Jan. 15, 2017 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
03:06:15
3558 Still A Libertarian? - Call In Show - January 11th, 2017
Question 1: [1:45] – “Have your experiences with libertarians completely turned you away from libertarianism as a political philosophy? I understand you have had differences with libertarians as people, however does this mean that you no longer believe in anarchism/voluntaryism?”Question 2: [1:03:25] – “How can a woman who is trying to date a man who has gone MGTOW convert him back to normal and help him come back to the dating world? This is a person I care about very much and watching him cross into this territory is upsetting. To clarify, I don't think he knows expressly what MGTOW is, but he is following the same MGTOW patterns that you have described in your videos and is doing so for the reasons you would expect. You seem like someone who can at the very least give me idea of what to do. How can I help him climb off of this slippery slope?"Question 3: [2:33:21] – “Stefan often says that it is a great hypocrisy of libertarian, pro-free market professors to teach in state-sponsored colleges and fund their ventures with state money. It is obviously true from truth/false point of view; however, the question remains whether it would actually be good of them to cease teaching in state colleges. If they did so immediately, the colleges and their students would lose a lot of good lectures, which, if only slightly, help fight against the leftist narratives. Moreover, the professors themselves, especially the less accomplished ones, would find themselves in a tough financial situation, sacrificing much of their personal income. Just how much merit is there in those professors staying in colleges vs. leaving them?”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
We have the greatest variety of calls and callers in the history of the known universe.
That has been empirically verified from at least 12 or 13 different dimensions.
And what a set of calls we had tonight.
First of all, a question.
I believe it may have been floating around a little while.
Am I a libertarian?
Am I still a voluntarist?
What is going on with my belief system?
Well, a lot and little, I guess you could say.
I unpack that all for you.
The second caller referred to herself as a special kitten.
And why not?
I ask you.
And she wanted to know, how can I reel back a guy who's going AWOL, who is leaving the dating scene, who's going MGTOW and men going their own way?
She really, really wants to date this guy, but he's been burned by women and doesn't want to date.
What a what can she do?
And we...
We had a long chat about that.
It was very, very interesting about where things are in the dating world these days.
It's really, really quite fascinating.
The third caller wants to know what's wrong with being a libertarian in academia.
What's wrong with being pro-free market and being in academia?
And I've had that question before, but I did take a new approach to it, as I generally try to do with these kinds of questions.
And I think it's a pretty ironclad case.
Let me know what you think of it, of course.
Please, please, don't, don't, don't, don't forget to go to freedomainradio.com slash donate.
To help us out.
We really, really need your help.
Sign up for a subscription or a one-time donation.
Hugely important.
And don't forget to follow me on Twitter at Stefan Molyneux.
And any post-holiday shopping you've got to do, FDRURL.com slash Amazon.
Thank you everyone so much.
Alright, up first we have Joe.
Joe wrote in and said, Have your experiences with libertarians completely turned you away from libertarianism as a political philosophy?
I understand you've had differences with libertarians as people, however does this mean that you no longer believe in anarchism slash voluntarism?
That is from Joe.
Oh, hey Joe, how you doing?
What's going on, Seth?
What's new?
Not much at all.
Alright.
Is there anything you wanted to add to the question?
No, I think it's pretty good as is.
Just kind of waiting for your answers.
So, you know, I kind of figured that would dictate where we go.
Right.
Well, I... We'll offer a few prepared remarks and let's let it go from there.
No, it's not up to me what I believe.
That's sort of the first and most important thing I wanted to mention.
So I can't will myself in and out of various perspectives.
The arguments are the arguments and I either find a way to overturn them or I have to accept them.
Now, yes, I have my differences with some libertarians, some voluntarists.
That has no bearing upon the philosophical validity of voluntarism, which is the consistent and universal application of the non-aggression principle.
So I don't have...
It's not up to me.
You know, because people say...
Did you change your mind about this?
Well, philosophy is not about changing your mind.
You know, like going to a mathematician and saying, have you changed your mind about two and two make four yet?
It implies a sort of degree of subjectivity that I would not feel comfortable ascribing to philosophical pursuits.
The hypocrisy of any individual person Adherent to a particular belief is not an argument against the validity of that belief.
I know I've got the, you know, fat guys don't sell diet books and so on, so there's a kind of marketing aspect to it.
But it is not an axiomatic or deductive reasoning disproof of a particular belief system if the adherents don't practice that belief system.
Even in theory, consistently, right?
So, if libertarians are still pro-spanking, even though the argument is ironclad that it's a violation of the non-aggression principle, that doesn't violate the value of the non-aggression principle.
It simply points out.
I mean, it just shows hypocrisy within particular individuals.
So, no, I haven't changed from voluntarism.
I haven't changed from a stateless society as the ideal, because that's not a belief set.
That's a reasoned set of arguments that aren't up to me to accept or reject based on a whim, if that makes sense.
Yeah, no, that makes sense.
Yeah, I mean, I kind of anticipated that that would be your answer.
I just kind of wanted to...
I think I represent a lot of viewers on the show that may have been around pre-Donald Trump campaign that are kind of wondering, what does this mean for what you're going to teach on the show going forward?
Because a lot of us are kind of like...
We don't really know what it means for you.
You haven't really offered any arguments against libertarianism, which is, you know, of course.
But, I mean, isn't it kind of damaging to the movement in and of itself to kind of disparage the subscribers to libertarianism?
No, I don't know, because to me it's not a movement.
If people are...
Hypocritical.
I think pointing out that they're hypocritical is important.
If people are inconsistent, I think that pointing out that they're inconsistent is important.
You know, if you have someone on a team, let's say you're on a football team, right?
And some guy is not practicing.
He's not working out.
He's not doing his drills.
It's not against the team to say, hey, Lardas, get off your butt and go and run through some tires or something or whatever, you know, go throw some footballs through a small circle like you're at the fair.
It's not against your team to ask for improvements within your team.
That's pro team.
Having this Omurta cone of silence around self-criticism within the team makes your team weaker.
It doesn't make it stronger.
If you've got a tennis partner who doesn't come out and hit balls with you, then pretending that they're still good at tennis and not pointing out that they're not holding up their end of the team, that's not going to make your team stronger.
It's going to make your team weaker.
So I wanted to point that out.
Now, as far as...
The linear direction towards a free society.
Let me give you an analogy.
An analogy is not proof, but hopefully it's illuminating to some degree at least.
And the analogy is this.
So let's say that you and I are driving to Las Vegas from someplace in the desert.
And we drive for about five minutes and we blow a tire.
And we don't have a spare.
And I say, oh man, we've got to go back and get a tire.
So we start heading away from Las Vegas.
Oh no, would you say to me, hey man, I thought you wanted to go to Las Vegas.
I'm like, I do want to go to Las Vegas.
And you're like, but we're walking in the opposite direction of Las Vegas.
And I say, yes, we blew a tire.
We can't get to Las Vegas in our current condition.
We have to go back and get a tire so we can put the tire on the car and then we can get to Las Vegas.
So the journey to a destination is almost never a straight line.
And there's some zigging and there's some zagging and there's some doubling back and so on.
This is not a paved road, you know, to sort of drop the analogy.
This is a hacking our way through the undergrowth.
And when I did that for a living, I was like a trailblazer and claim staker for gold, for a gold mining company.
And you couldn't always go in a straight line.
You know, you kind of had to cut a blaze through the trees and hammer in your posts in a I think it was a kilometer square.
I think we'd gone metric.
I can't remember.
Kilometer?
Yeah, I think it was a kilometer square.
But you couldn't just go in a straight line.
And sometimes you'd hit a gully, you'd have to double back.
And nobody would yell at me and say, well, you're supposed to cut in a square, but here you're doubling back.
He's like, well, no, but I have to get to there, and I can't get there in a straight line.
So, again, that is not proof of anything, but it is a way of understanding that just because you're walking away from Vegas doesn't mean you don't want to get to Vegas.
It means you do want to get to Vegas, but you recognize you need something that you don't have right now in order to get to Vegas.
And for sure, the left is not going to get us to Vegas, right?
I mean, my original hopes for the left, just to I guess, draw the picture back a little bit.
I know Mike has some stuff to add and I'll stop in a sec.
My original hope for the left was that the left would pull America out of these endless foreign entanglements.
And Obama, even armed with a completely undeserved peace prize, America dropped, what, 24,000 bombs last year?
And it's still involved in a wide variety of different military conflicts in a wide variety of different countries.
And they're still selling massive caches of advanced weaponry all around the world.
So my hope was that the left, because it has this constant criticism of imperialism, right?
That the left was going to get America out Of these god-awful conflicts around the world.
And they'd be somewhat of a peace dividend.
And I was willing to sort of live with the left as far as that went.
Or maybe the left.
And there have been some minor advances in this area.
But maybe the left would pull back on the war on drugs.
Which is a war on people.
So that was sort of my hope and my goal.
But that's not what happened.
That's not what happened.
I mean, Obama has basically been on welfare his whole presidency.
He's had a trillion dollars extra every year to spend and there's been no budget whatsoever for the past eight years.
He's had a trillion dollars extra to spend because the bailout money, basically, because there was no budget, they could just keep spending it every year.
So the guy's had, he's been LARPing as a president.
He's had an eight trillion dollars extra of money during his presidency without having to raise taxes.
Yeah, okay, I can stave off collapse too, you know, if everyone's willing to pay me a trillion dollars a year, free and clear, I can, I guess, do fairly well.
As a president.
So the left failed to deliver on the peace dividend.
They failed to deliver on withdrawing from foreign entanglements, or at least in a way of withdrawing that didn't create the power vacuum that the somewhat U.S.-created and armed ISIS is now rushing to fill.
Not only that, they defend it now that it's happened.
There aren't even that many people on the left that will say...
It'll even say, well, you know, Obama could have done better, you know, not going over there.
It's like now that, well, so long as it wasn't a Republican doing it, it's fine.
Yeah, and the left has deteriorated.
I mean, this is important to understand.
I mean, we look at...
The cuck-servatives, right?
The rhinos, the Republicans in name only.
And we say, well, there's been a pretty significant degradation, you know, since the days of even Barry Goldwater and before, and certainly from the classical liberal period of about 150 years ago, there's been a significant decline in republicanism.
That's entirely true.
But there's also been a significant decline in the quality of leftism as well.
leftists, of course, while economically completely insane, did used to have some pretty strong commitments to anti-censorship, pretty strong commitments to First Amendment rights.
They had pretty, as I mentioned, strong opposition to America's imperialism and to arms sales and all that kind of stuff.
And they were fiscally irresponsible, but more on domestic policies than they were on aggressive foreign policy.
But the left, remember, I mean, the social justice warriors, the mental leftists, they've infested everything.
Everything.
They're crawling up my pants, I guess we speak, and not in the way that I like.
And they've really degraded even the sum-ish values that the left used to bring to the table politically and economically and particularly militarily.
So...
The left has failed to deliver.
And the right, of course, was poised to fail to deliver to a large degree until Trump.
And as I've sort of pointed out, you need a high IQ population to have a free society, to have philosophical arguments.
And you also need people who are willing to not...
Be forever obliged to government programs and that is Europeans and people of European descent and to some degree East Asians and so on.
So all of this is just the reality.
And of course, I sort of thought, well, we kind of had a lot of time, but looking at the demographic winter, right?
The fact that white Europeans are barely breeding, they're like stressed out pandas in a falling airplane.
And the fact that other groups are, you know, vastly outbreeding.
It's a town in Germany where the most common baby's name at the moment is Mohammed.
And I think that's fairly high up there, if not at the top, of British names for babies as well.
And so, you know, we don't have time.
We don't have time.
The clock is out.
Time is out.
And so we blew a tire.
And now I'm going back to get a tire.
Is it because I've given up on Las Vegas, I'm heading in the opposite direction.
No, still want to get to Las Vegas.
We just need something we don't have, which is time.
Yeah, I mean, I'll grant you all that.
I mean, I'm a libertarian Trump supporter.
I mean, I thought, I mean, and I still, I support everything he's doing so far.
So, like, I entirely understand and I've agreed with, you know, the whole concept of that analogy.
You know, since he's running.
And especially since I started hearing the whole demographic argument, I understood the validity of that.
And I was like, you know, so, I mean, a lot of the time I've spent arguing with other libertarians, arguing that, I mean, I honestly think an argument could be made that even if it was Ron Paul versus Donald Trump, That you might be better off voting for Trump anyways, just because Trump's in a position where he can do things that Ron Paul can't.
Well, that's such a theoretical.
I mean, Ron Paul was never going to get to the presidency.
It was completely impossible, so let's not bother.
When we're out of time, let's not bother with theoreticals.
You know, like, I mean, when the airplane is falling from the sky, you know, let's not argue about whether we should have packed more parachutes.
Let's just cling to each other and get the hell out.
So, you know, this indulgence that libertarians have in wordplay and mind games and mental constructs and theoreticals and so on, we may be just a little bit past that at the moment.
Well, I was just trying to articulate.
I think that's the value of a Trump presidency is that he's, you know, a billionaire and he's never been a political figure before.
So, I mean, it's, you know, I think kind of like how you guys have argued before, how it's like if you could make a candidate in a lab, he's kind of...
You know, the ideal one you would shoot for.
And I, you know, I agree with that entirely.
So I've been supporting Trump this whole time.
But the issue of...
Well, and the media, right?
