?
Correct.
All right.
Physical attraction...
To men, but I mean, the romantic part of it, the, you know, the passionate, you know, being in love just kind of goes over my head, I guess.
So you've just not experienced it, right?
Right.
Yep.
And you mentioned that the guys were not, the guys that you were dating were not exactly high quality in terms of, I think you said cheaters or liars or whatever it was.
Is that fair to say as well?
Yes, of course.
I mean, they seem nice enough at first, of course.
The relationships, I mean, they end up lasting, you know, six months tops.
So, I mean, I see that they're not quality and I'm, you know, I hit the road.
And how are you choosing these guys if it's not according to the quality of their character?
We all make a choice to date someone based on some reason.
And it may be this is the only car left in the lot and I've got to get somewhere.
It could be a variety of things.
But why do you think...
What is your criteria for choosing these guys if they turn out to be low-quality people?
Well, for the most part...
Well, my younger relationships, when I was 18, 19 years old, I think I just didn't know how to necessarily choose...
You know, a quality guy.
I really hadn't dated much at all.
I hadn't dated at all, like through high school and things.
So I, you know, he showed me the right attention and I thought that was great.
And, you know, so I dated him for a while.
And now, you know, because of that, as I got older, started being more selective.
And so when I date them, it's usually...
They seem, you know, on the first couple of dates, you know, they have jobs, they seem to have good families, they're respectful, this kind of thing.
And then, it's usually over just a couple of, in the course of a couple of months, I'm seeing that, like, they're more emotionally unavailable than I had originally realized, or that kind of thing.
So, Then that's usually when I'm not happy in the relationship.
And then, you know, a few months in, it usually ends.
All right, I got a bunch of questions.
The first thing is you said you didn't know a quality guy, didn't know what a quality guy looked like?
So is that saying that your father is not a quality guy and you don't want anyone like your dad?
Because, you know, you grew up with a dad who's been married to your mom for 40 years, where you say your child is happy.
Sorry, go ahead.
And, you know, thinking logically, of course, you know, I know what a quality man looks like.
I have good brothers, brothers-in-law, dad that are good men.
But I think at the time, being, you know, 18 years old, I... I just didn't care.
I mean, essentially, I just didn't care that he wasn't like My father wasn't like the good examples that I had.
Okay, but then what did you care about that made you want to date these guys?
Like, if you had a template, as you say, good brothers, good father, if you've got lots of positive masculine role models of good, decent guys around, and you date shit dirts or bagheads or whatever you want to call them, right?
If you date bad guys when you have a template, then it must mean that you're avoiding that template and pursuing the bad boys for some reason.
And that's what I'm asking, like, what did you want from them?
Because saying I didn't know a quality guy is not, Accurate, right?
No, no.
The one that I'm actually...
The one that I'm thinking of in my head, the one that I dated for a while when I was 18 and 19 years old, he's the one that was more just lower quality.
And it was more...
He was really nice to me and I was just immature and...
It was kind of the first relationship I had been in and the first one that had really shown me this kind of attention.
Wait, did your father not show you attention?
He was a bit distant with me emotionally.
I think he just didn't know how to show that to me.
And what does it mean to say emotionally distant?
I mean, that's a...
I understand the words, but I don't know what your experience of that was with regards to your father.
I mean, he was physically there.
He's always been there.
He's been a good provider, but not a particularly, I guess, warm, you know, giving hugs and, you know, just a warm emotional...
Person, I guess, with me.
Or in general, I should say.
And you know what your biggest complaint was about the men you dated, right?
Yeah, that they were not emotionally available.
Emotionally unavailable, right?
Yeah.
Do you think there's a connection there?
Oh, definitely.
So you dated guys like your dad, in terms of emotional availability, and it didn't work out, right?
Right.
So it wasn't that you didn't know quality guys, it's that you had a template of emotional unavailability from your father, which you pursued, I would guess.
No psychologist is my guess, right?
But I would assume that you then...
Pursued guys like your dad, but without knowing that they were like your dad, or without knowing some of the discontentedness you had with your dad's emotional distance.
So you did this Simon the Boxer thing from my book, Real-Time Relationships, which people can get at freedomainradio.com slash free, that you were used to guys who were emotionally distant, so you pursued guys who were emotionally distant, and then you were upset that they were emotionally distant and broke up with them.
I mean, yeah.
Yeah, I mean, pretty much, yeah.
And how many boyfriends have you had?
Five or six.
Not many.
And is that the same, roughly, and I'm sorry to ask you this, you certainly don't have to answer anything you don't want to, but is that the same as the number of guys you slept with, or did you have sexual relationships outside of a longer term relationship?
That number is slightly smaller than the number of sexual relationships I've had.
So yes, I have had some sexual experiences that have been more casual.
Okay, so like 10 or 12 guys you slept with in total?
Yes, sure.
Okay.
Wait, sure.
Hang on.
It makes you sound like I'm pinning a number on you.
No, I don't mean to say like, oh yeah, that sounds like a good number and it's actually 20 or 30.
No, I'm just saying it's around there.
Okay.
All right.
And when was the last time you had a longer term romantic relationship?
I mean, earlier this year, I dated a guy for a couple of months.
A couple of years ago, I dated somebody for three or four months.
And the most recent one, who ended it?
I ended it.
Because of emotional unavailability on the part of the man?
Yes.
Yep.
Right.
And how did you know he was emotionally unavailable?
In other words, what behaviors would he have had to show that would reveal his emotional availability?
Well, he...
When we first dated, when we first started talking and going on a couple of dates, he...
I had been divorced not long enough ago.
How long had you been divorced, Megan, before you started going out with him?
About six months.
It was one of those that more of the story kept coming out as we went on when we were together more often.
So I was under the impression that it was more settled and that he was more over it.
And then as things progressed between us, then I realized that he was not over it.
And so...
And how long had he been married for?
Um...
I believe five years.
So five years, maybe a couple of years before they got married.
So a seven or eight year relationship, he was six months out of it.
But you thought he'd be mostly done with it?
I mean, he was also out seeking a relationship and I tried to talk to him about it and ask him where he was with that.
And he said he was over it, and so I was willing to go on some dates with him and see how that went.
And essentially, within a couple months, I realized, or within probably a month, I realized that he was not over it.
And what does your father think of your boyfriend?
So what did he think of your previous boyfriends?
He's never really had that much to say about them.
Why do you think that he doesn't know that men can break his little girl's heart?
Does he not know that, you know, I mean, when my daughter grows up, I'm going to be fully aware that men can break little girl's hearts and men can break big women's hearts and all that, and I'm going to need to, well, be the...
Daddy bear with the sharp claws, making sure that she's treated right and so on.
Especially because, you know, I mean, when girls are in their teenage years, I mean, their hormones are, I guess most women's hormones are going wild and it doesn't always lead to the best decision making if you go for the high status pretty boy alpha or whatever.
Then I'm just sort of curious as to why your father didn't rouse your His inert self to try and figure out whether you were dating decent guys or not.
He just wandered off.
Did he meet the guys?
Did he talk to the guys?
I mean, he's met some of them.
He's never...
I mean, I didn't date while I was still living at home, like during high school and whatnot.
So I really didn't...
So as I was choosing men, I was...
I think...
My father pretty much just felt that, you know, I was an adult and I was going to, you know, just date who I was going to date.
I don't know.
He never really had any much say-so in it.
Or, I mean, he never really attempted to have much say-so in it.
Well, given that he had a successful relationship, I mean, at least 40 years married and they're still together, and I assume they're going to stay together.
So given that he had a successful relationship and you were trying something for the first time, I mean, if he knew how to ride a bike, did he just let you wander off and ride a bike on your own and figure it out and fall down?
I mean, I'm...
Just curious.
Did he let you figure out how to speak English on your own or did he have some input into that?
Did he teach you how to read or did he just let you figure it out on your own?
Like, I'm just trying to understand the logic behind, well, you know, she's new to this, I'm very good at it, or at least I have a long-term successful relationship.
My daughter is trying things out for the first time, so I'm not going to get involved.
And you could argue that protecting your daughter's heart might be a little bit more important than protecting her knees by putting training wheels on her bike.
Mm-hmm.
No, I mean, I guess I don't know what the thought process behind it all was, but I mean, no, it really, really wasn't.
And what about your mother?
Did she...
You know, she chose a guy that she was happy with, I assume, for her life.
And so she also knows how to choose a man who's compatible, who's going to be around for the long term.
Did your mother help you in your selection of men or point out potential warning signs or meet the boys?
Yeah, she did more.
She did more.
I'm a little closer with her on that kind of, you know, the more emotional type topics.
And she did.
She did.
Oh, good.
Okay, so she helped you to choose the men.
Yeah, so I wasn't just completely loose in the world alone.
And why did she do such a bad job of that, of helping you choose the men?
Like, I mean, if you ended up with guys who you didn't like, and your mother was advising you on the guys you wanted to be with, why do you think she did such a good...
I mean, she didn't, like, meet them at the first date or anything, so she wouldn't have been able to.
Like, so if there was anybody that was, you know, that I was...
With a little longer than I would, you know, bring them home to meet mom and dad or whatever, and she did.
Okay, so then your mother had a chance to evaluate the men earlier in the relationship, and I would assume also that you'd have, you know, what they call in project management terms, a post-mortem, I guess, medical terms as well, which is after a relationship fails, to figure out what went wrong, what the signs were, and how to avoid them in the future.
Is that something you did with your mom?
No.
So what feedback exactly did she give you on these guys?
I like his hair.
I mean, I'm trying to figure this out.
No, I mean, she...
Like, with the boyfriend that was probably the longest-term boyfriend that I had when I was 18, I mean, she tried to, I guess, question, you know, is he really a good match for you?
That kind of thing.
And...
I mean, essentially, I just ignored it.
I just said, you know, I love him and, you know, I want to be with him or whatever.
And I ignored it.
And that was a mistake because she ended up being very right about it.
Okay, so then I'm sorry that she had so little credibility for you as a teenager.
I'm sorry, too.
I mean, and that's the result, I would assume, of her parenting earlier, that for some reason...
You didn't have...
You didn't respect your mother's opinion enough to even put the brakes on a little bit of what you were doing.
And I'm sorry for that.
You know, a lot of parenting, when your kids get older, it's all about the credibility you've earned when they're younger.
So that they'll listen to you and know that you're not running your own agenda, but are trying to do the best for them, based upon the knowledge that you have.
And, you know, to some degree, that requires the exercise of legitimate authority when kids are younger.
You know, like I... I think it's important for parents to say to kids, I'm older, I'm more experienced, here's how I know, here's what I know, here's why I know, and you're pretty new to this, so you need to listen.
So I'm sorry you didn't have that, but given that your mother turned out to be right, did you listen to her going forward to the newer guys, like regarding the newer boyfriends?
I mean, honestly, there really wasn't a whole lot of input in future relationships.
And that's probably my fault because I hadn't listened before and maybe she didn't feel, you know, her place or feel comfortable or what have you.
I don't know.
Okay, so you didn't get really any input from either parent.
What about your siblings?
Did they, your brothers or your sisters if you have, did they look out for you and try and guide you towards better guys or give you post-mortems about your relationships, figure out what went wrong and how it could be improved next time?
Um, to some degree.
I have a, um, a sister that, um, that I'm closer with and, and talking about relationships.
So to some degree, yes.
Um, do, you know, kind of a post-mortem and, um, try to figure, figure it out a little bit.
Um, so I, I feel like each, each guy was, um, Slightly better than the last one before, so I don't think I was exactly making the exact same mistakes every time.
Essentially, even if they had been good guys, I've never felt satisfied at all with any kind of romantic relationship.
Question.
Here's where we move from the past to the present.
So question, Megan.
Okay.
When it comes to emotional availability, in our conversation right now, for the past 40 minutes or whatever it's been, do you feel that you are emotionally available to me?
Probably not.
What do you mean?
That's a very non-committal answer.
It takes me a little while to be emotionally available to someone.
I'm trying to give as honest of answers as possible.
I'm not saying dishonest at all.
I'm just talking about emotional availability.
It feels like we could be discussing a grocery list.
But it's your life, your heart, your future, your potential child.
And you seem distant to me.
I mean, I don't know what else to say about it, honestly.
And the reason I'm saying that is that, of course, you can choose not to date, in which case emotional distance, which I'm not saying is true, I'm just telling you that's my experience, right?
Mm-hmm.
But if you choose not to date, then your emotional distance is not going to be a factor in your relationships.
But if you choose to have a child, your emotional distance, if it's there, is going to be very significant in that relationship, right?
Yes.
Because it just struck me that you complained about emotional unavailability and we're talking about very important things in your life.
And, you know, it's not like we just met on the bus.
You've listened to shows.
You've known that this call is coming up for weeks.
And I can't get a handle on where your emotions are at all.
Well, I mean, I don't know, I guess, what you're asking.
Yeah.
It's a data point for me.
You can just mull it over that it may not be entirely the men who are emotionally unavailable.
And you say that you don't have passion in your life.
And again, I'm no doctor, but I assume you've had that checked out to make sure hormone levels and all that are where they should be.
But if you don't have passion in your life, if you don't have desire or much desire in your life, It just seemed odd to me that you'd complain about the emotional unavailability of the men you were dating with no particular self-criticism, but you yourself have complained about being emotionally unavailable to yourself, right?
Which is that you don't have these spontaneous big passions that guide you or motivate you in your life, at least romantically, right?
Right.
No, I mean, that's part of why I said, you know, all these relationships, you know, it's easy enough to say, You know, he's, you know, he's this or he's that.
But yeah, I mean, I am the common denominator and I, and I realized that about myself that, you know, that's a problem with me too.
It's just as much my fault as theirs.
Did you tell these guys that you were aromantic when you got into romantic relationships?
Did you say, listen, I don't feel particular romantic or sexual passions and that's been the cause of the failure of my relationships in the past.
I just want you to know, before going in, that this is my being.
It's not going to change.
It's who I am.
Did they know all of that going into a relationship with you?
There's only been one guy that I've dated since I've known that about myself, since I've discovered that about myself.
And yes, he did.
Yeah, I told him just from the very beginning of just having initial conversations, he knew about that.
Right.
Now, who's going to take care of your baby if you're working?
I assume you'll be working because you want to get a degree, which means I hope you're not going to take a whole bunch of social resources and then use it to stay home.
No.
My plan, I guess, would be to have a babysitter, try to work from home to some degree, or work part-time to some degree.
Until the child won't have to go to school.
Well, okay, but when the child goes to school, I mean, you understand that what you gave me is not even remotely a plan, right?
That's a hope.
Cross your fingers.
Yeah, I mean, that's why I'm coming to you.
To try to get a better feel for what more of a plan I need to make.
Well, the plan is who's going to take care of your child.
That's the plan, right?
I mean, that's the question.
Now, maybe you'll have some paternity leave.
And certainly if you're an academic, right, it's one of the bonuses of getting that state cartel license is that you have some flexibility as far as that goes.
But if you have a job, you know, particularly a job with a hospital, I don't know anything about your field, but it doesn't sound like a, it sounds like a bit of a kind of got to be there, like lives are at stake and communication is at stake and treatment is at stake.
So that's going to be part of your life.
And children, babies need you all day and all night.
Because you'll be tired, right?
You'll be breastfeeding and you are going to be up half the night.
It depends on your kid.
You know, some kids will sleep through, but boy, it's a bit of a dice roll as far as that goes.
And they certainly won't sleep through at the very beginning because they need to be fed every couple of hours.
So for months or more, you're going to be, you know, very tired and leaky and bonded with your child.
Is that the plan, right?
Because you say you're going to get a master's degree in a couple of years, wait a couple of years of that before trying to have a child.
So the question is, are you going to be able to take a couple of years off?
You need at least a year and a half of breastfeeding and hopefully we can go longer than that.
Before you put your kid into a daycare, or I don't know what it means to have a babysitter.
I mean, a babysitter doesn't usually provide in-home childcare for the 10 or 12 hours a day that you're traveling and working and changing and getting ready to go to work and getting out of your work clothes and all of that.
So if you can afford a live-in nanny, I guess that's one possibility.
But given that you're Still in school in your 30s, I assume you don't have a lot of savings and given that you're only going to have a couple of years where you're trying to establish your career before you have a kid, then you're basically going to go to an employer saying that, well you won't say it of course and I don't think it's legal for them to ask in most places, but you're going to go to an employer after having...