I mean, Trump is able to attack and dismiss the media in a way that no other candidate in history has ever been able to do.
And we saw that today.
Yeah, we saw that today.
Trump, you know, a guy from CNN wants to ask a question.
He's like, no, stop it.
You're terrible.
You're fake news.
Moving on.
And, I mean, Ron Paul just never had the juice, so to speak, to do that.
Mike, you wanted to add some stuff?
Yeah, I mean, first off, and this is a question that I open up to the listenership, I don't even know what a libertarian is anymore.
Can someone tell me what a libertarian is?
There's the vague kind of small government-ish thing, but is a libertarian the fat shirtless guy on stage at the Libertarian Party event too long ago?
Is it Gary Johnson?
Is it a social justice warrior who is saying that Trump is Hitler?
People that'll sell their soul for a Newsweek article?
Is it open borders people who think that open borders is somehow going to fill the country with people dependent on the welfare state who will vote against the continued existence of the welfare state?
Is it Bill Maher?
People like Bill Maher ascribe themselves.
You know, I'm vaguely libertarian.
Libertarian is such a giant umbrella these days and so many people bat the word around that don't seem to have any principles as it comes to what it means.
It has become absolutely meaningless.
And like most movements, you start getting all these weird purity tests.
It happens in every type of group.
And actually, lately, you've been seeing it with the alt-right.
There's certain segments of the alt-right that don't like other segments of the alt-right, this or that.
Whenever you get movements and people start attaching themselves to labels, you get purity tests.
You get, what does this label mean?
Different people have different ideas.
And it all just becomes so meaningless, which is why I love the fact that this is a philosophy show.
Steph, is this an atheist show?
No!
Is this a libertarian show?
No!
It's a philosophy show.
So, in general, I hate labels.
And I hate labels because they just result in purity tests.
The label changes over time.
It just becomes absolutely meaningless.
Are you this?
Okay, well, you ask ten different people, they're going to have ten different answers as to what this means.
So, I think that's a big factor and a big problem with libertarianism present to us.
You could say that about philosophers, too, but that doesn't mean that philosophy isn't a valid pursuit.
I don't think you can say that about philosophy as a discipline.
Yeah, again, the actions of individuals who claim to follow a particular discipline does not validate or invalidate.
If you have a terrible scientist, that doesn't invalidate the scientific method.
In fact, the only reason you know he's a terrible scientist is because of the scientific method, so even his mistakes are valuable.
And there's another element, too.
I mean, for libertarians that like the Rothbard, and I've certainly read my share, he has detailed incredibly extensively his foray with the left and trying to court the left into libertarianism as allies.
And needless to say, spoiler, it didn't work.
It really, really, really didn't work.
So in the days of social justice warriors, in the days of everyone throwing around the term racist every five seconds, anyone that's aligning, any libertarian-ish person that's aligning with those elements of the left, Rothbard has tried this.
We already have And the left was way weaker back then, way smaller, way less crazy.
There's historical patterns like, this doesn't work.
And you see people like, oh, I'm going to align with the left.
It's like, okay, well, that might be personally enriching.
You might get positive write-ups in the mainstream media in some way, shape, or form.
People might like you.
You might get invited to the right parties, that type of thing.
There's all kinds of goodies and benefits to aligning yourself with the left.
But it doesn't work as far as achieving the goal as to what most people would describe as voluntarism.
It's not going to get you a smaller state.
So everyone that looks at Rothbard as the origin story for their libertarian thoughts, he's detailed this more extensively than I could ever dream of, and it doesn't work.
It doesn't work.
And now, as Steph said, the left is stronger, things are getting worse, there's these racist We're putting together a presentation currently of Jeff Sessions and the origin of why, you know, there's these murky rumors of Jeff Sessions being a racist out there.
Turns out it has to do with the testimony of someone who, later, there's a subpoena that came out and someone said, yeah, the same guy that is responsible for all these rumors about Jeff Sessions being a racist, he thought Dan Rather was talking to him through a television set.
Trying to give him secret messages.
He'd make a gesture and then Dan Rather would be talking to him through the television set.
And there's all these stories as far as this guy's credibility being completely in the toilet.
But it's being reported now as if it's true because, you know, that's what the media does.
That's what the left does.
They just smear, smear, smear.
So anyone that's not pushing back and fighting against the social justice warrior smear merchants, they're all are selected individuals that are not on what I would consider my team.
Team Western Civilization.
It's not Team Libertarian.
It's not Team Voluntarist.
It's Team Civilization is going to survive and thrive and we can have arguments and discussions and debates about the best way for society to move forward at that point.
But if you're going to align yourself with a bunch of our selected people who want to throw muck around, you're not on my team.
And I don't care what term you call yourself.
You're the enemy and it stops there.
Well, I'd kind of like to go back to what Steph said earlier about Like, if you've got shitty players on your team and you want them to get better.
And I agree with that notion entirely.
In fact, that's similar to an analogy I was going to bring up.
And the reason—and I agree with you, which—it surprises me because the way you framed your video—what was it, like, why I was wrong about libertarians— But you framed that as it was a breakup.
And in the beginning of the video, you actually defined what you call libertarians, to answer Mike's question.
You said Austrian economists, objectivists, and like a few other things in there.
Now, I understand the umbrella's gotten a lot larger.
And yes, you know, due to Gary Johnson, we've gotten a bunch of other weirdos that are hypocrites, I agree.
Again, Steph, you framed it as though...
I mean, I don't know if I remember specifically saying that you're not a libertarian anymore, but it sure sounded like you wouldn't discuss...
Okay, sorry.
Can you get to a question here?
I mean, we're doing beat around the bush here, Steph, to see if you can get to a question.
Right.
My question is, when you said you were breaking up with libertarians, does that mean you don't call yourself one anymore?
I mean, that's...
Well, but what have I called myself?
I call myself a philosopher.
See, it's why I was wrong about libertarians, not why I was wrong about libertarianism, right?
The manifestation of the philosophy.
Right.
See, people either surrender their egos to reason and evidence, or they don't.
Now, I don't care if somebody is 100% correct in their conclusions.
If their methodology is emotional preference, they're wrong.
They're wrong.
It's sort of like if the wind happens to blow some fall leaves into the shape of the letters E equals MC squared, we don't give that wind a PhD in physics, right?
It's accidental.
So if it's emotional preferences, like they don't like the government or they want to smoke dope or whatever it is, that they just can't get their shit together and don't like being told what to do, and therefore they're libertarians, then they're wrong.
It's a rigorous methodology that you need to follow, and the last domino that falls is the conclusion.
If you're in that big bucket called libertarianism for emotional reasons, then you're wrong.
You're not even accidentally right.
Because you're not right.
Right is the methodology, not the conclusion.
Right.
I mean, I can teach a one-year-old to scratch two and two make four in the sand with repetition and skittles.
It doesn't mean that they understand what they're doing, even though they can write something that would indicate understanding if it was something self-generated.
So they're wrong.
They're wrong.
Now, I thought for a long time, because this was my journey, I thought for a long time that libertarians were libertarians because Of a rigorous application of philosophical principles and non-aggression principles, property rights, free will, personal responsibility, and so on.
And you find out something very interesting when you are around, I shouldn't say in or part of, but when you're around a particular group and their conclusions match yours but their methodology doesn't, it's easy to be blinded to the distance between you.
And And the way that you find that out is you lead them someplace that is surprising to them based upon the methodology that they claim to accept.
And it was spanking and a couple of other things with libertarianism, right?
So libertarians have to accept that spanking is immoral if they wish to be libertarians.
Because it's a violation of the non-aggression principle.
It's not self-defense.
It's the initiation of the use of force.
There's no ifs, ands, or buts about it, and anybody who argues otherwise is so plainly wrong, please call into this show and we'll hash it out.
But it's not even that complicated.
It's a violation of the non-aggression principle.
So if you're a libertarian, because you hold the non-aggression principle as sacred, And by sacred, I don't mean divinely revealed or supernaturally derived, but just that's the North Star you guide yourself by.
Then, regardless of your emotional reactions, you have to accept that spanking is a violation of the non-aggression principle.
Or you can't be a libertarian anymore.
Those are the only two choices.
Well, I guess the third choice is find a way to argue that it is somehow self-defense to hit a toddler.
Toddler with a chainsaw.
The new movie.
Sharknado 9000.
Toddler with a chainsaw.
And so, when you're part of a community and you share the conclusions, and you think you share the methodology, but you don't.
It's kind of a wake-up call when you apply the methodology that everyone claims to share.
In an area that is emotionally difficult for them.
And then you see whether they have any integrity at all.
Or whether they simply have emotional reactions that have landed them in the same conclusions that you have but without any of the methodology that you have pursued.
Circumcision is another one.
Clearly, circumcision is the initiation of the use of force.
I kind of wanted to get into that a little bit because...
Well, no, hang on.
But that's another clear example of an issue to do with that.
And it's the same thing on the left, right?
I mean, the left is constantly scorning the right for being anti-science, anti-scientific.
Anti-facts, anti-evidence, anti-reason.
Can you believe that some people on the right don't even believe in evolution?
And then you bring up ethnicity and IQ, race and IQ differences, and the left goes completely mental.
And become the most hysterical science deniers you'd ever find outside of a toked-up coven of...
Amish people, right?
And so it's just, the left says, oh, we're really into science, we're really into science.
No, you're into science that serves the expansion of state power.
You're not into science that is actually factual about race and IQ differences.
The complete science denies when it comes to those particular issues.
And that is much more important than global warming, even if global warming is completely valid in effect, which it may be.
It's far more important to We don't accept differences between races at the moment, because that's what everyone's making decisions based on.
Everyone's the same.
And if they're not, those decisions will spell the end of civilization.
So a little bit more important than what the temperature is going to be like in 100 years.
But, right, so you have these particular groups, you share conclusions, and you think you share the methodology, and then you find out if you do or not.
Right, so back to the circumcision thing, just while we're at it.
I have a little bit of a disagreement.
I agree with the peaceful parenting in terms of hitting your kids being a violation of the non-aggression principle.
But like you said, if you treat the non-aggression principle as sacred, like you said, I think it's important to kind of not too flagrantly use the word aggression in certain instances.
Now, when it comes to circumcision, I honestly have a hard time placing it.
Wait, I'm sorry.
I don't know what you mean.
To flagrantly use the word aggression?
I have no idea what that means.
Is it an accurate use of the word or not?
I don't know what flagrant means in this context.
You're using it too broadly.
You can't use it if somebody has a verbal disagreement with you.
This isn't aggression right now.
Right?
So, like, I can't tell you you're violating...
We're not talking about the word circumcision.
We're talking about the hacking a third of the skin of a baby's penis off circumcision.
I know we are.
That's what I... So why are you conflating it to language?
I don't follow.
I'm not conflating...
No, no.
I'm saying...
It's important not to call things aggression that are not aggression.
And if the action isn't what's defined as aggression, then we shouldn't call it a violation of non-aggression principle.
Okay, so hang on.
Is your case that circumcision is not aggression?
Correct.
And how is the cutting of completely healthy tissue off a child's body, for no medically sound reason, how is that not aggression?
Well, because I think the intent matters.
Before we get into that...
No, no, no, no.
Intent does not define aggression.
Intent defines the degree of aggression and the degree of criminality involved.
So if someone accidentally gets killed, that's less egregious in the eyes of the law than somebody who was killed as a result of planning and plotting and all that kind of stuff.
Now, the intention is certainly to cut off a third of the baby's penis skin, right?
That certainly is the intention.
Now, people could say, well, it's to look like your father, or I thought it was good, or I heard that there were some medical benefits and so on.
And I do have sympathy with people about that, for sure, because a lot of people do get a lot of lies about this kind of stuff and may not feel comfortable researching it themselves, which is why I've never made the case that everyone who circumcises their child is...
Irredeemably evil.
I've never made that case, and that's why I put information out about this.
I've never said anyone who ever hits their child is irredeemably evil.
I have said that prior to knowledge, you exist in a state of moral limbo.
Once you have the knowledge, you have the responsibility, not only for your own decisions, but to share it among people that you know.
You get moral responsibility when you get moral knowledge.
Right.
So it is an act of aggression, but...
It doesn't mean, though, that everyone is irredeemably moral who participates in it.
Well, could we define aggression?
The initiation of the use of force.
Okay, so like if somebody's standing in the way of a moving train and you shove them out of the way, did you initiate force?
Is that aggression?
What do you think?
No.
No, of course not.
Right.
Because they would not charge...
Hang on.
They would not charge you with a crime after the fact, right?
I've gone through this a bunch of times before, so I won't go into much detail because this is kind of 101.
But if you pushed me out of the way of a speeding train, I would thank you and I would never bring you up on charges.
And so it's irrelevant when it comes to...
To the implementation of that rule within society.
Right.
So that's not a violation of non-aggression principle, but you did use force on their body.
I would say that extends...
No, but come on.
It's around whether you thank someone afterwards, right?
So let's say I just come up and...
Let's just say that you go up and just stab some guy in the throat.
And he doesn't want it, and he's not happy with it, and then clearly that is a violation of the non-aggression principle, and he will then charge you with attempted murder or whatever it is after the fact, or murder if you happen to kill him through that action.
On the other hand, if you're a skilled surgeon and someone is choking on a chicken bone, and the only way you can save that person's life is to perform an emergency tracheotomy using a butter knife and...
Hopefully not too much butter.