Taking society for six years of education, you're going to go to an employer with the express intent of basically abandoning your work to be a good mother within a couple of years of starting your job.
Or your career, right?
And then what?
And then you're going to be home for a couple of years, and then the kid's going to go to school, but hey, school gets out at three o'clock these days, right?
And work is till five, so then what?
Does that mean your kid is going to be in some form of daycare?
How's the kid going to get there?
I mean, there is a lot...
To try and figure out that gets extremely complicated.
If you don't have a man, bring it home with a cheddar, right?
Mm-hmm.
So what are your thoughts on all this?
You're absolutely right, yeah.
Okay, right about what and what's your plan then, right?
I'm giving you that you said you called in to know what some of the challenges are.
These are the ones that pop into my head.
So what do you think about that and what are you going to do?
Well, I mean, it's definitely going to be difficult, and I mean, I may end up not doing it at all.
I mean, obviously, it's a very challenging thing to go through.
I mean, there are.
There's a lot more things to think about than, I guess, my vision of kind of...
You know, rosy, to say the least.
So, yeah, getting down to the nitty gritty, it's a lot.
Why do you want a child?
You know, like, because if I said, well, I desperately want to become a doctor, and my plan is just to sort of do something later, and I haven't thought any of it through, Then it would be kind of confusing as to why, you know, if I want to be a doctor, then I would take very specific steps to go about achieving that and end up as a white-haired extra on scrubs.
But why do you want a baby?
Part of it is biological.
You know, just kind of the biological desire to have a child.
But, I mean, a lot of it's emotional.
You know, I would like to...
I would like to have a baby, and I'd like to have a child, not just a baby, and it's all cute, but I'd like to raise a child and experience the mother-child bond and bring another life into the world.
Those are all sort of synonyms for I want, but why do you want?
And do you think you're going to have a mother-child bond if you're working?
Working mothers have bonds with their children now.
Even if they're married, mothers work.
Well, let me ask you this.
Do you think that spending more time around your child makes the bond stronger or weaker?
Spending more time around them?
Yeah.
Probably makes it stronger.
Yeah, because as the studies showed, children who are placed into other care for 20 hours a week or more experience exactly the same emotional symptoms as children who are abandoned by their mothers completely.
So without a doubt, more time with your child creates a stronger bond, less time with the child weakens the bond, of course, right?
I mean, we wouldn't expect anything.
You spend more time learning Japanese, you learn Japanese faster than if you spend less time learning Japanese, right?
It's dose dependent, you know, to give you a medical...
I'm sure you're familiar with.
So, but what is it that you expect to get out of having a child?
Because you said there's emotional, I assume that you, that there will be emotional benefits for you to have a child.
I would hope so, because you shouldn't have a child for reasons that give you no happiness or benefit.
And what are the emotional benefits, Megan, that you feel will come from having a child?
I feel that it's It's something that will make me happy.
I feel that it'll make me feel fulfilled, you know, as a woman, as a person to, you know, have an offspring.
So, and this is, I don't mean to sort of be a trap here, but that's all stuff the child is supposed to do for you, right?
Yes.
Yes.
But you know it's not the child's job to make you happy, right?
Yes.
It's not the child's job to make you fulfilled.
It's not the child's job to make you a woman or to fulfill or help you avoid loneliness or to help you feel complete.
That's not the child's job, right?
Mm-hmm.
And there'll be lots of times when if you try to give that job to the child, the child will resist you with every fiber in its being.
Because the child will feel used.
And the child will specifically avoid and rail against the idea that the child is there to make you happy.
I think that the best way, my opinion, this is not factual, but I think what I like to hear from people who want to have kids is I'm really going to enjoy watching that child develop, watching that mind develop.
I'm really going to enjoy the existence of that child for that child's sake.
Bringing someone, introducing someone to the glories and excitements of the world and watching that child grow and develop and Become their own person.
That is something where it's not the child's job to make you happy, but what you're talking about is how you're going to feel better because the child is in your life.
Well, I mean, I didn't express it very well.
I guess I don't express, obviously, I don't express emotions very well, but I mean, what you're saying Is accurate.
I mean, what you're saying, like, you know, watching the child grow and, you know, become a successful adult and watch the child have joy in his or her life.
I mean, those are all things that would make me happy.
Right.
And to watch the child grow, you have to be there.
You can't be at work and watch your child grow.
You know, webcam at the daycare ain't the same thing.
So, and this is sort of what I'm trying to sort of get you at.
I want you to have the best experience of being a parent possible.
And in my opinion, and I think there's a lot of data to back this up, but in my opinion, that actually means being with the child, right?
I mean, if you had a man you loved, you wouldn't marry him and then immediately move to the other side of the country and have a long distance relationship, right?
I mean, if you could, if it wasn't necessary.
So if you want to be at, Assuming you don't win the lottery or discover a treasure chest of ingots under the floor of your house, being there with the child is the best way to watch the child grow and interact with the child and gain authority with the child.
I'm just curious, was your mother a stay-at-home mom?
Some of the times, yes.
And for you?
She stayed at home.
For you?
Was she a stay-at-home mom?
Yeah, yeah.
There was periods of time where she would work, like weekends, and then, you know, I think she didn't actually work full-time until I was more like in middle school.
Right, but I mean, with seven kids, there's not a lot of individual attention, right?
Yeah, younger, you know, younger years.
Yeah, for the most part, she was at home.
Right.
So, look, if you can find a guy who you can have the amiable companionship that your parents have and he's willing to provide for you as a mom, then you can have a wonderful relationship with your child by being home and enjoying the company of that child and the child enjoying your company.
You know, rather than dragging your lactating, exhausted carcass off a bed and driving dangerously off to work with bloodshot eyes, you know, like that's, I don't think, going to give you the satisfaction that you want out of the parent-child relationship.
And listen, I'm sure you're aware of this, but I just want to reinforce it to everyone else.
If you expect a child to make you happy, that's not going to work.
The child will resent you.
If you expect a child to keep you from being lonely, that will not work.
The child will resent you.
Well, I shouldn't say that won't work, because a lot of times, tragically, it kind of does.
Because, you know, the parents get older and the children are turned into substitute boyfriends and husbands and wives or whatever.
And the parents use even the adult child as this giant stopgap polyfiller measure to keep the water of loneliness from seeping through the cracks of bad decisions.
And...
But if you want to really enjoy being a parent, then you've got to invest in it, right?
I mean, you're not going to school part-time, you're going to school full-time because you want to get the most you can out of your education.
Well, it's a bit more important to how you raise a child than it is how you learn about how to convince people to get certain medical procedures done against their superstitions.
So I would say that to have the best experience of being a parent, get someone to provide for you so that you can be home With your child and that may mean, probably will mean, finding a man who you love or at least can Live with in a positive companion kind of way.
And I would also suggest, Megan, that you've got to figure out some of this emotional distance.
Because children are hungrier for their mother's hearts than they are for their applesauce.
Children flourish and thrive with, and it could be the dad, right?
But in your case, it probably would be the mom.
And certainly for the first couple of years with the breastfeeding and all that.
They literally are hungry for their mother's hearts because that seems to be the wellspring of the milk sometimes.
So I would try and figure out where my emotional distance was because a child, like if a guy finds you, you can drift apart from a boyfriend, you can break up with a boyfriend, but you can't drift apart from a kid and you can't break up with a baby.
And so, if the baby's putting emotional demands on you that you haven't figured out why you're emotionally distant as yet, that I would sort out first.
Now, as far as the ethics go, you know, I mean, if everybody's consensual, I mean, the child isn't consensual to growing up without a father.
The child isn't consensual to growing up without the father.
However, I mean, I grew up without a father and I'm very happy to be alive, so I don't think that's inevitable.
You will, of course, have to answer why there's no father in the child's life.
For both a son and a daughter, that's going to be a challenge.
And you are, of course, going to have to research and read up on the challenges of single motherhood.
Like, I went to the website that you recommended.
I don't even want to give it by name, but I went to the website you recommended and looked around.
Couldn't find anything.
About the statistical dangers of single motherhood for children.
Nothing.
Not a thing.
And that is, to me, highly irresponsible.