Then clearly that person is not being attacked by you in a violent manner.
You are attempting to save that person's life.
And should you be able to save that person's life, they will not...
They would not pursue you in criminal court, and should they ever try, the case would never get anywhere because you were acting to save that person's life.
So the fact that you're...
It's like saying that the two situations are identical because in both you're cutting open someone's neck with a knife.
Right.
So the intent there matters.
So that's what I'm saying.
Now, if my mom had a surgeon...
Hack off part of my penis when I was a baby because she said, fuck that baby or whatever.
That would be a violation of non-aggression principle.
But she didn't do it for that intent.
She did it because in some way she thought I was going to be better off.
I don't...
Well, no, that's mostly not true because we've known this...
When the government stops paying for circumcisions, they drop enormously.
So if circumcision was really important, there wouldn't be a $300 barrier to having it done.
In other words, when the government stops subsidizing circumcisions and parents have to pay $300 to have their children circumcised, the number of circumcisions drops enormously.
So it clearly is not that important to parents.
Well, I didn't say it was important.
I just said that she didn't think she was trying to hurt me when she did it.
She thought she was making me better off.
I mean, whether or not she paid for it isn't my point.
No, it matters a little bit.
I'm sorry to interrupt, but it matters a little bit.
Because if there was a truly life-saving operation and your parents could afford it and it cost $300 and they said, forget it, it's not worth it, that would be pretty bad, right?
So they think it provides less than $300 worth of value to get circumcised, which means they don't think it's any kind of particular life-saving or very important medical procedure.
Well, to them, what if $300 to them is a lot and it doesn't...
I just said, and they could afford it.
Right.
So, I mean...
But even if it was a very important...
Medical procedure, they could borrow the money, they could get a small loan, they could put it on a credit card.
I mean there's lots of ways and very few people just can't possibly in any way shape or form get hold of 300 bucks for an emergency.
Right.
But simply because my parents had the money or the government was paying for it, that doesn't then push it into the realm of aggression because, well, now we get the money.
Let's cut the foreskin off.
She wasn't trying to hurt me.
My parents weren't trying to hurt me when they did it.
See what I'm saying?
Why did they do it then?
What?
Why did they do it?
I mean, you'd have to ask them, but either way.
No, no, no.
You should ask them, rather than talking about it with me, in theoretical terms, you should ask them why they circumcised you.
And I'm sorry that they did, of course, but you should ask them.
I don't know.
How am I possibly supposed to know your parents' motive for something that happened decades ago?
That's your job.
No, but you ask them.
Okay, but I'm saying you can't ascribe motive to them and call it aggression because you don't know that they weren't trying to hurt me.
I think it's pretty safe to assume they weren't trying to...
Well, they knew what would hurt, right?
Well, no.
I don't know what they mean to say, they weren't trying to hurt me.
...and they get hurt, then again, that's still not a violation of non-aggression principle.
Okay, but don't say they didn't want you to get hurt because they knew that the circumcision was incredibly painful.
Well...
But they still thought it was a net positive to my life.
Well, I don't know because you haven't asked them.
So you're asking me to theorize about what your parents think about decisions made decades ago when you haven't asked, go ask them.
I don't know what they thought.
Right, but we're saying we don't know what their intent was.
So we can't jump to the conclusion that it's a violation, not aggression principle because that means that their intent would have to be negative.
Well again, I don't know.
Look, I certainly, it is a violation of the non-aggression principle to perform an unnecessary operation.
For no clear medical benefit.
Now, if they were dependent upon the advice of the doctor, and if the doctor and all the doctors said, this needs to be done, this is the only thing that will save your child from penis cancer or something like that.
Well, you know, maybe they could have done a little bit of research and so on.
But in that case, for me, the morality I'm not an advocate of circumcision.
It may be that it's a net negative.
Ultimately I think it's pretty benign, but it could be a net negative on someone's life.
But that doesn't mean that the intent was to hurt the child, necessarily.
You know what I mean?
So, I have a hard time class...
Well, no, but...
Sorry.
So, again, let's say that your parents got very bad medical advice.
Right.
Is the doctor providing best care practices?
Is he talking about the facts behind the situation?
Or is he looking to make a quick buck by...
Circumcision, right?
Which is a very quick way for the hospital to get a relatively risk-free couple of hundred bucks.
It's a multi, multi-billion dollar business in the States.
And of course, everyone knows that there are lots of cultures around the world where circumcision does not occur.
So, you know, every baby has the umbilical cord removed from their belly button.
I mean, you don't see many people walking around other than snowflakes in artist degrees walking around with some umbilical still trailing back to the mothership.
But, I mean, everyone's aware that there at least is some cultural reference point for circumcision.
And it's not like all the other men's penises are falling off or turning into slither.io attack snakes and strangling their brain cords with their fangs.
This is...
It's known.
It's known that there's lots of people who don't get circumcised.
It's certainly known that it's not an absolute medical procedure.
It's certainly known that it's somewhat optional.
And it's also known that it can be done voluntarily as an adult by the child when the child becomes an adult, right?
That doesn't change what I think about parents who want to circumcise their children.
I think they would have to be actively inflicting pain or some kind of Uh, you know, damage for the sake of the damage, you know what I mean?
But they're not, it's not about that.
I mean, if parents could choose the option to have a child grown without foreskin, I feel like they'd choose that instead.
If it was, you know, done at a price that they preferred, you know what I mean?
You can have water.
Wait, you, you, you think children, like if, if, if parents could somehow take a pill to alter the genetics of the child, so the child would grow without a foreskin, do you think we may be just in a little bit of a theoretical realm here at the moment?
Because this is completely impossible for any current or, I imagine, future technology.
Right, but I know it's a theoretical, but if you bear with me for a second, you see what I'm saying?
I would think, based on why they do it, that they would choose that, because they're not doing it to do physical damage.
They're doing it for the sake of the, I don't know, cosmetic change, however you would frame it.
But Oh, no, no.
Listen, I mean, hacking at a child's penis for cosmetic reasons is bullshit.
That is a shitty, shitty reason to hack at a child's penis.
Come on.
You can't justify this on the grounds of plastic surgery or penis aesthetics.
I mean, come on.
I'm not defending it like it's a good thing.
I'm not saying that everyone should be circumcised.
I'm saying that I have a hard time calling the parents if they're libertarians and Subscribe to the non-aggression principle.
I have a hard time calling them hypocrites because I don't think parents do that to their newborn children for the sake of inflicting pain.
When did I ever say it's about inflicting pain?
What a straw man.
The question is nothing to do with anything that you're saying.
And this is, of course, because you're circumcised and it's emotionally difficult.
And I appreciate that and I sympathize with that, but I can't let it derail the conversation.
It is an initiation of The use of force to hack away the healthy tissue on a male child's penis.
For no good medical reason.
That is the initiation of the use of force that is mutilating a child.
Now, we can talk about motives and all that kind of stuff.
And sure, I mean, that may ameliorate the situation.
It is still a violation of the non-aggression principle.
Because otherwise, everyone's belief system would be fine to justify whatever it is.
Like, let's say that you go and strangle some homeless guy because you believe he's the next Hitler who's going to destroy the world.
And you genuinely believe that.
You're doing it not to harm that man, but to save the world.
And it is unfortunate that the homeless guy has to be strangled in order to save the world because he's going to be the guy who invents some bacteria that's going to wipe out all of humanity and leave only the cockroaches and Lena Dunham running around.
So, if you genuinely believe that, you genuinely believe that you're saving humanity by strangling this hobo, Is it still a violation of the non-aggression principle to strangle a hobo?
No.
Yes!
I mean...
Yes!
Now, you may get an insanity defense, but nobody lets you walk.
Great.
But that person wasn't choosing violence to, like, solve a problem they could otherwise solve.
If they thought that was the only option and they were that delusional, granted, they're delusional, but I don't think that means that they're violating the non-aggression principle.
So you're willing to say that a crazy guy who's strangling someone is not violating the non-aggression principle because he's crazy?
So the intent is the only thing that matters, not the action?
Yeah, pretty much.
I mean, I could give another example.
Would you punish?
Hang on.
Would there be consequences for the crazy guy who strangles a homeless guy because he thinks he's saving the world?
Would you just say, oh, well, off you go?
Well, it's impossible to prove his intent if he really thought that or if, you know, so I don't think...
Ah, so now we're in the realm of trying to define the moral content of actions through completely subjective measures that can be never proven anyway, one way or the other, right?
You can't prove.
You can't prove why your parents decided...
To have you circumcised, my friend.
You can't prove it.
They could lie.
They could tell the truth.
We don't know.
What was your state of mind 25 years ago when you made this decision?
Oh, I thought it was for your benefit, and I thought it was great, and I thought...
You can't possibly ever know these things beyond a shadow of a doubt.
The only thing we know beyond a shadow of a doubt is you're missing a third of your penis skin.
Right.
So, I mean, I would call that...
So we can't...
Sorry to interrupt.
We can't ever make a moral judgment because there could be some belief set that someone could explain to us that would justify what they did.
So basically, there's no such thing as the non-aggression principle because women's subjective preference that can't ever be verified can nullify the immorality of violations of the non-aggression principle at any conceivable time.
I don't...
I don't think that's possible.
It's...
If intent is the only thing that matters, and you just said intent can't be proven either way, then the immorality of an act can never be proven either way.
This is deductive logic 101.
Intent is the only thing that defines an immoral act.
Intent can be never proven.
Therefore, immoral acts can never be established.
Therefore, there's no such thing as immoral acts in any objective sense.
You may not like those conclusions, but they do follow directly from your premises.
I mean, you could be right, and I'd have to contemplate it, but I mean, as of right now...
No, no, no.
Do you not understand what I just said?
I mean, you're a smart guy.
What had I just said that you don't understand?
Don't give me this, well, maybe, maybe, I'll think about it later.
If you want to have a conversation about this stuff, and you're making very strong moral statements...
What about it do you not understand?
Because this is very, very simple logic, and you're smart enough to get it.
Let me go over it one more time.
You said intent is the only thing that matters in defining the immorality of an action.
Not the action, only the intent.
And then you said intent can't be proven either way.
Therefore, it follows that the immorality of an act can never be proven either way.
Therefore, it's not a principle.
If you can't ever prove anything, one way or the other, then there's no such thing as having a principle.
So, what about another example?
Like, let's say having your wisdom teeth removed.
Like, I had my wisdom teeth removed, and they weren't causing crowding or any problem, but they were removed by force, of course.
Is that a violation of the non-aggression principle?
Did you agree to have them removed?
Yeah, but I was like...
Then it wasn't removed by force.
But I mean, I was a teenager.
Force is when you don't want it to happen.
Otherwise, it's like saying, I was raped because I wanted to have sex with someone.
If you want it to happen, it's not force.
Okay, so, but how do you know a baby does or doesn't want it to happen when they get circumcised?
Are you kidding me?
How do you know whether a baby doesn't want to have a third of its penis skin hacked off?
With almost no anesthetic?
Are you kidding me?
I'm not saying I know.
Have you ever watched the procedure on video?
Have you ever heard the screams?
Have you ever seen measurements of the cortisol levels that are far higher even six months after this mutilation?
I mean, it's like saying, well, we don't know whether a baby actually wants you to take pliers and slowly rotate and twist off its big toe.
We don't know that for sure.
I mean, they haven't signed a contract saying no.
They don't explicitly, with Hitchens-like eloquence, tell you not to and give you the reasons why.
I mean, how do we know?
We don't know.
We don't know.
Maybe they do want their ears sawn off Van Gogh-style.
We don't know.
I mean, come on.
Come on, you can't say that seriously, that we don't know whether a child wants to have a third of its penis skin hacked off.
I mean, I think, I don't know.
Are you listening to yourself?
Seriously, do you know where you are in this conversation?
Do you know how you appear?
This is so ridiculously defensive, I can't even continue a conversation at this level.
You're grabbing at so many ridiculous, embarrassing, and morally horrifying straws that I can't continue this conversation because it's crazy.
You're so defensive about what happened to you, and I sympathize.
I really do.
I wish the decision that your parents made had been different.
But you're so hell-bent on defending this at any kind of cost that you're now making completely immoral statements.
When you take a deep breath and you say to yourself, you look in the mirror and you say, man, I just said we can't tell if a baby doesn't want to have its penis mutilated.
Does that sound healthy to you?
Does that sound like, yeah, that's within the bounds of moral discourse?
No, I'm saying that like say years later, like say if right now if you were to ask me whether or not I wish I was circumcised, I could possibly say yes because I think the benefit I enjoy of having a circumcised penis the rest of my life could be net positive compared to what I went through as an infant that I don't remember.
But we're not talking about you as an adult.
We're talking about a baby.
Yeah, I understand that.
But you're placing all this importance on the judgment of a baby that Wait, are you saying a baby's judgment now?
Again, do you not hear yourself?
Is there an observing ego that's floating around you looking at yourself saying, what the fuck am I saying here?
A baby's judgment?
It's a baby.
It's newly born.
Its judgment consists of, oh wow, there's some bright shit in this big space that I never knew before.
A baby's judgment?
Yes.
Right.
So, if you're concluding that a baby doesn't want its foreskin to be cut off, then you're placing important on the baby's judgment also.
So, again, you hear the phrase baby's judgment and this sounds perfectly normal to you.
Doesn't sound insane at all.
No, it sounds ridiculous.
Oh, good.
Oh, good.
Okay, I'm glad that you understand that what you're saying sounds ridiculous.
Nobody's talking about the baby's judgment.
We're talking about the fact that the baby...
It goes into paroxysms of agony when you slice a third of its penis skin off.
We're not talking about the baby's judgment.
We're talking about hacking a defenseless baby's and mutilating its penis.
It's not a judgment issue.
I get that it's gruesome.
I mean, you don't have to keep, like, impressing it upon me as if I don't.
I do, because you're talking about the baby's judgment.
Rather than the baby's primal reaction to an ungodly physical mutilation in the most sensitive area of the baby's body.
What if it had cancer on its arm and it was extremely painful to remove it, don't you still think it's not a violation of non-aggression principle to remove the cancer?
Are you saying that the foreskin is a cancer?
No, I'm just saying that it could be possible.
Okay, then shut up.
Shut up.
Stop coming up with bullshit because you're emotionally triggered.
I'm not emotionally, I'm not upset.
If you want to have a conversation with adults about issues, you can say, look, it's way too emotional for me.
I can't make any fucking sense because it's so traumatic.
And this is why circumcision is such an ungodly thing to do.
It is such a horrible thing to do because look how traumatized you are.
You can't make any sense of this in any way, shape, or form.
You're now comparing perfectly healthy tissue that evolved there to protect the head of the penis and to increase physical sensation to pleasure for both the man and for the woman, and also to scoop out semen if you were getting sloppy seconds.
A perfectly healthy piece of skin and nerve endings, you are now comparing to cancer.
With no break, no pause, and no part of you is saying, well, this is fucking stupid.
I can't say this.
This is insane.
It sounds normal to you to make these arguments because you're traumatized.
And this is what I want to prevent for other people.
I mean, and I'm sorry to be hammering at you about this because you were mutilated as a baby and I'm sorry that it happened.
But this is why it is so damaging.
It makes people kind of crazy.
They can't think straight around this issue because they're traumatized and it's incredibly emotionally difficult.
And you know, as well as I do, that if we were talking about a clitoris, you would not be saying any of this shit at all.
This all comes down to male fucking disposability.
Would you be arguing this if we were talking about female genital mutilation, my friend?
That's a totally different analogy.
Why is it totally different?
Okay, say there's an entirely superfluous and unnecessary part of female genitalia that...
The foreskin is not superfluous or unnecessary.
Mind functions just fine.
No, it doesn't.
Okay.
No, no, it doesn't, because you're missing a third of the sensation in your penis.
Of course, you can't compare it.
Because you don't have a foreskin.
But it has significant effects.
It's clearly had significant emotional effects, for which, again, I'm incredibly sympathetic towards.
Oh my God, you've got to stop.
I'm not emotional about that.
The only thing I'm getting emotional about...
You bloody well should be.
And you're acting in a completely irrational manner.
And again, you'll listen back to this, and other people will listen to this, and they'll see what I see.
And you don't see it at the moment, because this is a part of you that is messed up.
And I'm sorry about that again.
Oh my God.
But it is not any different to talk about female genital mutilation compared to male genital mutilation.
Why is it different?
Because men have a piece of skin they don't need.
Well, does a woman need a clitoris in order to survive?
Not in order to survive, but I mean...
Oh, good.
Okay, so she has a piece of pleasure-giving nerve endings that she doesn't need.
So let's just hack that off too.
What's the difference?
What's the difference?
People enjoy having clitoris.
How do you know if I were to, say, have foreskin back and then have it taken off again?
How do you know?
It's already a foregone conclusion to you that I would choose having foreskin.
Again, I'm not saying I know.
Let me ask you this.
Do you think you would be as good a pianist if a third of the nerve endings in your left hand were removed?
Well, that's not the same analogy.
It absolutely is.
Do you think you would have the same dexterity?
Do you think you would have the same feeling of touch?
Listen, years ago, I got a cut on my thumb.
I tripped carrying some plates from the dishwasher and I cut my thumb pretty deeply.
And for years, there was like a numb patch right above this wound because the nerves have been cut.
Now, oddly enough, it's kind of coming back a little bit over time.
And I guess the nerves are uniting and joining together.
But I had like a dead spot on my finger, like a null zone or a dead spot, right?
Because the nerve endings had been cut.
Now, a third of the skin, a third of the nerve endings on the penis are removed during circumcision, something like that.
I don't know if it's exactly a third.
I mean, it's a third of the skin.
I don't know if it's a third of the nerve endings, but I know that I'm not circumcised, right?
So the nerve endings are very precious to me.
It is without a doubt that you have less sensation because you have roughly a third fewer nerve endings on the end of your penis.
It also is without a doubt that you will most likely have to use more lubrication because the foreskin rolls back and forth when you're thrusting in a vagina or Wherever.
And it reduces chafing for the woman.
And likelihood of erectile dysfunction is much higher for men with circumcision and lots of other issues that go on, along with post-traumatic stress disorder, perhaps, crazy non-arguments with the topic.
But yeah, without a doubt, without a doubt, you have much less sensation because you had your foreskin removed.
And I sympathize.
I really do.
But I can't sympathize to the point where I'm willing to bend reality.
I mean, I'm not trying to, either way, I mean, that's kind of like a, we got off on that like for a very long time.
I'm not like super committed to that, my position there, but even still...
So now you're just changing the subject because you got an argument you didn't like, right?
No, I want to go back to another argument that...
No, no, so you're dropping this topic because you asked me for proof as to how you had been diminished.
Through circumcision?
And I gave you irrefutable proof that you're missing roughly a third of your nerve endings in your penis, and now you're just changing the subject.
How do you know that's a net negative?
Most women complain that men masks last too short.
So if I have less sensitivity, shouldn't that be a bonus in my life?
Oh, so you feel that you would be premature ejaculation man if you had Your full sensation.
Well, now who's going into theoretical realms of who can...
No, this is exactly what you said.
You said that you would last less long if you had your full penis intact, right?
I don't know.
All I'm saying is you can make an argument either way.
It's not...
I don't think it's a...
No, no.
No, you couldn't.
Because listen, if men without...
I mean, I assume you accept evolution as the general methodology as to how we got here.
Is that fair to say?
Yes, I'm not too emotionally distraught to see the reason in that, yes.
Okay, then do you want to take it from here as to why if women preferred to have sex with men who had no foreskin, that there would be no such thing as a foreskin?
I'm sorry, could you say that again?
It kind of skipped.
Well, if it was much better for women to have sex with a man who had no foreskin, men wouldn't have foreskin, right?
Natural selection pressures would have removed the foreskin hundreds of thousands of years ago.
How do you know in a thousand years we won't have it?
I mean, how do you know?
Okay, so now you're changing the subject again because you got an argument you don't like.
No, I'm not changing the subject.
I'm just saying...
No.
In the past, is it reasonable to assume that if it was better, if a man lasted longer and the woman was more satisfied, that there would be a positive selection pressure for an absence of a foreskin?
This is Evolution 101, right?
Come on.
Give me a break here.
Don't be such a fan.
There's no way.
It's no shame to agree with two and two make four.
I'm not trying to dominate you personally.
We're just trying to meet in reality with little things called facts.
If it's beneficial for the human immune system to be completely impenetrable, can't you make an argument for why isn't the human immune system impenetrable?
It's not there yet.
It doesn't mean that it's impossible to get there.
It will never be.
But even still, I'm not trying to argue with people.
It costs more energy to grow a foreskin than to not grow a foreskin.
The foreskin is not the default position of the species.
It is a positive selection.
It costs more energy to grow a foreskin than to not grow a foreskin.
Everything that you add, your earlobes, your eyebrows, everything costs more energy to make and carries with it the risk of mutation and bad shit happening.
So the foreskin is there for a positive reason.
I'm a little...
I actually don't know.
Do monkeys have foreskin?
Fucked if I don't, man.
I'm willing to go to nonsense about Trump and pee in hookers and jump in a shot called Russian urine or whatever, but I have no fucking clue.
I don't think dolphins have foreskins.
But you understand, everything you grow in addition is a...
Is a challenge, right?
And is an expenditure, an additional expenditure of energy.
So anyway, I'm going to move on to the next caller because I think you kind of need to get back and review this one.
And again, I do sympathize.
We didn't even get to what I called in for.
You do.
I'm sorry?
We didn't even get to what I called in for.
Well, I guess you should have been a bit more premature.
Premature elaboration would have been helpful.
But feel free to call back in again.
But thanks for your call.
Let's move on to the next caller.
Alright, and if anyone wonders why I have questions about the term libertarianism.
Alright, up next is Special Kitten.
Did you have something you wanted to add before we move on to the next caller?
Just, if people think they're doing good by strangling people, which was the hobo argument that came up earlier, it's not a violation of the non-aggression principle.
If there's people that call themselves libertarians that believe that, I don't want to be in that group.
I don't want to be within 10 miles of that group.
And it goes back to what I was saying about libertarianism in general kind of being a meaningless term these days.
And the caller did point out that in the beginning of that video, you kind of defined libertarianism to some extent.
But unfortunately, like with people, Bill Maher and such, they're not exactly using the same definition.
It's become this giant mainstream definition of anyone that likes to smoke pot is a libertarian.
And yeah, I don't know.
I think it's pretty much a useless term these days.
So I'm going to stick with philosopher and stick to facts and go from there.
And I think it's pretty clear.
You know, this is, again, people think that they're being also subtle, but it's very clear that this fellow is very scared that his parents had him circumcised for no good reason whatsoever.
Which is why he's got all of this mental maze set up to baffle and bewitch and bother and bewilder everyone who tries to get close to this.
I mean, why the hell would you talk to me?
Talk to your parents.
You know what I mean?
Go talk to him.
Say to this guy, go talk to your parents about why you got circumcised.
It's a very important question, especially if you're going to go forward and be a parent yourself.
And the fact that he would talk to some stranger on the internet versus his own parents means that he does not want to get the answer from his own parents, which means I think he knows deep down what that answer will be.
Well, the personal responsibility element isn't even part of the question if circumcision is a violation of the non-aggression principle.
Whether the moral responsibility is going to fall on the doctor because the parents don't have any information.
Maybe they've been locked in a bunker, unable to search on Google for circumcision or read any parenting books or something.
If it falls on the doctor, okay, well, it's still a violation of the non-aggression principle.
An unnecessary surgery removing healthy tissue.
I still don't understand why this needs to be said, but apparently it does.
Well, no, but to be fair, I mean, there are, not that you're not being fair, but there were at some point these sort of scare stories about all of this.
But of course, I mean, it wasn't really part of the Western tradition as a whole.
It was introduced, as you pointed out, by James Kellogg of the Corn Flakes, famed to prevent children, prevent boys from masturbating.
got nothing to do with medicine.
Oh, I look at the pre-Google days as something completely different.
You know, if you're just, you have a parenting handbook that's given to you and you go to the library and all the books say, "Yay, circumcision is good," and you don't have access to information, again, like you said, when it comes to moral responsibility, if you don't have the information, well, it's kind of hard to hold someone personally responsible.
At some point, people become morally responsible for getting the information if and when the ease of accessing it becomes so simple, which now that we have Google, it's harder to say, you know, oh, geez, I couldn't have found this out.
Well, the other thing I would say is that if you have a Jewish doctor, of course, you may not be getting the most objective discussion of circumcision known to mankind.
And everyone kind of knows that, right?
So just another thing to, you know, if you avoid knowledge, then you're responsible for it as well.
Yeah.
All right.
Well, up next, we have Special Kitten.
Special Kitten wrote in and said, how can a woman who is trying to date a man who has gone MGTOW, that's men going their own way, convert him back to normal and help him come back to the dating world?
This is a person I care very much about, and watching him cross into this territory is upsetting.
To clarify, I don't think he knows expressly what MGTOW is, but he is following the same MGTOW patterns that you have described in your videos, and is doing so for the reasons you would expect.
You seem like someone who can at the very least give me an idea of what to do.
How can I help him climb off this slippery slope?
That is from Special Kitten.
Hello, special kitten.
How are you tonight?
Oh, I'm doing well.
Is he not around?
Can we not talk to him?
Oh, no, unfortunately.
He lives in another city, so, you know.
You know, that doesn't really matter to the internet.
Oh.
But we would shock him if we called him, right?
He doesn't have Skype.
He doesn't have Skype, but he's got a phone, right?
It does not have calls or text messaging.
How's he heard about MGTOW if he doesn't have access to the internet?
No, he hasn't heard about MGTOW, but he's following those MGTOW patterns, is what I'm saying.
Ah, okay.
But he has a phone we could call.
I'm not saying we would, but he does have a phone that takes calls, because otherwise I think it's not a phone, but something that makes toast.
No, his phone doesn't take calls.
What?
What is it for?
Is it a paperweight?
I don't quite understand.
No incoming calls?
No, it's more of like a GPS for him.
Huh.
How do you get in touch with him?
Do you use carrier pigeons?
Smoke signals!
Wait, no, how do you?
Do you take to the sewers and send up rats with notes?
No, he has the Facebook messaging app.
Ah, so you message him on Facebook?
Correct.
Wow, so he's not just men going his own way.
It's like men going his own way away from technology.
All right.
But do you talk to him on the phone?
I mean, what kind of relationship are we talking here?
Well, we're really, really good friends.
We haven't really been able to date or anything.
Oh, but you'd like to date him?
Yes.
And how long have you known him as a friend?