And, you know, if you're going to be a single mom, okay, well, it's not the initiation of force, so it's not immoral, but you do need to be aware of the dangers.
And the website that you pointed me out, maybe it's there and I didn't find it, but I spent some time looking around it.
And it was all like, oh, it's glorious.
And here are the studies that say it's wonderful and so on.
But the statistical dangers that accrue to children who grew up without fathers was nowhere mentioned.
And that's something to be aware of as well.
Those are just my particular thoughts.
And I certainly wish you the best with your choices.
Well, I appreciate you talking to me and forcing some answers out of me and giving me some more things to think about.
Technically not force.
And we've got a presentation called The Truth About Single Moms.
We can get more of this danger.
All right.
Thanks, Megan.
I appreciate it.
And I guess let us know what your decision is over time.
I'm certainly curious to hear.
All right.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Bye-bye.
Alright, up next is Vladimir.
He wrote in and said, I feel like a lot of young people out there have no idea what the socialism is and how bad it could be for the entire civilization.
I feel emotionally drained every time I fight people around me, trying to prove them wrong, and feel like all the fighting is taking me away from my personal freedom or goals.
How can I light up my goals along with helping people see the true nightmare which socialism is?
That's from Vladimir.
Hey, how you doing today, brother?
Pretty good.
How are you, Stefan?
I am well.
I am well.
That is a terrifying statement and experience, so I completely understand where you're coming from.
When you see disaster approaching and people won't listen, oh man, what do you do?
Yeah, and these arguments just bounce off the wall.
Nothing sticks in there every time I try to talk to them and just use some logic.
It didn't work because it was Russia.
It's not because it was communism or socialism.
It's not the infrastructure.
It's the people behind it.
But if we trust this in the right people, then something magically will happen and it will be a much better system than you had before.
It doesn't work that way.
It's a system.
So can you tell me a little bit about your, or a lot if you like, about your family history and what happened?
Okay.
My family in late 1900s were, well, late 1900s to early, were counts.
Like, they had a county, they had a mansion and everything.
And that was taken away from us.
But when there was a revolution, a socialist revolution in, what, 1916.
We were lucky we didn't get killed, I guess would be.
But my whole family became on the streets and was trying to work their way up and tried from the ground zero.
And we opened up one of five manufacturing can't facilities in Uzbekistan, which was part of USSR. It was a Central Asia.
And that was being taken away from us in like early 1950s by the government again.
Then my dad opened up a transistor business, and he was selling transistors to England, to France, to a lot of Western countries.
USSR falls apart, copper prices went up by 300 times, and because he was locked in the contracts, we became bankrupt.
Then he opens up the furniture business.
And eventually we had to relocate ourselves because the mob, the policeman problems, like the taxations, the firemen.
And then he finally opened up the drywall knife business that actually was very, very successful back in Uzbekistan when it became independent and was enough for us to come to the United States and to have some savings to start fresh again in this country.
So that's my history, kind of.
It's sort of admirable, and it is in fact admirable, the degree to which your father just kept trying.
You know, like that Chamba Bamba song, I get knocked out, but I get up again.
I mean, that's impressive.
And we're trying to do it now, too, with a couple different ideas.
Right.
Do you come from a Jewish background in Russia?
No, we're Russian, Christian Orthodox.
Okay.
Yeah, it just sort of reminds me of, I did The Truth About Ayn Rand, part one, talk about her sort of life.
And, you know, her father got raped by the communists financially and economically.
And, I mean, she had to get out.
It's sort of funny, years later, she met her sister who stayed, and her sister was still defending the regime as it stood.
Yeah, my grandmother defended it all the time.
I think she was deeply indoctrinated by it.
So we always had this occasion when we get drunk, obviously Russians to some extent, and there it goes.
My dad tries to say bad things that socialism did, and she would try to defend it, and they would be fighting for hours and hours.
And my dad usually would win the arguments, because there was logic behind it.
In general, and I know that this is not statistical, it's anecdotal, but in your experience, do you find that there's any difference in the genders between who is more amenable to socialism?
Hmm, that's a good point.
I think women on average would like socialism a little bit more.
Sure.
Because the teacher is going to get paid the same amount of wage than the engineers would, but at the same time, being an engineer is a lot more difficult than being a first or second grade teacher, in my opinion.
Right.
And, of course, in general, socialism is what women have evolved to adapt to.
In other words, not working directly for your resources, but instead having a man or a patriarchy provide those resources to you, that's what men have adapted to.
There's nothing wrong with it.
It's just based upon the nature of the fact that women for many decades of their life are physically, functionally, largely, repetitively disabled by pregnancy, by childbirth, by healing, by breastfeeding, by sleeplessness with the babies.
And of course, women aren't out there getting a whole bunch of stuff for themselves.
They're secondhanders.
They rely on other people to bring them resources.
And the more resources they get, the more resources women get, the more attractive they are.
Right?
Like that old song, you don't need money when you look like that, honey, do you?
Right?
Because guys are going to buy you drinks and buy you dinner because you look that sugar baby kind of way.
So for a woman's physical vanity is swollen and her level of attractiveness is enhanced in her own mind, the more free stuff she gets from men.
So when a male politician comes along and says, I can get you free stuff, That's...
Free stuff for women is like free sex for men.
It's very, very hard to resist.
Politicians is...
Political life is porn for women in terms of what...
And women can't quit socialism any more than men can just walk away from pornography for the most part.
So I think that reality is something that needs to be understood.
And it's no accident that women generally choose security over freedom because...
A single man can take risks because it's only he who goes hungry if he fails.
But women who've evolved to be mothers prior to the modern Western age, they don't have the capacity to take risks because lives literally depend upon them.
Not just that they have to give food to their kids, but because they themselves have to generate milk for their babies.
They need extra calories for that.
And so they can't afford risk.
They, you know, bird in the hand is worth two in the bush, which is why women choose security over freedom, which is why when women get the vote, you get a welfare state within 10 to 15 years.
It's almost inevitable.
So the fact that women are more partial to socialist ideas, and I say this, you know, with Thatcher and Rand and other women who are, you know, very strong against these kinds of things, but these were very happily married women, at least for most of their lives.
So the only women who are for the free market are those who are happily married, which is why if you want to destroy the free market, you have to separate men from women, because then women will vote against the free market and for the security of state handouts, which destroys the free market, which is why Marxists and feminism go hand in hand.
Marxism wishes to destroy the free market, and feminism separates men from...
Women and once women are separated from men, they turn to the state for security and the free market is destroyed.
And then men kind of bows down to the system and accepts it.
Well, men can't fight the state and at least Western men to a large degree have evolved because they need so much case-selected investment in their children, they've evolved to defer to women.
And so when women get the vote, and there are Marxists around, and the big challenge was Marxism, not fundamentally women getting the vote.
People say, oh, women got the vote, and we get...
Yes, but that's because there was Marxism around, which programmed a lot of the intellectuals.
You know, they say, Marx says that religion is the opiate of the masses, and it's a pretty true statement to say that Marxism is the opiate of the intellectuals, which is even more dangerous.
Oh, my God.
So...
Yeah, you get Marxists around who hate capitalism, and they convince women to separate from men, and, you know, we did the dominoes just now, I don't need to do them again.
So, you're not...
When you're speaking to evolution, when you're speaking to biology, facts and arguments don't matter.
Because genes are evolved to reproduce, not to be philosophical.
Genes are evolved to get that sperm to the egg in whatever way possible.
Not to pursue abstract reasoning goals.
In fact, you know, the mind developed, particularly the capacity to defer gratification, developed so that men could accumulate additional resources with which to get women, right?
It's all around the reproduction of the genes.
And how does philosophy...
Help you reproduce your genes.
Well, these days, being philosophical is actually kind of a threat toward the reproduction of your genes because a lot of women will go like, ew, free market?
You're a cold, heartless bastard.
I'm taking my eggs elsewhere.
Yeah, and that's kind of a problem I'm having right now to ban us.
Oh, are you on...
Have you been banished to Eggless Island?
What does that mean?
Chick's not...
Chicks not hot for the free market guy?
No, not so much.
I'm dating a couple on the side, but I want a serious relationship.
I started getting ready to make a family, make babies and find a way to support them and to have them grow.