Six years, just about.
Holy God.
And when did you first get that yearning burning for his meaty loins?
As soon as I saw him.
Oh man, you spent six years in the friend zone?
Yeah.
Oh my god, my friend.
Oh my goodness, what happened?
No other men around other than this man who doesn't want to date?
I'm not very social.
Huh.
And then like, yeah, I've grown up like really, really sheltered and stuff.
So it's taken me a long time to communicate like a normal person.
Right, doing fine so far.
And have you expressed any Interest in dating that he knows about?
Dating him?
Oh, of course.
I've told him multiple times.
And what does he say?
Ah, well...
In the past, I haven't done so in, like, a very straightforward manner.
Like, I did it in, like, the woman, like, vague kind of way, and then it wasn't until recently I was able to express it in a straightforward way, but he had not done the MGTOW. Sort of thing.
And he was just like, oh, I don't think I want to date anymore.
And what were the indirect ways, just because I know a lot of guys don't really get how women communicate in this way, but SK, what were the subtle ways that you put forward your potential availability?
Well...
Just kind of like, oh, if I could date a guy, I would date you.
Or it's like, oh, you're the kind of guy I want.
You know, that really vague, like, stupid way.
Oh, okay.
So not very subtle.
Have you ever seen Cats vs.
Cucumbers?
How about you're the cucumber and I'm the...
Anyway, okay.
All right.
And so he doesn't want to date.
Has he gone through a bad experience with the court system?
No, no.
Um, he's just had, like, these really gross and, like, psychotic girlfriends.
Yes.
Ah, he's had psychotic girlfriends.
Yeah.
Really?
Mm-hmm.
Why has he had psychotic girlfriends?
I just...
I don't think his judgment is just very...
Okay, no, no, no.
Actually, what it is...
No, I understand that, of course, but why is his judgment so bad?
Mm...
He sees these girls with these problems and he's just like, oh, I want to be a knight.
I want to save them.
You know?
Captain Save-A-Ho.
Yeah.
And why does he, why does he want to, why has he wasted his sexual market value in pursuit of broken women that he can't put back together?
I haven't confirmed this with him, but my theory is that.
No, no.
Six years.
Six years you've known this guy.
You get no I don't knows in this conversation.
I'm telling you that right up front.
Because anything you don't know about this guy is what you have consciously avoided knowing.
If I've known someone for six years, hell, if I've known someone for six days, I generally know all about them, at least all the relevant stuff, right?
So what was it about his history, his childhood perhaps, his mom, his dad, his role models?
What was it?
That gave him this perspective that he had to shred his penis against a cheese crate or a female crazy.
I was about to say, I think it's his mom because his mom has been, she's been like the single mom drifting from man to man kind of.
And that was like his main female role model.
And then he was also raised to be like a good old southern boy, you know, really chivalrous and stuff like that.
So I think those two things...
Together.
Is his mom crazy?
I think so.
Alright, and how is she crazy?
You know how people who have personality disorders, they're just kind of off?
Like, their behavior is just kind of different?
I've heard that, and I think I may have brushed up against that once or twice in my life.
Like, I haven't seen her take pills or anything, but she's just very off, and I just don't know.
I don't know how to describe it.
Is he aware of the influence his mother...
I mean, I know that the South and introspection don't always go hand in hand.
Not to overgeneralize, but it's a little thing I've noticed.
Does he have any idea the effect that his mother has had on his dating choices?
I don't think so at all.
At all?
So his level of self-knowledge is not high?
No.
So what do you like about him?
Everything.
Pretty much.
No, no, no.
What you've described to me is a bunch of negatives and red flags and warning signs.
Crazy mom, history of dating crazy women, no real self-knowledge, no understanding of these patterns.
This is not a plus.
So you tell me what you like, and don't give me any of this mealy mouth, everything stuff.
What is so great about this guy who dates crazy women and doesn't have a clue how he got there?
Okay, well, it would be...
His personality has a very, very calm yet authoritative kind of personality.
And he's very, very creative as an artist.
And he's very, very socially in tune with people.
He's almost like a snake charmer.
He can make pretty much any person like him somehow.
He's just one of those people.
Yeah.
You know what that's a characteristic of?
What kind of personality structure that's a characteristic of?
Extreme charm?
Mm-hmm.
Well, I'll let you look that up after the show.
Okay.
Yeah, just look up extreme charm and capacity to manipulate others into liking him.
You may be illuminated by the response of that.
So he's charming and he's, I guess, alpha, calm, authoritative and so on.
Although he doesn't sound particularly alpha and calm when he's dating crazy women.
What else?
He's very attractive.
A lot of women will say that about their party.
Is he a pretty boy or a manly dude?
He's like an ex-pretty boy.
I don't know how to describe it.
He looks a bit different now, but when I met him, he was the pretty boy.
And what's changed?
He grew out his hair really, really long, and he just lets his facial hair grow out.
I guess that's...
Two out of three, ex-pretty boy, facial hair growing out, kind of let my hair grow long.
Yeah, we have a lot of things in common.
We like the same shows and things, and we both want to travel a lot, and we both have a lot of similar viewpoints about things.
So, wait, does that mean you're not particularly into self-knowledge either?
Oh, no.
I try to be very into self-knowledge as much as I'm able.
But he's not?
I don't think so, no.
But you like the same TV shows?
Yes.
So which one do you think is more important, just out of curiosity, in terms of long-term compatibility, liking the same TV shows, or having some clue about why you are the way you are?
Well, definitely the second one.
I would think so.
What are the more deeper values than TV shows?
What are the more deep values that you might share with this fellow?
Well...
Sorry, I'm not good at putting together words.
It's...
I don't know.
We both really want just a free kind of lifestyle where we're not just chained to an office.
Sorry, your free kind of lifestyle includes dating him and his free kind of lifestyle does not include dating you or anyone.
So you'll have to dig a little deeper for compatibility.
If your definition of freedom is, I'd like to be free to date you, and his definition of freedom is, I'd like to be free to stay away from you as far as dating goes, that's not a compatibility, you understand?
Yes.
Okay, so let's try again.
And we both kind of... I don't know.
Okay, so he's pretty.
I don't really talk that much.
He's good looking and that's what you want.
Right?
He makes you tingle, right?
Yes, he does.
He makes you tingle and you've been kind of circling around waiting for his defenses to weaken.
Why don't you try bringing him a water buffalo or inviting him into your hot tub wearing only a towel?
As far as I've heard from male listeners, that works in the past.
So is it fair to say that You're very sexually attracted to him, but you don't really have much of a clue as to fundamental value compatibilities?
Yes and no.
You are right in that sense, but at the same time, we do have a lot of deep conversations, but they're more like his feelings and my feelings.
They're not in that kind of realm that you wanted me to reach for a question ago.
What realm am I trying to get you to reach for?
You may be reaching a little there, but go ahead.
I feel like the answer you wanted me to give was something just kind of like, we both had the same core values inside, or some kind of answer like that, but we don't really talk about that in particular.
It's more of, I guess, feelings-based talk, I should say.
Okay, so you both like talking about your feelings to each other.
But he's not interested in finding out the source of his feelings.
I don't think he knows how to, to be honest.
But you do, right?
And you haven't shared that knowledge with him?
I'm sorry, my microphone cut out on that last part.
So he doesn't know how to figure out the source of his feelings.
You do, but you have not shared that knowledge with him, is that right?
Um...
Yes.
I don't know.
I feel like he has to figure it out himself.
Hang on.
But why haven't you shared?
I'm sorry.
You cut out for a second there.
Please finish your thought.
Can you hear me?
To be honest, yes, yes.
I feel like it's something he has to find himself.
I feel like if I push him, he's going to just mentally block me.
Ah, so you can't be honest with him because you feel you'll be rejected.
You can't be honest about things that are of interest to you, like figuring out why you feel the way that you feel because he's going to reject you.
But you do share other core values that I would still like to hear about.
Because so far, this is not only not sharing core values, this is kind of being oppositional in your core values.
He wants to date no one.
You want to date him.
He does not want to know about his feelings.
You do.
You would like to share your interest in knowing about the source of feelings with him, but you fear he will reject you.
These are oppositional values.
So please, my friend Special Gittin, tell me about these core values that you share.
And I'm not trying to be mean.
I'm actually trying to get you into his pants.
I really am.
I'm trying to aim you straight at his sticky thing.
So just help me help you get into his pants.
However gamey and bachelory they might be at this point.
So again, and we don't have to keep going on this path, but I think we should just point out For anyone who's not aware, that right now we have not a lot of compatibility in terms of values, right?
You find him attractive.
I get that.
I understand all of that.
But in terms of actual values that you share?
I feel like we do have the same kind of deep down we're conservative, but we are a bit more liberal in the sense of the freedom thing I was mentioning and just...
Stuff like that.
So our core values in that manner are the same.
I think the biggest difference is this thing he wants to do now.
He wants to do this big Tao thing.
Yes, but your freedom definition, you want freedom for you to date him.
He wants freedom from you dating him.
So your definitions of freedom are not very compatible.
Um, they are on that note, but I'm saying as far as, like, in every other way those two match up, it's like that one right there.
Yeah, that's giving me the issue.
Well, that's kind of the important one, whether he wants to date you, right?
All right.
Um, let me ask you this, special kitten.
Mm-hmm.
How trustworthy do you appear to him?
Hmm.
I don't think he trusts very many women right now.
No, no.
Don't give me abstracts.
I don't want abstracts.
I want you.
He's not potentially dating other women or not, right?
Yes.
So how trustworthy do you appear to him right now?
Well, very trustworthy because I don't really like any of his friends.
Like whenever I go to see him, it's just like...
You don't like his friends?
And this is a plus?
Is there anything you share in common other than you like his looks?
You don't like his friends?
This is supposed to make you more trustworthy?
I don't mean like, like I dislike them.
I mean, I'm not trying to get with them.
I don't really have any particular...
Oh, you're not trying to have sex with his friends?
Yes, that's what I meant to say.
I'm sorry.
Okay, I think I'm getting kind of a sense of the circles that you're moving in, but I gotta tell you, and I don't mean to sound blasé, I wouldn't put at the very pinnacle, at the very peak, at the very tip of Mount Everest, a female reliability that she's not trying to bang my friends.
But that's kind of, that's below base camp in terms of the starting place, right?
Not trying to have sex with my friends, I mean, that maybe gets you into the same town, let alone the same room.
Okay?
So you're not trying to have sex with his friends.
What else?
Has he had other girlfriends who have tried to have sex with his friends?
Yes, that actually is a baseline.
He's dated these psychotic, awful girls.
So yes, that actually is important to him.
He doesn't...
Most of his other female friends are not like that.
Okay, so your taller than Mickey Rooney contest is you're not trying to bang his friends, whereas other girlfriends he had did try to and maybe even succeeded in banging his friends.
Is that correct?
That is correct.
All right.
What else?
Well, I'm not really a person who spills other people's secrets and stuff.
Whenever he tells me these really deep emotional things, they don't really go anywhere.
And...
He can really, really, like, relax whenever he's around me.
Like, I can tell there's, like, this kind of defense he'll kind of put up around other people, but when it's just, like, me and him, he just, like, really, really relaxes and becomes almost like this different person.
What else would lead him to believe that he can trust you?
And you had talked about that when he's with you, he sort of relaxes, lowers his guard.
How often are you around him physically?
I don't mean legs, obviously, because that's to come, perhaps, but just in his physical vicinity?
Anywhere from, like, three to five times a month or so.
Sometimes it's more or less.
He has, like, a really big, busy work schedule, so...
Right.
And then, of course, I live a town away, so...
Right.
Now, do you have a job?
I do not.
You don't have a job, and why not?
Well, I... Do not need one since my parents pay for my college.
And are you a young lady?
Yes.
And he is a young man?
Yes.
And what are you taking in college?
I'm doing computer science.
All right.
And he has a job, of course, right?
Yes.
And has he met your parents?
He has.
And what do your parents think?
Of him?
Well, they don't really like any men that aren't Christian.
So, I mean, they don't dislike him, but they obviously disprove of him not being a Christian.
So if you're a young lady and you've been into this guy for six years, you were a child when you were first attracted to him, right?
Yes.
Right.
And he's roughly your age, right?
Oh, yes.
He's only about two years older than me.
Right.
Okay.
And your parents don't like him as much because he's not a Christian?
Is he an atheist or an agnostic or something else?
He is an atheist.
Right.
Is his plan to never date again for the rest of his natural-born life that you know of?
Well, I don't know.
Because, see, he said before that he doesn't want to date anyone, but then he changed his mind.
But...
He's been like this for about seven months now, and that's longer than normal, so I think he might be serious this time.
And do you know what happened with his last relationship?
Oh, yes.
I know all about it.
You said that you're a vault with details, so just give me the rough sketch if you don't mind.
Well, this last one, this one was actually the least crazy, but she...
She was seeing this other guy.
They weren't having intimate relations.
But she was seeing him.
And then so, of course, he didn't like that.
And he was just like, stop seeing this guy.
And then the girl was like...
Wait, she was seeing both of them at the same time?
Yes.
So he got into a relationship with a woman who was dating someone else at the same time?
No, this happened later.
So he was in an exclusive relationship with her and she dated someone else at the same time?
Yes.
Okay.
And then what?
And she refused to stop seeing him, so he just...
The other guy, you mean?
Oh, the other guy.
I don't know.
I guess those two are still seeing each other.
I don't talk to them.
I don't know.
And what about the relationship before that?
Oh, this one.
I mean, has he had a real bunny boiler in the rear view?
I don't know what that means.
A bunny boiler is a reference to Fatal Attraction.
I guess it's kind of an older movie now.
With just a really crazy girlfriend.
She wasn't really that insane.
She was just promiscuous.
She's just the kind of girl who can't have a stable relationship.
She likes to jump relationships every like two months.
And that's what happened.
And are these women very physically attractive?
The one I just talked about, who can only go two months, she was quite physically attractive.
The other ones, not really.
They were okay.
They weren't ugly.
They were just okay.
And how would you rate your own looks?
I mean, just talking about the most shallow element of attraction.
I guess an eight or nine, depending on preferences.
I don't know.
Okay, eight or nine.
And him?
About like a seven.
Do you not have any men around you?
I mean, you're an intelligent woman.
You're an intelligent woman.
You're self-described as very attractive.
Eight or nine is very attractive.
You are going to college for a career that may, in fact, give you some significant income, perhaps.
You're a nice girl, right?
I mean, you come from a Christian family, so I assume you're a nice girl.
And are there no nice men around who don't have a history of, you know, playing the slots in crazy town, so to speak, and who are emotionally available and who are willing to date and so on?
And I'll tell you why I'm channeling my audience in a moment, but just aren't there Any men around that might fall into that category?
Well, unfortunately, when you live in a small town, a lot of the eligible bachelors, they go to a public school, and then they can pick out their girl from a public school.
And then the ones who do not pick from a public school, they leave.
They go.
They go somewhere else.
And I went to a private school.
There were only about 15 male classmates in my grade or in the grades above me.
I just happened to not like the 45 or 60 that were in my age range.
And then now that I've been in this town for three more years, I feel like all of the eligible guys have either been picked or they have left.
Are you kidding?
Hang on, hang on, hang on.
I'm sorry to ask you a question and then interrupt your response.
Okay.
But I think I need to play back to you what I heard in my head.
Okay.
Are you ready?
Yes, I'm ready.
When I was younger, there were 45 boys around that I could have dated.
But none of them were as attractive and as available and as positive for me as the guy who was dating crazy women and now doesn't want to date anyone at all.
Who my parents dislike.
And who does not share my interest in self-knowledge.
And who does not share my interest in dating.
But we like the same movies.
Out of all the boys you knew, this is the guy you couldn't conceivably do better than.
Out of all the 45 boys.
Not to mention the other boys you may have met at some place around the town.
Come on.
Come on.
You can't expect me to believe that.
That the 45 guys were way below this guy in terms of availability and compatibility and likability.
This guy is the very pinnacle, the very top of everyone you could have gotten out of all the boys you knew when you were in school.
Um, yes.
I guess you can phrase it like that.
No, that's what you're telling me.
Didn't like any of the 45 boys who were around, but this guy, who dates crazy women, is not interested in self-knowledge, and doesn't want to date anyone at any time now, this is the very top of the pile for you.
This is the very best guy for you out of all these boys that you knew.
So you don't want to date.
You don't want to date.
If you're choosing this guy, you just don't want to date.
Come on.
If you had some friend who was telling you this story, oh yeah, I was around dozens and dozens of guys growing up, but the only guy I'm fixated on is the guy who won't date me.
Okay, well then you don't want to date.
If the only guy you're interested in is the guy dating crazy women you don't share really any values with and who doesn't want to date you, then you don't want to date.
You're pining after someone who's unattainable because he's unattainable, because you don't want a relationship, in my humble opinion.
Now, if he was the only guy in town, okay, I mean, then I guess your options are a little thin on the ground, right?
Because I'll tell you this, oh, special kitten friend of mine, let me tell you something.
Let me tell you something.
And this, ladies, you all need to hear.
When I was growing up, there were nice guys around.
A lot of nice guys around.
And do you know, my friend, who all the really attractive women went for?
The jerk attractive ones.
Absolutely.
The cold-hearted, Often mean, emotionally unavailable, sometimes pretty boys, other times just incomprehensibly, what?
I remember, oh, so distinctly, I was responsible for editing some of the yearbook.
And we had our own little office and my friends and I would hang out there when I was in high school.
It was a tiny little office, but, you know, it was a fun place to hang out.
And there was a girl there, and everybody wanted to date.
And she had, like, I've known the arc of these guys since.
guys who've had spectacular careers, made lots of money, become professionals and great providers and good fathers and good husbands and, you know, just good guys all around.
And she dated a guy.
Well, let's just say he didn't quite have that trajectory.
She dated him.
It was completely incomprehensible to me.
Incomprehensible to me.
And this was a kind of common pattern of attractive women pursuing Wind-up, monotonous, predetermined, no-self-knowledge jerkozoids.
And I can guarantee you, my friend, circling around you are really, really nice guys who would love to date you.
Come on.
You're in computer science.
Don't tell me there aren't a few guys floating around who might just be interested in dating you a tiny bit.
You're in computer science.
What's the ratio there?
There's only one other girl, but...
Okay!
So, you kind of got the market cornered on availables with a future who might in fact be interested in dating you.
They're right there in the room.
Don't look now.
I'm sorry, I'm sorry.
There are pieces around with your name on them.
Sorry, go ahead.
I'm sorry.
I want to add something.
I don't know if it'll change your...
I don't know if it's going to change your mind.
If you're not about to tell me you have three breasts, one of which is hanging off the back of your knee, I'm not sure it will, but please go for it.
Okay, well, I actually, in high school, I was not attractive at all.
And I was incredibly weird.
I was one of those weirdo-like anime, like nerd chicks.
It was only recently.
Hey, hey, hey, do not dis anime.
Some of the greatest allies of this show love anime, and I love them for it.
So I will not hear anything negative about anime.
Unfortunately, it didn't give me any points back then.
No, the guys in my class, they actually voted me the ugliest one.
Wait, you were voted the ugliest in your class?
Yes.
That's a thing?
Well, it wasn't like an official thing.
They were just talking about it in the library and I overheard.
And what has changed so much?
Well, I was like a late developer.
I think that's what it is.
What does that mean?
I mean, your World War II footage?
Does that mean you sprouted boobs later?
I mean, what does that mean?
Yes, that's exactly what it means.
Oh, you got like mega-titted later on in your teenage years?
I mean, what are we talking here?
Yes.
Oh, well...
Okay.
Okay, go on.
Well, I mean, I took this birth control and it like changes your hormones.
And then it's just like, I just, I got really large chested after that.
And then that's...
When things really changed for me.
Oh, so because your body thinks that you're breastfeeding imaginary babies, right?
So it's like, kaboom, boobs for days.
You could feed an African village with these things.
All right.
Yeah.
Your boobs were on time, but you were five minutes late.
Okay, I get it.
I get it.
So I'm afraid you now have full vision of just how shallow some men are.
But anyway.
And then what it was...
But you haven't changed weight or anything.
Is that right?
Or exercise more or whatever?
No.
So what it was is that like, you know, these guys, they all didn't like me.
They all thought I was ugly.
And I have seen them now recently.
Now they're all nice to me.
Now that I'm pretty, now they're all interested.
And it just makes me feel angry.
I would never want to date them.
Ah, okay, so here now we're getting to something that's important, and I appreciate your honesty with that, and I appreciate the passion and the vulnerability of saving that, right?
Yeah.
Because that's really frustrating, right?
You voted the ugliest, and you sprout some chest feeders, and suddenly it's like, hi, can I buy you an island?
Yeah, that's unfortunately what happened.
Right.
Right.
But he was always nice to me.
Even when I was really, really ugly and weird, he still had compassion for me.
Hang on, hang on, hang on.
Why are you calling yourself ugly?
I don't understand.
I just wasn't that good looking when I was younger.
But your face hasn't changed that much and your hair hasn't changed that much.
And if you haven't changed your weight that much or changed your exercise regime that much, the only thing that's changed is birth control and boobs, right?
Well, no.
My face was also covered in acne.
That wasn't cute either.
Oh, I'm so sorry.
That is rough.
No, that is no laughing matter.
I've known people like that in my life.
It is a very, very, very difficult situation.
And did birth control help with that or just grow out of it or what?
Yes, it is birth control.
It really has helped clear up all the oil that used to give me all that acne.
All right.
And is it for that reason that you took the birth control, or were you in a relationship?
Yeah, I was just worried about what could happen, so that's why I started taking it.
Worried about what could happen?
You mean if you were in a relationship and wanted to become sexually active?
Mm-hmm.
Wait a minute.
I'm not sure I quite follow this, and I feel we're kind of on the edge of a precipice here, so anytime you want to turn back, it's entirely up to you, but...
Okay.
Were you promiscuous?
You're afraid what would happen?
Like you get drunk and I don't know what, what do you mean?
I wasn't promiscuous.
I was always in a like monogamous relationship.
Okay.
So you were in, and how many boyfriends have you had?
Five.
And when did you start dating?
When I was 17.
It's quite a few.
Yeah, unfortunately.
Why?
No, it was...
Well, the first...
It was, like, my fault at first because at first I was doing what you said.
I was going for, like, the really jerk pretty ones.
But then even when I went for the nice ones that, like, weren't super pretty, like, there were still issues.
And what were the issues?
Oh, well, Juan was just really, really, really jealous.
And he would, like...
He always thought I was cheating on him, even though I was.
He would take my phone and he would go into my house and stuff.
And I was just like, you're obsessed.
This needs to stop.
And then the other one elected to tell me that he was a drug dealer and he was into illegal activities.
And I was just like, I don't really need this.
This is too much.
Okay, so you've got one semi-stalker, one drug dealer.
How else are you doing?
Those were the only two that were like average.
The other three, those were my fault.
I chose them because they were pretty and they were jerks.
So that was my poor judgment.
Wait, the drug dealer and the stalker were normal?
Yes, they were normal looking.
Oh, normal looking.
Okay.
And what happened with the pretty boys?
They were just...
It was all some form of just them being a complete jerk.
But jerks how?
That's a generic term.
Well, the first one, it was also kind of like...
How do I explain this?
He wouldn't let me wear certain outfits and stuff, and he would always show me off weirdly.
Around his friends and he always, he just treated me like an object.
I don't know how to describe it.
It was just like, I was like this possession he had and he was just like, oh, look at this.
Look at what I have.
And it was just really gross.
I couldn't deal with it.
And then, and then the second one, he, he decided to have his friend come into the room while we were Intimate and decided to film it and I was looking over and I just saw this guy with the camera so I was just like we're breaking up today and then and then the other one was just well
he thought I was like in love with his best friend because I knew his best friend first but like he and the best friend He and I, we were just friends.
And I even opted.
I was like, hey, I'm not just going to talk to this guy anymore if it makes you feel that upset.
But by this time, he was just so upset by it.
He just told me that it was over because he thought I was lying and stuff.
So those were the three pretty ones.
God, I'm...
His friend filmed you having sex?
Yeah.
Hope you broke that goddamn camera.
No, I should have.
God.
I don't know.
I just wanted to leave.
And this...
This is the best around?
Um...
Well, I... Those were the pretty ones, so that was my really bad judgment.
But no, the two who weren't was jealous stalker guy and drug dealer guy.
Mm-hmm.
This is the best there is around?
I guess.
I don't know.
I mean, I'm still looking, but...
So you and the guy you have a crush on both choose bad people to be with, right?
It's not just him.
Yes.
I mean, these are heartbreaking people to be with, and you've got to be careful.
You know, your heart can only take so many whacks before it'll break permanently.
Mm-hmm.
You've got to...
You know, when you've had a bad breakup, you've got to nurse that wound like a broken bone.
You've got to protect it.
You've got to strengthen your heart again.
You know, because a lot of people have this impulse, I'll go out and start dating, and you're just exposed like going skiing with a broken leg, right?
Just makes it much worse.
How do you get along with your dad?
Oh, I love my dad.
We talk all the time.
I mean, of course we do.
We live in the same house.
But, you know, there's no, like, solid relations, I mean.
So, is there no guy around like your dad?
No.
Are you sure?
I don't know where to look, to be honest.
Okay.
So that's different, right?
Yeah.
What does your father think of these...
Does he know?
No, he's only met, like...
The very first guy.
And then, of course, the guy that this call is about, he's not the other ones.
I don't know.
It was just too short.
I mentioned it was like five within three years, because now I'm 20.
So the time period was just too short.
Like a couple of months?
Yeah, generally like a couple of months.
And then I'd be a couple of months by myself, and then I'd find someone else.
What are you looking for when you think of dating a man?
What is it that you...
How do you know if you want to date him or not?
It's just like how...
I don't know the word how to describe it.
It's just like when you click with someone really, really fast.
It used to be heavy physical attraction for the first three, but now I've just been looking for ones that I just click with on a bit more of a personal level.
I'll generally meet them at school or at a nerd gathering, like an anime convention.
And how do you know whether they're trustworthy?
I mean, WIGTOW, Jesus, you're on the verge of WIGTOW, right?
No, I don't want to give up, but...
No, but how do you know?
Like, how do you know whether somebody is worth trusting your heart with?
How do they earn your trust?
Just...
I don't know.
Generally, I let them hang around for a few months.
And if they just...
They don't do...
If they don't raise any alarms, I guess...
Oh, come on.
Come on, come on, come on.
I don't know.