It's difficult to find the right one that doesn't have all the clutter and junk in her head, to be honest.
Right.
Right.
Well, no.
Good.
Good that you're not getting involved with a crazy woman or a woman who's not solid and sensible and down to earth because those women will merge with the state and often and it will be a very, very unpleasant second half of your life.
I did.
And I'm glad that I stopped it.
Right, right.
Now, as far as, you know, what to do about all of that, I've done this a million times before, so you just have to be as public and as passionate and as honest as possible and just see, you know, it's the old thing, run your flag up the pole and see who salutes.
So I want to get into all of that.
But the horrors of socialism, well, it's...
You see, the thing is, it's horrible for you and it's horrible for me.
I don't know that it's horrible for everyone.
No, the average person lives very happily in USSR. Well, yeah, maybe.
But certainly, you know, if you've got a lower IQ, you just want stuff now.
You don't want the conditions for future wealth.
You know, like if some guy's got something that you just want the government to take it and give it to you.
Now, not later.
Like when I say to people that I say, well, only the rich can afford these things and therefore that's bad.
It's like, no, no.
Only the rich could afford cell phones to begin with, and the rich were willing to pay $10,000 for a cell phone you couldn't stand under a tree and use.
It just sort of pointed at the satellite.
It was crazy, right?
These shoebox things.
But because the rich were willing to pay $10,000 for that, you now can get a cell phone for $30.
Yep.
Right?
And people are just like, but that took a long time.
It's like, yeah.
And if you're smart, you don't want that process interrupted because you want cool stuff in a decade or two.
But of course, you know, idiots, children, and drunks, they want things now.
They want things now!
And because they have the state, they can get them, because the state can just grab stuff and hand it to them.
So idiots, I think, are perfectly fine with socialism, and it doesn't matter how long or how much you explain that the deferral of gratification is really important while the deferral of gratification is associated with higher IQ. I mean, you're asking a toddler to get something from the top shelf.
Just, you know, it doesn't matter.
And we've got a presentation called The Death of Reason about all of this.
So don't waste your time on that stuff, man.
Seriously, it is not your job to go around trying to get short people to become tall.
You know, it's not your job to lecture my hair follicles until they produce a mohawk, right?
It's not your job.
There is a physical incapacity among a significant number of people to listen to reason and evidence.
Now, I don't know if they had been raised with philosophy and reason and evidence.
I'm sure that they would have a much greater ability.
But given how much propaganda there is in society these days, and it's from every single conceivable direction, Okay.
And, um...
You know, like Chinese guys aren't often tall enough to play elite basketball, but if they're also severely malnourished as children and grow up stunted, well, they really functionally have no chance.
Even the tall ones probably wouldn't have a chance at that environment.
So it takes a huge amount of intelligence to be able to overcome propaganda, which is why propaganda is so unfair to the less intelligent, because it denies them the very tools that they need most desperately to enhance their intelligence.
It doesn't matter if I overeat at lunch because I could just go get more food.
But if I'm on a boat in the middle of nowhere and I have to ration myself, then it really matters if I overeat at lunch because I'm going to run out.
And so this is what's so brutal about government schools because all the government schools are needed to egalitarianize education for the poor and so on.
It's like, nope, because poor are generally lower IQ, not always, but poor are generally lower IQ and propaganda is It destroys your capacity to use your mental capacities well if you're not that smart.
The smart people will often find a way to overcome propaganda because they're sort of relentless and restless curiosity and of course the smarter you are often the less you are susceptible to Immediate negative social repercussions, right?
So smart people who are committed to the truth say, oh, well, someone called me a racist.
Eh, okay, well, who cares, right?
Because the important thing is truth in the long run.
But people say, well, why are people so susceptible to being called racist these days?
Because they're dumber.
Because intelligence has been declining.
Because welfare is this giant eugenics program to idiocracy style breed idiots and not breed smart people.
And idiots are very susceptible to social pressure because they don't have the deferral of gratification and the long term goal oriented mindset to allow them to deal with Being called mean names and, you know, whatever.
Like, I mean, you've got a bigger and longer goal.
So this political correctness is a reflection of the falling intelligence.
And you can see this particularly in university campuses, you know, the triggly puff phenomenon where people are just screaming, keep your hate speech off my campus.
This is not, I mean, it's not hate speech because it bothers you.
It's only hate speech because it bothers idiots.
And they just call it hate speech because...
They're emotionally triggered and they have no intellectual way to manage their own emotions and accept that being upset is foundational to the progress of society.
You know, I mean, if hate speech had had its way, there never would have been an end to slavery because the people all intellectually and financially and emotionally invested in slavery would have called abolitionism hate speech, shut it down, and we'd still have slaves.
So, I mean, this lowering of intelligence as a whole, you can see this with the speeches of presidents, you know, the analysis that they're continually declining in complexity.
And this is partly the result of immigration of low IQ groups, but it's also the fact that schooling has gotten worse and the fact that the standards for university have lowered enormously.
And, of course, you know, universities are very keen on promoting feminism.
It's not that much of a mystery.
Universities like to promote feminism because if women reject feminism and accept the argument that it's better to have children when you're young, your eggs are fresh, and you have lots of energy for sleepless nights.
If women want to have kids early and want to have maybe their education and their careers later on, well, they're not going to go to university.
Or if they do go to university, they're going to go to university for a semester or two to get their MRS degree, find a good guy, and settle down.
And so given that 60% in a lot of places of university placements are women these days, and given that women wouldn't be going to college much if they were having kids when they were younger, of course colleges want to promote feminism, which says defer having children.
Because colleges want the women to come in the here and now so that they can fill their fat coffers and destroy Western civilization.
Go ahead.
That's, I think, the biggest challenge for me right now, Stefan, to be honest.
Personally, I'm relatively pretty successful, like financially dependent guy and I'm having like trying to do a couple startup business and I have enough resources to do so.
But then I'm looking and I have two ways to either go MGTO and just...
That's MGTOW. For those who don't know, that's MGTOW men going their own way, which is to issue or to avoid committed relationships with women and certainly marriage and children.
Correct.
And I mean, I have...
A couple of women that I kind of sort of date, but I know that it's not something I want a long term.
And a part of me wants to actually create the family, create the life, and find the right one.
But coming from Russia and have all this kind of traditional values kind of been poured into me, I'm looking here, I'm like, I don't know what to do because these women here are just, they are impenetrable.
Like, mentally and...
The more I'm actually living in the United States, and I've been here for about 11 years, the more I want actually to bring, honestly, for me as a partner, somebody from the other, like probably Russia, Ukraine, or somebody who speak the same language, who has more of a feminine, nurturing views about the life, who actually want me to be the main provider, and she sits at home, and she takes care of the kids.
But to do that, I'm running into a huge risk of Hey, is she actually doing it because she wants to be my partner?
Or is she doing that because she wants a visa in a more of a progressive country?
How tall are you?
5'9".
5'9".
Are you fairly, you know, Russians are renowned for upper body strength.
Are you a fairly strong guy?
Yeah.
Okay.
Do you think you could carry a water buffalo?
No.
All right.
Well, Cambodia is out then.
That's a challenge.
And, you know, I mean, there are ways of figuring out whether or not a woman is into you for your money or your green card or visa or whatever it is, so you don't end up like that sad sack silver fox jailer in Orange is the New Black.
But...
Certainly, there does seem to be a fairly high demand for women who are feminine.
And, you know, I can't for the life of me understand why you'd want to get married.
If you're not gay, why would you want to get married to another man?
Right?
To a woman who just says, well, I'm exactly the same as a man.
It's like, well, then why would I want to get married to you?
Because...
And again, if you don't want to have kids, fine, do whatever you want.
But if you want to have kids, someone's got to stay home.
And it really should be the one who has the milk bags attached.
Honestly, at this point, I'd rather marry another man and say, hey, dude, let's play some video games and let's watch some TV and have fun instead of marrying somebody who's pointing finger at me.
We're equal.
We're equal.
Now go mop the floor.
Right.
Yeah, I mean, you marry a dude, at least you're going to get good twitch reflexes and a desire to play Call of Duty 4, right?
As opposed to, we're equal, now do my work.
So, yeah, as far as the horrors of socialism goes, there are some significant challenges to getting people to understand it.
And because there are no morals left.
In Western society, other than political correctness, which is not morality, but a semi-jihadist hysteria against white males.
So when you say to people, taxation is forced, taxation, socialism is a forced redistribution of wealth, people don't...
Thou shalt not steal.
Well, I'm not religious.
Why should I care about that?
Or, well, it has positive outcomes to some people.
Therefore, it's good.
And so there is no particular way.
I'm certainly, you know, I'm acting on the desire for a positive outcome.
I have to sort of avoid the word hope these days.
But I'm acting with the desire for a positive outcome.
But it could well be.
It could well be that simply...
What's going to have to happen is there's just going to have to be an enormous amount of suffering.
And through that enormous amount of suffering, people will start listening to reason and evidence again.
I wish it didn't have to be that way, but that's the way nature plays it.
That's the way reality plays it.
And hopefully, there won't be so much suffering.
And so much technology exists to keep everyone alive that the The dumb and propagandized simply will forever out-breed, out-vote, out-maneuver, and out-mob the smart people.
But it's okay.
At some point we'll figure out how to get to space and go set something up somewhere else.
Yeah, I know, right?
I don't know, Stefan.
It's just...
I feel like the entire system is just kind of pressing down pretty badly on average.
A man who actually doesn't want to embrace the whole idea of, bite into the whole idea of, hey, let's be all nice, pink, rainbows, and pretty.
Like, I want to create a business.
I work out.
I don't want to be one of those men who just I don't know, gets under the woman's heel and that's it.
Because I've seen that happen so many times here.
I had a few Russian friends who married American women and one of them, one of them, was going and shopping and he was like, The wife told him to pick up some kind of a can.
So he asked her, like, hey, so where's the can is?
And she's like, oh my god, you don't know where the can is.
I'll do it myself.
Fine, I'll do it myself because you're incapable of that.
I'm looking, like, why are you allowing her to talk to you like that?
Like, what is going on?
Like, why are you so castrated?
Like, traditional Russian men, if a woman speaks like that to a man in public, oh boy.
She's in a lot of trouble.
And I'm not talking about physical violence or anything else like that.
The man is just not going to tolerate it.
But here...
Yeah, I mean, this is what it's referred to, you know, if you've been around the MGTOW channels and all that, I mean, this is what's referred to as the shit test, the woman just being nasty.
And...
In general, it seems to be that she's happier if the man responds assertively to her being nasty than if he just rolls over and says, okay, sorry, honey.
Right?
I mean, it's...
The woman, you know, women to some degree want to make sure that you didn't go all beta on her.
Right?
I mean, men, when they get married, they're worried that the women are going to pull the pin on the fat grenade and balloon up.
And women, when they marry the alpha, they don't want to end up with him slacking off and being the slow spinal question mark turning into a beanbag beta on the couch.
So, yeah, they're going to test your mettle from time to time.
There's nothing wrong with it.
But this idea that always deferring to women is going to make people happy, that's not...
Being conciliatory, that's just being a coward and not standing up for what is best for you and your wife.
So how would I avoid that?
Like, I'm just stuck.
Well, no, just in the dating scenario, I mean, you stand up for what's right.
You know, you don't act in a destructive way and you don't allow other people to act in a destructive way towards you.
And if a woman is being disrespectful or abusive or negative or hostile...
You're just like, nope, we're not doing that.
Not happening.
That is really rude.
I do not accept that kind of behavior.
Find out.
I guess that makes sense.
You find out.
And if she's like, well, you made me do it or it's your fault.
It's like, okay, bye.
Like, bye.
If a woman, if anyone behaves badly and then blames you for behaving badly, run.
Run.
I don't care if you're pantsing around your ankles.
Leave them behind you because it's better to be arrested for a misdemeanor than whatever else might happen.
Okay.
That makes sense.
You know, if I just started calling you an asshole because it took you a little time to respond to a tough question, I hoped you'd hang up on me, right?
Well, I would want to know why would you call me an asshole, to be honest, first.
Eh...
Really?
Like justifications.
Oh, there's your problem.
No, there's your problem.
It doesn't matter.
It doesn't matter.
Listen, the first time we talk, I just call you an asshole because you're pausing to think about a response to a difficult question.
What does it matter?
What does it matter?
It doesn't.
It doesn't matter.
You know, this idea that we have to figure out why, you know, you hear this all the time from libertarians and other people where they say, well, I don't know if the plan was simply because they were silly or because they had some bad, I don't care.
I don't care.
The behavior is what matters.
The motivation, like trying to plumb the depths of people's meanness and trying to figure out why they're mean and why they're this, who cares?
It doesn't matter.
I don't ask the feelings of my infection when I take my antibiotics.
I just want it gone.
And that's probably why I'm getting more drained, because I try to find out the reasons why, instead of just letting it go.
Don't.
Don't, don't, don't, don't.
It doesn't matter what the motivations for malice are.
And in fact, the desire that there's value in finding out the motivations of malice is just a giant net or trap that malicious people throw around you to keep you around them.
You don't reward malice with attention.
This is the basic, you know, would there be any intranet if this principle was followed?
You don't engage with malice.
You don't engage with evil.
You don't engage with abuse.
The very idea that you should is something that abusive people put forward so that you'll keep talking to them when they're assholes.
We don't do it.
It doesn't matter.
You know, somebody, you try and talk reason and evidence with someone, and if they just start taking a long social justice warrior psychedelic dump all over your reason and evidence, ban, click, disattach, disassociate, forget it.
Forget it.
I mean, no, you do not reward malice with eyeballs.
Don't give focus to meanness.
I always keep talking about ostracism as the way to run a civilized society.
This is what it looks like.
That makes a lot of sense.
Okay.
And people plumb motivation in order to avoid argument.
You know, the number of times people have done this, you know, cheap-ass dime-store Bazooka Joe psychologizing on me.
Why?
Well, Steph does this because mommy issues.
Steph does this because he's an old, angry white guy who doesn't like change.
Okay, who cares?
Can you deal with an argument?
No!
Because I can pretend to plumb the depths of your consciousness, figure out your motivations so that I don't have to deal with what you're saying.
It's hate speech!
Do you have an argument?
No, those people are full of hate, therefore they're wrong.
It's like, that's not an argument.
That's not an argument anymore than these people are ballerinas.
People are forgetting the...
I don't know.
I feel like a lot of people are forgetting the value of the argument and everybody just goes for, oh, he just called her racist.
Great.
She's a great speaker.
All right.
Oh, he's a great speaker.
Oh, she just called him bigot.
Nice.
She's a great speaker.
It's like...
I'm just looking at the politics and everything else.
I'm just throwing a bunch of, like, as many insults as possible about how you're culturally inappropriate.
And that's the argument people are trying to make without actually putting any facts or figures or anything else.
And a lot of people are biting that.
That's what scares me the most.
Idiots are always overwhelmed by the emotion at the expense of reason.
And we just have many more idiots in public discourse than we used to.
There used to be a barrier by which, you know, public discourse used to be like a breakdancing competition at the top of Mount Everest.
Not a lot of people made it up.
So you had really, really fit, healthy people up there.
Now...
Every idiot gets into college.
Every idiot can contribute on the internet.
There's no requirement for quality.
And so idiots attract other idiots of the lowest common denominator.
And the neo-frontal cortex, the seat of intelligence, is kind of designed to overcome the impulses of the lizard brain.
And so the smarter you are, the more you can overcome your emotional responses.
And the dumber you are, the less you're able to overcome your emotional responses.
And so because we have so many people in public discourse now who are basically complete idiots, immature, tantrum-throwing, wobbly-armed fools, well, what happens?
Well, what happens is idiots cheer, the burn!
Feel the burn!
Ooh, snap!
Ooh, burn!
Yeah!
He said something mean to the other guy!
He wins!
Yeah, burn!
It's basically turned into like drunken wrestling matches rather than intellectual thrust in Paris.
And so, I mean, you see this all the time on call-in shows, you know, even shows that have some thin veneer of intellectualism like Bill Maher's show.
Someone says something that's kind of an encapsulated huh, and the audience is like, yeah!
You know, and they just say, they just cheer because they're idiots.
These people should be nowhere near intelligent public discourse.
And in the past, they would never have made it up Everest, let alone have the energy to do the breakdancing.