Are you saying that after, hang on, are you saying that after knowing a boy or a man for a couple of months, you have no idea whether they're trustworthy or not?
They've completely fooled you.
They could be a drug dealer, they could be a stalker, they could be someone who's so nasty that their friend comes in to film you having sex.
And maybe the friend, well, you still have to have a friend who wanted to do that.
Or who's, you know, paranoid and jealous of your supposed attraction to something.
Like, you have no idea.
Because if you don't have any idea, you're really flying blind and you're in significant danger.
Seriously, I'm not kidding.
You're in significant danger because you could meet some really crazy guy.
I mean, these guys are crazy enough, but it could get much worse if you have no radar for danger.
I mean, I sense that they have personality flaws.
Like...
Like the one who tried to film me.
I knew that he was...
You know, he was really pretty, but he wasn't that smart.
So, and like, when he did it, it wasn't like a malicious thing.
He just genuinely thought he could do that because he was just that dumb.
But like, I didn't...
Wait, wait.
No, no, no, no, no.
No, no, no, no.
What?
No.
He just genuinely thought it was acceptable to film...
Surreptitiously film someone having sex?
That's not an intelligence thing.
No, no, that's not an intelligence thing.
Come on.
That's an insult to people who aren't intelligent to say that, oh, well, anyone who wasn't intelligent would think that.
Well, he didn't set off that alarm bell.
I didn't think he would do that.
I just thought he just...
Okay, so this is my question.
How do you know if someone is safe?
Well, I guess I don't.
Because listen, listen, sorry to interrupt.
Okay, so you've got the pills, not going to protect you from STDs.
These guys could have some very serious medieval crotch rot and not tell you.
I mean, filming you having sex is a crime.
You now have two criminals in the vicinity, the drug dealer and the friend who filmed you having sex.
Yeah.
So how are you going to be safe out there?
How are you choosing to date these guys?
How do you know who's safe?
I just don't know.
Okay, that's good.
That's good.
That's good.
You know, the first step in solving a problem is knowing there is one.
You are not safe.
So my question is, why are you not safe?
How do you not know Who's remotely trustworthy?
This is not a criticism.
It's not like, well, you should know.
I'm just looking at the evolution of this imperiled lifestyle.
I don't know.
Why aren't you bringing these men home to your father for him to have a look-see?
Couple of months?
That's enough time.
Do you say all in the same goddamn town?
That's enough time to meet your father, right?
Yes.
So why?
Why not?
I guess I just...
What it is is that, like, I just don't...
I mean, they always pass the same judgment.
They're just like, if he doesn't go to a church, then he's not trustworthy.
It doesn't matter that some of the guys I went to church with are the snakiest ones.
They go to church and they're all trustworthy.
I'm sorry to interrupt.
Are you saying that your parents have no idea who's trustworthy other than do they go to church?
I'm saying that I was generally not willing to bring them because I thought they would always pass that judgment for those reasons.
Do you wish you'd brought them now?
If it would have made a difference, then yes.
Would it have made a difference?
Do you respect the judgment of your father?
I mean, I do, but the other time I brought these people home, he never said anything.
Those judgments I said just now, they were like both, like the one about, the guy this calls about, and then the other guy, like my mom said that.
My dad didn't really say anything.
Your dad said what?
He didn't really say anything.
Sorry, your mom said what?
My mom was the one who said that she didn't approve of them based on their religion.
My dad didn't really say anything.
Did you ask him?
I'm not saying you should have.
I'm just curious.
No, I didn't ask him.
And what do you think he would have said if you had asked him?
I don't know, to be honest.
I don't know.
He's very pensive, so very secretive.
Your father is secretive.
I thought you said you guys talk all the time and you're very close.
Did I miss that?
Maybe secret was the wrong word.
He's just like one of those people that's like really kind of deep in his thoughts.
He'll just like to sit there and think about things for a long time.
So it's like I don't know exactly what he'd say.
He keeps all of his thoughts inside.
He keeps all of his thoughts inside so you don't have access to his judgment when it comes to dating.
Is that right?
He doesn't give you the feedback?
I genuinely don't know what he'd say.
And has he been like that Your whole life, or is it more recent?
No, I think that's just his personality.
I don't know.
It's not that he's emotionally unavailable, it's just...
Sounds like he's emotionally unavailable.
I'm sorry?
I just think he's just one of those deep thinker types, because I have asked him about things, and he'll answer, but I don't know what he'd say about that in particular.
Why, I mean, the fact that you're not, I mean, your parents are together, right?
So they trust each other and I assume have a decent relationship and all of that.
So they know something about relationships that you don't, which is how to have them in a non-dangerous manner, right?
Yes.
So if someone is in my family who knows something important that I don't, I mean, if I'm gaining weight and my father is a nutritionist, what would I do?
You would ask him, like, stop it.
You know what you're doing.
I clearly don't.
What do I need to know?
Mm-hmm.
And why...
Oh, I know why.
Yeah, I know why.
It's because you want to, in a sense, fill the hole of unattractiveness that you felt for so long.
By having guys want you, right?
That was very true at first, but now I've just been really sad.
I haven't wanted many of them around me recently.
When did you last date?
May.
Okay.
But that was it to some degree, right?
I mean, after feeling unattractive, you get drunk on sexual market value power, right?
Oh yeah.
At first it was like having a superpower.
I really liked it.
Now I kind of don't.
Right.
Right.
But your father would have interfered with that process, right?
Which one in particular?
The process of like, if you want to go out and milk your sexual market value because you're more attractive now, Or you've gone sort of ugly ducked into swan thing, then your father would have pushed back against that process and wouldn't have allowed you to feed your wounded ego with male attention or would have discouraged it because he would have pushed back against these guys, right?
Yes.
If he knew exactly what I was doing when I was doing it, then yes.
So you used men to make up for your history, right?
Yes, unfortunately.
Right.
I mean, no, and you talked about feeling like an object, like the guy who would, you said, show you off in a weird way to his friends, right?
So you've got a guy there who's using you to boost his ego because you're attractive, and you're using, particularly the pretty boys, you're using the men to make up for feeling unattractive when you were younger, right?
Oh, yeah.
It's revenge.
Kind of, yeah.
Is that right?
Yes.
Stop doing that.
I know you have.
Don't ever do that again.
Don't ever do that again.
Because it makes you extremely vulnerable.
When you use people, you will get used.
If you look at other people as emotional crutches, as stuffing to put in the hole of bad things in your history, you're using them like you would use a tourniquet to tie a wound.
You're using them as objects, as ego Slaves to your own insecurities, and if you go out in the world with the attitude that you deserve to use people because you've been hurt, they will use you back.
That's the transaction that goes on under the table.
So you're using the men, and then they use you back as sexual objects, as ego, as film subjects, whatever it is, right?
Ego gratifications.
Yes.
And because, you know, I can guarantee you that some of these guys couldn't get a woman as attractive as you, and then when you'll date them, they're in over their head.
They know that their sexual market value doesn't meet yours, and therefore they erupt in jealousy.
Because they don't feel they can keep you because their sexual market value insecurities are too high to believe that you will continue to find them attractive.
And so they imagine that you're wanting to be with their friends or you're gonna be unfaithful or whatever, which of course then it's a self-fulfilling prophecy, right?
They drive you away anyway.
Yeah.
Right.
So they're using you as the cheerleader they couldn't get in high school, but they can't maintain it because they don't have the confidence.
I mean, a confident man has no problem dating a very attractive woman because he's confident, right?
I mean, they're in over their head.
They've got fraud, frauditis, I call it, which is where you feel like you just are, you've been promoted too high above your capacities or you're kind of like an imposter.
You know, like, I mean, if I woke up tomorrow with a knife and Gloves over a surgeon's table cutting someone open, I'd be like, oh no, you can't do this, right?
I mean, and so if they're thrilled to be dating the kind of girl they couldn't get in high school, then there's going to be blowback because they're using you to staunch their wounded vanity just as you're using them to staunch your wounded vanity when you were younger, right?
Yes.
All right.
Don't do that.
Don't do that.
It's bad for them, but most importantly, it's bad for you.
You should not approach interactions with others as if they're livestock or utility or cutlery or something to be used to serve your needs alone.
Then this mutual exploitation will escalate until disaster occurs.
So I just want to put that in very, very bluntly, not just for you, but for others.
Okay.
Everybody has their battle scars from the teenage years.
Everybody has...
And the people who have very high sexual market value...
Oh, how much should I reveal?
All right.
So the people who have very high sexual market value, we all think they've got it so easy, they've got it so great, and we wish we were them, and so on.
It's not...
That's not real.
There was...
There was...
I am self-editing here for important reasons.
So there was a girl in my junior high school.
She was the bee's knees, I guess you could say.
Yeah.
And I asked her out.
I did.
My reach may have gotten a bit farther than my grasp.
But yeah, I asked her to go To go swimming.
Because I was a really great diver.
I was on the swim team and that was my cave of competence.
And yeah, she just turned to me and said, would you like to go swimming?
No, I said, would you like to go swimming?
And she turned and looked at me and said, with who?
Mayday, mayday.
We've lost engine four and there are no parachutes.
And you just know it's not going to go well after that.
So the funny thing is, years later I ran into her at a party.
She seemed kinda sad, and I didn't mention the dating or anything like that, but I did, you know, mention how popular she was in junior high school, and she's like, yeah, I never got that back.
Never got that back.
And it's not easy for the people you know now, because when you're that attractive or that, when your sexual market value is that high, Everybody knows deep down that whoever wants to date you doesn't want to date you for you because you have such a wonderful personality and such a hearty laugh and such a great sense of humor, right?
It's the eggs, right?
And it's the boobs or the butt or the cheekbones or the hair or whatever it's going to be, right?
It's the thing around you, not you, right?
Mm-hmm.
Not at all about that, no.
I'm not telling you anything you don't know, but I also wanted to remind people that Like, cause you went through a lot of people fantasize, right?
A lot of people fantasize about this.
Oh, you know, this summer, right?
You leave school in what?
June, right?
You leave school in June and you say, oh man, this summer, you know what I'm gonna do?
I'm gonna work out like crazy.
I'm gonna get lots of sun.
I'm gonna get a tan.
I'm gonna get ripped.
I'm gonna get cut.
I'm gonna get chiseled.
And I'm gonna go back and I'm gonna rule this place.
I'm going to walk down the hallway past these cheesy weird colored lockers and butterflies and birds and petals are going to follow in my wake and people will swoon.
I will generate a whirlwind of impotent lust around me as I carve my way through these teenage jungles of hormones and lust.
I shall stand out.
I shall be the after picture in the back of the celebrity magazine.
I will be different.
That's exactly what I wanted.
You got what you wanted, and it sucked, right?
It came after high school, so...
It still sucks, right?
Yeah.
Be careful what you wish for, everyone.
You just might get it.
Oh, yeah.
No, we've all had that.
All had that thought.
I actually went through...
I wrote about this in The God of Atheists, my novel, available at freedomainradio.com.
But I actually went through one of these makeovers.
I won't sort of get into the details, but I got great clothes and a great haircut after getting like, I had these bangs.
My mom used to cut my hair sometimes with pinking shears.
Do you know what those are?
I don't.
Well, it's a new generation.
Why would you?
So pinking shears, I don't know if you've ever seen those scissors and they've got like Little tight diagonal up and downy lines.
They look like, you know, the awning that is over an Italian cafe with those little up and down, like zigzag things.
So she would cut my hair with like zigzag awning.
I mean, I literally look like I've been attacked by cormorants.
And...
Anyway, so I got, an influence came into my life, and I got a great haircut, and I went and got cool clothes, and I started listening to cool music, and I started going to nightclubs, and I had a total, like, when I went in, literally, like, this happened on a weekend, not the nightclub thing that was later, it happened on a weekend, and I went into school, I could not figure out why nobody was talking to me.
My friends were completely ignoring me.
I thought that, oh, do I look good or look better, and now nobody wants to talk to me?
Nobody knew who I was.
What?
Everyone thought I was the new kid.
I had gel, believe it or not.
I needed it.
I had this big aha pompadour.
This was big in the 80s, right?
And I had one of these cool Sting army jackets and I just look good.
I look in the pictures back then and I'm like, damn, I look good.
It's the old saying, you never know how good you look until years down the road.
You look back at the pictures and you're like, Damn, I look good.
Damn!
And I went to nightclubs.
I learned how to dance and how to pick up girls and all that.
And I remember this was sort of towards the end of high school.
There were some kids who'd been kind of mean to me in the past.
I was never really bullied or anything like that.
I was too funny and too quick on my feet for anything like that.
I remember after I started going to clubs, I was like 16 or 17 or something like that.
And after I've been going to clubs for a little while, this is back when high school used to last till 18, back down to grade 12.
And back then you'd go to grade 13, because you know, what's an extra year of your life in the hellhole of government school?
And some of the kids who had been, you know, kind of mean to me in the past, And I was pretty popular.
I mean, not Alice Cooper style popular.
It was pretty popular in high school.
I had a great circle of friends and never wanted for social contact or anything like that.
But you know, there were a couple of kids who were kind of mean.
Anyway, so these kids, I used to go to a nightclub called Nuts and Bolts.
Yeah, very subtle.
Took me a little while to get it too.
They used to play these videos of like macabre horror movies while everyone was out on the dance floor, grooving to Pet Shop Boys and stuff like that.