But just remember this, there are idiots who have taken over public discourse.
And by idiots, I don't just mean necessarily people who have a low IQ, but people who are selected and therefore susceptible to propaganda.
Because propaganda is all about tweaking the are-selected preference for comfort in the moment.
Whereas case election is, I don't care if it's uncomfortable in the moment, I'm going to do what's right for the sake of the long-term good of myself, my gene pool, my tribe, my nation, my society, or whatever, right?
And that's what I feel like.
I feel like this is a hippie movement from the 1960s with just a lot more microphones to dumb people.
Yeah, and what was the 60s all about?
Sex, drugs, rock and roll.
Yeah, because that's how you build a good portfolio of stocks for retirement, sex, drugs, rock and roll.
I don't want to keep my herpes to myself.
I'm going to socialize it.
I'm sorry?
No, I just did this quick research about the hippie movement, the hipster movement a couple of years.
And it's the same thing.
Even the songs, they also wanted socialism pretty badly.
The hippies back in the 1960s.
Again, let's enjoy this life.
Let's do drugs.
Let's have sex unprotected.
Who cares?
No responsibilities, no repercussions.
Let's have a socialist country where they will take care of us.
But that movement was bound to fail because there are so many conservatives that give a large pushback against it.
It's like those anti-war songs.
What is it good for?
You know, there's something happening here.
What it is ain't exactly clear.
There's a man with a gun over there telling me I've got to beware.
And it's like, can you get an argument in there about, I don't know, Easy money leading to war.
I mean, you can, right?
You can get...
But anyway, it's just a bunch of nonsense.
And no, the hippies have won, though, because the hippies climbed into academia and polluted the minds of the next generation, right?
So the smarter hippies got straight into academia.
I mean, even guys from the Weather Underground, a terrorist organization in the United States, ended up, it blew my mind when I first heard about this, through Ann Coulter, in Demonic.
Like, the fact that genuine terrorists have ended up in American academia just tells you all you need to know.
And the hippie movement, I did this research for my novel, almost.
And there was a very strong hippie movement in the 1920s and 1930s in Germany.
And then people got so revolted by it that you got a swing.
Now the swing, of course, is a little less extreme in the West, hopefully or thankfully.
But yeah, once you get these people into academia where they can't be fired and they start getting government funding to pull more and more people into their soupy, leftist, brain-eroding nonsense, then it spreads like wildfire.
And then like a wildfire, sometimes you can do your best to contain it, but maybe the best you can do is let it burn itself out.
And that's all we may be in for at the moment.
That's one of those things that we as a family are very, very afraid of.
We just ran from socialists, man.
We don't want to do it again.
No, I get that.
And there's things that we can do, right?
There's things that we can do.
The government has the media in general.
It has the movies.
It has the television because they hand out the licenses, right?
They hand out the licenses and they subsidize the movies.
And they have the education.
They have the higher education.
They've got a lot.
All we have is three chords and the truth, right?
As the song says.
All we have...
Is the microphone, the attention of the world such as we can command it, and the truth.
And that's more than most have had throughout human history, so we should at least be grateful for that, I think.
Do you think we're in minority now, compared to like 30-40 years ago?
Oh yeah, without a doubt.
Yeah, without a doubt.
But we also have greater, infinitely greater capacity to reach the world.
I mean, 30 years ago, 20 years ago, I wouldn't have had You know, of 160 million downloads.
Close to 200 million now.
I mean, that wouldn't have happened.
If I can't be happy with that, if I can't be happy with the fact that through willpower, tenacity, and courage, and a continual goal of improving everything I do, if I can't be happy about the fact that I've added 200 million points of light in the minds of the world, What can I be happy with?
That makes sense.
Completely.
Alright, I'm going to move on to the next caller, but don't waste your time with idiots and find a good woman.
And be public, I would say.
You know, it's still legal and you can be public in what you talk about.
And it only takes the courage to surmount disapproval, not to dodge bullets.
And for that we should be grateful.
Thank you, Stephan.
Thank you very much.
Alright, up next is Richard.
He wrote in and said,"...in a free market, what should be the limits of what you can own as to maximize liberty?
With the abolishment of slavery, we understood that human life should not be subject to being property." Does this extend elsewhere?
And how could we justify either position rationally?
My foremost interest would be land in an economical sense, that is, landmass and natural resources.
Doesn't complete procurement of land trespass on the freedom of future generations?
I think it is pretty clear the radical viewpoint in either direction leads to bizarre situations.
In short, where do we draw the line and how do we justify this?
That's from Richard.
Hello Richard, how you doing?
Hello, I'm good.
Thanks.
And you?
Not too bad, not too bad.
Okay, can you pretend that I'm a woman for a moment?
Yeah, sure.
Okay, I would like for you to make the case to me, Richard, what are the limits of my ownership of my own vagina?
To maximize sexual access for men, what should be the limits on my own vagina?
In other words, who could own my vagina and use it as they see fit to maximize sexual access for men?
I would say that we have two different ways to view this.
One would be in a pragmatical sense.
If the goal is to maximize the amount of men who get laid, then Maybe you shouldn't have the freedom of your vagina.
But if we look at it...
Okay, so then I would be...
The government would tell me who I must have sex with in order to maximize sexual access for men.
Right, right.
So that would be institutional rape for the sake of some particular end that would be beneficial, I guess, to people who would be satisfied with that ghastly form of interaction, right?
I'm not advocating of it, for sure.
Well, but...
I'm not saying that you are with regards to this, but vaginas clarify.
Vagina cuts through.
It clarifies.
It captures.
Sorry, that's Gordon Gekko.
But vaginas really help us to understand property.
They are, I guess, emerging from Plato's cave is like mulling over the vagina.
So...
If women are to have exclusive and unrestricted self-ownership over their own vaginas, because to advocate anything other than that would be to advocate rape of some form, then we see that when it comes to self-ownership of vagina, there is no pragmatic limit by which that should be diminished, right?
Of course.
I totally agree with that.
Okay, so why, and I've often thought this, I guess starting as a teenager, why isn't everything a vagina then?
When it comes to property, or just thinking about force, why isn't everything a vagina?
Why can't I mate with my own electrical sockets?
I've tried!
Don't get me wrong, it's fun, it makes me look like a cyborg having an orgasm in the new Battlestar Galactica.
Ooh, geek reference, 101.
But why do we have a rule of property for a vagina?
And then somehow it's different for men's stuff.
Well, I guess if we go back in time, as I mentioned with slavery, if you ask the average citizen of that time, they wouldn't really hesitate in saying that slavery was like natural, I guess.
So, it was possible to own another person, right?
And I would say that we realized that that was nonsense, and we changed that.
Yeah, because that was an artificial division with regards to self-ownership, right?
So, some people got to own themselves, and other people didn't, right?
So, here, that was because of a lack of consistency and universalism with regards to property rights.
so with regards to so what we want is more consistency with regards to property rights and again if a woman has exclusive and permanent ownership over her own vagina that's the basis of a property right why wouldn't we extend that to everyone well if we keep on this track but like after slavery we understood that everyone should be free right and then
But we still are able to own animals, right?
And no one would Really question that today, or most people wouldn't question that today, but we still have to make that justification, right?
We still have to say, okay, we should probably not be able to own animals, or we should probably be able to own animals, because this is why.
I'm sorry, I don't follow.
Can you just try and encapsulate this?
Are you saying that to own animals is morally equivalent to owning human beings?
No, not at all.
Not at all.
I'm just trying to play by that rationale, right?
But you're not responding to my argument, Rich.
Okay.
Right, so you're talking about the limits of what you can own.
Why shouldn't there be the limits over what you can own?
And I put forward the argument from vagina.
The vaginagment, right?
And you're now going off into some other thing rather than responding to what I'm saying.
If there's no limits over what a woman can do with her vagina...
I mean, even, let's say, Amy Schumer.
There's no limits to what a woman can do with her vagina if she has the perfect perpetual right of self-ownership with regards to her own vagina.
Then that's an argument that says there should be no limits of what you can own.
So you said, in the free market, what should be the limits of what you can own?
And I said, okay, well, what about vagina?
You said, well, there's no limit to what you can own as far as vagina, right?
So now you have a problem, which is that you've proposed self-ownership that has no limits.
So if you've proposed the image, sorry, you've proposed that there should be limits to self-ownership.
And I've given you an argument as to where you've agreed there should be no limits to self-ownership.
So now you have a problem.
Going into slavery doesn't help you, right?
This is just debating 101, right?
So you have the problem, which is you have to say either that a woman should not have exclusive control over her vagina, which we both, of course, would...
This is a false argument.
A woman should have complete ownership over her vagina.
It's a means of production.
You can't socialize it, even if you're a communist, right?
So that's one.
We've discarded that.
So the woman has no limit over the ownership of her own vagina.
Mm-hmm.
And so now you have to create two separate categories of property rights.
One, vagina-centric, woman has complete control over her vagina.
And another one, which is something else where there is less control or a limitation of control.
So already you have a challenge, right?
Because you're either going to say, well, there should be no limits of what people can own because vagina...
Or I'm going to create two separate categories, one for vagina and associated ownership, and another one for something else, which seems to me overly complicated and Occam's razor should deny.
And by the way, just for those who want to know, we won't get into this here, but there's a video on the channel called Does Morality Apply to Animals?
Moral Categories Explained.
So if people want to know where I stand as far as animal rights go, they can go there.
So going off into...
Animals and slaves, like you're not actually dealing with the vagina argument.
Okay, right, right.
What I tried to do was rather like lift the idea that there is a need...
I was going to say it could be considered a Kantian argument, but you'd have to mispronounce it.
But sorry, go ahead.
So let me give an example, for instance.
I often think about the person who wants to completely go off the grid, right?
And if we follow social contract rules, or social contract thinking, why would I sign a social contract that basically It removes my right to walk around.
Richard, what are you doing?
Okay, we've gone to animals, we've gone to slavery, now we're going to live in the woods in some sort of social conflict.
What are you doing?
Where are you going?
Do you not know how to respond to what I just framed?
That is where the argument needs to go next.
You proposed limits on self-ownership.
I gave you an example where there are no limits on self-ownership.
And now you either have to split self-ownership into two, One which you can have limits on and one in which you can't, or you have to accept that there should be no limits on self-ownership or property rights.
So I'm not going to follow you into the woods because that's not where we're, you know, we're playing tennis and I don't want to go to the woods.
Okay.
Do you understand the point that I'm trying to make, right?
Yeah.
You said there should be limits.
Vagina, no limits.
So I'm afraid I've split your argument with the gash.
Okay.
Mm-hmm.
Kind of in the same way as what you're saying.
I mean, we must have two lists, right?
We must have one list where things are not able to be owned, and one list where things are able to be owned.
And right now it's generally the case that only human life should not be able to be owned.
Why is that so?
That's what I'm trying to...
Well, because you can't split property into two categories.
At least, if you do, you have to have very, very good reasons, right?
Like, you can split lizards and mammals into two categories, but that's because cold-blooded and all that kind of stuff, right?
So if you're going to say human beings can't be owned, it's for the basic reason that...
For human beings to be owned, there must be human beings owning them, right?
You're not going to sell a human being to a centipede or a chipmunk, right?
So in order for human beings to be owned, you have to split human beings into two categories.
Those who have complete self-ownership and those who have no self-ownership.
And unless you can find a compelling reason as to why you, you know, entities should not be needlessly multiplied is one of the basic principles of rational thought.
And this is why you don't have a category of lizard, which is, you know, I don't know, blinks slightly more frequently.
There's no particular reason to subdivide it to that degree.
And so, given that entities should not be multiplied beyond what is necessary...
Dividing human beings into those who have self-ownership and those who have no self-ownership without a clear biological reason for that is to create contradictory concepts of self-ownership for exactly the same species.
White is saying, these two, like, mammal is warm-blooded, but these two warm-blooded things are somehow opposite.
Well, a biologist would say, no.
Human beings have self-ownership.
Ah, but here's a category of human beings which has no self-ownership, but in fact can be owned.
It's like, well, then we have two categories of self-ownership for the same species, which is not good.
What would we then do about...
Like, if we accept that, say, I accept that with...
No, no, that's not an if, dude.
That's not how debate works.
I'm not pitching an opinion.
Star Wars is better than Star Trek!
Okay, well, if we accept...
This is an argument, right?
Yeah, of course.
You can't say, well, if we accept that, like, it's a choice, right?
Two and two make four.
Okay, I'm willing to accept that conditionally.
It's like, no, that's not how it works, right?
But say we had a system that ran the world like that, like, you should be able to own everything, right?
Like, there are many things today where people own land from the remnants of aristocracy, right?
Should we remove that right for them to own land because they procured it invalidly?
Or do you follow what I mean?
Yeah.
I mean, so we have tons of examples of how that has worked in the past.
I don't think we need to reinvent the wheel.
I mean, the degree to which things that are unjustly acquired, well, they might be sold and the proceeds given to those they were unjustly acquired from.
And I'm talking about not multi-generations because sins of the fathers can't be visited on the children.
If your father dies in debt, you don't inherit his debt.
Or you can just pass things to the free market.
You can subdivide land among those who worked the land rather than those who merely owned it unjustly.
You can look at how slavery ended.
You can look at how state goods were redistributed after the fall of communism in Russia.
I mean, that's more of a technical thing.
Is there a perfectly just and moral answer to that?
I don't know.
I mean, that doesn't really matter.
I mean, the whole point is that once we're in the place where we're divvying up unjustly gotten gains, Fantastic.
You know, I mean, that is the least of my worries.
My worries is to get the concept of injustice and immorality and the violations of the non-aggression principle into people's heads at all.
What happens after they fully understand it and they're dividing up the unjust proceeds of immoral government actions?
Great.
I'm not going to be alive to see that, but I hope they have a great time doing it and I hope it's a great celebration and I hope it's done as fairly as humanly possible.
That's not even remotely my concern.
Isn't that, however, a pretty fun topic, though?
A pretty what?
A pretty interesting topic.
Yeah, I mean, it's as interesting a topic as the, you know, where the liver is in an orc.
You know, it's a fine theoretical thing, and I guess if you want to figure out the biology of Klingons or what word they'd use for a trigly puff, I don't know.
I don't know, right?
But I think trigly puff would be too fatty for my heart to eat.
That would be whatever that is in Klingon.
But, yeah, I mean, if you want to spend time doing that stuff, I guess it's okay.
I think that there are somewhat more important topics to deal with in the world.
But, you know, it's not bad for a sort of mullet over for shits and giggles thing.
Yeah, and I mean, I think we both would agree that the number one...
Topic of problem today is the fact that the state is so all-powerful.
And that's something that we need to do something about first, right?
And I would have no say in that, but, like, what happens when we get rid of the state?
That's kind of what I'm thinking about.
Yeah, who cares?
I mean, it's literally like saying, you know, if you're a hundred years before the end of slavery, it's like, who's going to pick the cotton after the slaves are free?
It's not your concern.
The concern is to get the moral argument implanted into as many minds as possible, and we are a long way from even getting that process, giving that process any momentum.
I mean, just the very idea that taxation is theft is something that is probably believed by very, very few people in society as a whole.
So...
What happens after the majority of people not only believe that, but decide to act on it against all masked self-interest in the universe?
I don't care.
I mean, I've got to prioritize what I can do with the time that I have.
All right.
Going to move on to the next caller, but thank you for bringing up a very interesting topic.
I do love chatting about vaginas.
I mean, property rights.
Who's getting here?
Thank you.
The bearded clam is my thing.
So, All right, well, thanks everyone so much for listening.
Oh, don't leave!
Don't leave me now!
And you can go to freedomaderadio.com slash donate to help out the show.
Donate, help us, help us grow, help us keep everything going.
This new camera I did not fashion from old pieces of toenails.
And so please, please help us out.
You know, I'd go 4K, but then you'd just realize how old I am.
So...
I'm not doing that.
But freedomainradio.com slash donate to help us out.
You can follow me at Stefan Molyneux on Twitter.
And, of course, fdrurail.com slash Amazon.
Follow the affiliate link, fdrpodcast.com.
Like, subscribe, share.
You know, I'm doing this video so that it's easy to share what it is that we're doing and because a lot of you enjoy my facial expressions.
Here's one.
Please help us with donations.
So have yourself a wonderful, wonderful day, everyone.