But anyway, I was in this nightclub and these kids from high school came in and you could tell, like you know the tourists, right?
This is their first time in a nightclub.
And I was dancing with some attractive woman.
And I, you know, to be fair, I can bust the odd move or two.
I knew what I was doing out there in the dance floor.
I'd been doing this for a year or two by this point.
And I just remember looking across at their faces and they're like, they did not...
They didn't process that it was me out there on the dance floor, but I used to love going to dance clubs.
I went for years.
Oh, fantastic.
But, and, you know, I didn't, I'm not, I'm not a pickup artist that way.
I was like, oh, let's go sleep with someone.
But, you know, I liked asking girls to dance and we'd chat.
Sometimes occasionally we'd exchange phone numbers, but it usually never really led anywhere.
But I just love to dance and it was just a great time.
But I just remember that I had that kind of, not quite anything as, as, Physically transformative as yours, but I went from, you know, sort of bland boy to hot man, like in the space of a weekend, and nobody knew who I was.
I mean, I was like a ghost in my own high school.
And I remember being in a play.
I was in a play, and one of the girls who was in the play got really drunk, and at some point, She was so drunk, she came over to me and she said, Steph, Steph, you're gorgeous, but you flirt with everyone.
And I just, I once remembered that as just, you know, in vino veritas, right?
Like in wine there is truth, that you kind of get these things.
And when you go from, in a sense, zero to hero in the sexual market value land, it is a drug.
It's like a drug.
Is that fair to say?
Yes, definitely.
Right, right.
And like a drug, you'll use people to get it, right?
Yes, I unfortunately stepped on a few people.
Well, you dressed for it too, and you gave off the signals and all that, right?
Crazy has a homing beacon.
Like crazy people, like sonar.
You know, you don't know how the bats are flying in the dark.
But they get where they need to go.
And it's important to understand that if you're using people, you put off this bing, the sonar goes off.
I'm a user.
I need you.
I'm dehumanizing you.
I'm using you as an ego stuffing.
I'm using you as a crutch.
I'm using you to make up for rejection in the past.
And that goes out like...
And people pick up on it.
And they're...
Mutual utility.
Mutual utility.
Excellent.
Excellent.
We can get into the dry goods business of packaging each other to make up for our histories.
And you can see this.
I mean, you know, one of the great and instructive tragedies.
This is before your time, but for those who are past your age group, and you may know a little bit about these, but of course there's Princess Diana.
Out of relative obscurity, this...
Very physically attractive woman with this, you know, I don't know, this Australian outback whirlpool of blondish hair.
You know, she got the prints and it just turned into a nightmare.
You know, she threw herself downstairs.
She had bulimic and ended up being passed around from celebrity to celebrity on this downward slope of nightmarish God knows what, right?
Ended up dying like a dog in a tunnel trying to escape the photographers who were her living.
And Madonna.
I mean, Madonna, I mean, Camille Paglia says she had like the most, one of the most photogenic faces of the 80s and 90s and all.
I mean, I never found her that attractive.
She's always had that kind of, there's a line from a Tom Wolfe novel about the Italian American girls being resolutely anti-intellectual and unbelievably hot.
And I remember from Madonna, she did a movie called Truth or Dare, I think she was dating Warren Beatty, and she goes to a doctor because she's having problems with her voice, you know, big singing problems with the voice, as always happens, with people on tour, usually.
And Warren Beatty's like, well, why are you, this is like, why you have cameras?
You're meeting with a doctor, this is your livelihood, this is your voice, this is serious business.
And the doctor says, I don't know, well, maybe she just wants to be on camera.
Maybe that's what she likes.
And he's like, she doesn't even want to live when the camera's off.
She doesn't want to live off camera.
And, you know, that didn't obviously work out very well.
She apparently had a pretty tumultuous relationship with Sean Penn.
I think some of that may be overblown, but it probably wasn't that great given what's known about him.
But, you know, Madonna, I mean, she was in, you know, famous movies.
She was Eva Peron.
Don't cry for me, Argentina.
And...
Now, you know, she's having god-awful messes with her son, who apparently doesn't want to see her and doesn't want to go on tour with her.
And they were going to court trying to get him to leave Guy Ritchie, her ex-husband, and be dragged across, I think, by force across the Atlantic to be with her.
And, you know, she tweeted these horrible pictures of Women sitting on men's faces talking about her ex-husband and she's half drunk and now her sexual market value is declining significantly.
So naturally she's complaining about objectification.
Why?
Because it's not working for her anymore.
She's getting kind of whistened and knowing how to age gracefully seems to be something that a lot of starlets have lost or a lot of famous people have lost.
And yeah, she was offering to blow guys who vote for Hillary Clinton.
And she said, yeah, good blowjobs.
You know, lots of eye contact.
I'm right in there.
And drunken mess on TMZ, just, you know, drunk on stage, apparently, when she's doing shows.
And it's horrible.
You know, she's a very intelligent woman.
I think she tested genius level IQ. I mean, she's a very, very intelligent woman.
But this is what happens.
I actually read her biography many, many years ago, so I won't sort of get into more details because it's a very interesting story.
But it's a mess.
You know, we, you know, this woman who had a very, I mean, I had gay roommates once who had this book and I flipped through it.
It's a very sort of deviant, erotic book called Sex.
I can't remember what it was about.
Woodfinches, I think.
Oh, there was wood involved.
Anyway, and so she's all about the sexual market value and what has it done for her?
She's now alone.
She is unable to pull the trick, right?
This is what Blanche Dubois says.
You know, I don't know how much longer I can pull off the trick, the trick, the magic of having a man lose his reason because of my physical charms.
And It is a mess.
She's now alone, divorced.
Her son at least doesn't want to see her.
I think her daughter is pretty embarrassed by her.
And she's now, of course, desperately trying to virtue signal about the exploitation of women.
Oh, women get so exploited in the music industry.
Yeah, right.
You're right.
Look at the top five earners in the music industry.
Four out of the five are women.
Oh yeah, so exploited.
Because women can shake their asses and get eyeballs, which men generally can't.
I mean, I've seen Ed Sheeran.
He needs a good Sheeran.
Sheeran?
I don't know what his name is anyway.
Man, get a haircut for God's sakes.
You look like a slowly exploding orange.
Anyway.
Or Donald Trump holding in a sneeze.
But...
It is a mess.
You know, I mean, it's like you suddenly make...
Somebody just suddenly hands you $20 million.
And now, why do people want to hang with you?
You don't know.
So the loneliness that we attempt to assuage by vampiring off other people's attention, right?
You would deny it attention because of low sexual market value.
And part of you is angry at that.
I understand that.
I really understand that.
But you understand why sexual market value and why physical attraction exists.
It's to make more people.
It's to make babies.
It's to cement families together.
It's to make the pair bond set in stone.
So that we stay together and raise our children and raise our grandchildren together.
That's what sexual attraction is all about.
It's not to serve your wounded ego because you had no boobs and a pizza face.
And I'm sorry for those things.
I'm very sorry.
But that's not why the primal power of sexual attraction exists.
It is not a toy to be used to repair your bruised ego.
Right?
Correct.
So...
You were rejected in the past, right?
And now you're attracted to a man who is rejecting you in the present, right?
Yes.
You see the pattern, right?
Your father is emotionally distant.
You say he's not emotionally unavailable.
My particular amateur opinion is everything you described screams emotional unavailability to me, but fine.
He is emotionally distant, right?
Yes, in a way.
Because you can't figure out what's going on in his mind.
Maybe it's deep thinking.
I don't know.
I don't know the guy.
But if you're not comfortable having a solid and direct connection with a man, maybe because of your father, maybe because of Low sexual market value or almost anti-sexual market value when you were younger.
If you're not used to having a sort of direct connection with a man, where sexuality is the icing on the cake, but isn't the cake.
Or rather, sexuality is the dessert of intimacy.
You can't live on dessert, not for long.
Then the question is, what would life be like for you if there was a good man who liked you for who you were?
It wasn't complicated.
They weren't weird.
They weren't drug dealers.
They weren't having friends filming you having sex.
They weren't jealous of your friend.
They weren't a stalker.
They weren't just a nice, normal guy who liked you for who you were.
What would that be like for you?
Well, we'd probably still be together.
It wouldn't have ended badly, I don't think.
Because, I mean, that's just what I've been looking for.
I'm sorry, go ahead.
Sorry?
I said that's just what I've been looking for.
Well, are you willing to broker up your boobies to get that?
In other words, are you willing to not use your sexual attraction to get a guy's attention?
Yeah, I've been trying to do that a lot more.
That's important.
You know, if you want, because, you know, if you have a lot of money, The temptation is you can always get people's attention by spending money on them.
You can always get people to hang out with you if you offer to take them out and pay for them, right?
Yes.
But are you willing to pretend you're poor to gain the real riches?
Are you willing to not use your physical attraction or your physical attractiveness to get a man's attention?
Are you willing to rely on your personality?
I am willing to, but I know it's going to be hard because I'm not very social, so projecting my personality is very difficult.
I'm willing to do it, but I know it's going to be very hard for me.
And you mentioned that at the very beginning of the call, which was that you are not social.
Are you an only child?
No, I have younger siblings.
Right.
And when you were growing up, what was it about you that was not social or why?
Were you shy because of the acne?
No.
I've always not been talkative.
Even when I was an infant, I didn't make a noise unless I wanted food or I shit myself or something.
My parents even took me to go see if I was autistic and I'm just quiet.
I don't know.
Do you feel quiet in this conversation?
I'm sorry?
Do you feel quiet in this conversation?
I know I just had a big, long speech, so I apologize for all of that, but do you feel, like, quiet in this conversation?
No.
It's different when it's, like, one-on-one, and then, for some reason, when I can't see the person, it makes it easier, because, like, eye contact makes me nervous, so...
It could be overwhelming, right, in terms of, like, you can...
Have your thoughts without the eye contact.
I understand that.
Because I don't think you've had any difficulties in this conversation whatsoever.
And we've been talking about some fairly challenging stuff.
Is that fair to say?
Yes.
So...
Do you think you're interesting as a person?
I'm interesting in the way that like that weird chick who doesn't talk is interesting.
If I am able to project my personality, then I think I am pretty interesting, but I just normally don't project my personality.
And what do you mean by project your personality?
It sounds like protect almost, but what do you mean by project?
I don't...
I have a hard time just, like, opening up and, like...
A lot of times I'm talking, I'll just, like, I'll, like, stutter a lot, or, like, I'll get all sweaty, and, like, I just, I won't be able to, like, think of words to say.
I don't know.
Have you felt that during this conversation?
A little bit.
During, like, the nerve-wracking parts when I was talking about, like, the guys.
Those are the best parts!
Right, right, right.
Right.
And what is the cost for you of projecting your personality or rather...
Yeah, what's the cost?
What is the benefit for you of not projecting your personality?
It's kind of...
It's like, you know how water always kind of seeks its lowest point?
It's kind of like that.
It's like a habit and then it's kind of like protection and it's easy.
It's just easy to do what I always do.
It's really hard for me to open up and then...
There's like rejection and stuff.
I don't want to be rejected for my weird personality.
And what's weird about your personality?
Because you have all of these judgments that I don't like, frankly.
Because they indicate a conclusion rather than a curiosity.
If you have already judged yourself as weird, you are going to invite people into your life to judge you the same way.
Because people who disagree with you will accept that you know yourself better Than they do.
I don't accept this about you.
I don't accept this about you, that you can be summed up in one syllable word that is actually negative.
What is weird about your personality?
It's a lot of the things that I'm into.
Like not as many people are into it.
Unless I go online.
You mean like philosophy?
Yeah.
Am I weird because I'm into philosophy?
No.
Am I weird because I like video games?
Am I weird because I like 19th century novels?
Am I weird because...
I mean, everybody's into stuff.
If you have a personality, you're into things that aren't common.
I mean, is it better to be into what everyone else is in?
Then you kind of don't exist either.
I don't know.
So what is weird?
What is weird about you?
I don't see it.
It's also a lot to do with like...
Being socially anxious.
That makes me weird because most people don't stutter when they're talking to people like that.
I don't know.
There's just been this theme of solitude that's followed me my whole life somehow.
This what?
There's been this theme of solitude that's followed me my whole life somehow.
Right.
When you're home, do your parents ask you questions about yourself that matter or persist?
Rather, you know, not like sort of how was your day or, but you know, like more questions.
I mean, like, do you have these kinds of questions?
I'm not saying like I do, because everyone's different, but do you have this kind of curiosity around you, about you?
No.
They just ask me if I've done something that I'm not supposed to.
That's really what they ask me.
Like, did you leave the door unlocked?
Those are the questions they ask me.
You've got to listen back to that.
That was like a no perfect imitation of a mom.
No, seriously.
When people slip into parents, it's like, boom.
Boom.
All right, so who asks you questions?
You say you're into self-knowledge.
Is there anyone in your life who asks you questions about why...
You think the way you think, and who challenges your assumptions about being weird or whether you have anything in common with this long-haired guy who works a lot, this guy in the middle of the town.
Is there someone in your life who asks you these kinds of questions?
Yes.
Okay.
Friends?
I really want to have one other friend right now, unfortunately, besides him.
Well, it's not unfortunate that if it's a real friend, that's more than a lot of people get.
And does your friend think that you're weird?
Well, she doesn't think I'm, like, weird.
I mean, she knows I'm different, but she doesn't see it in, like, a negative connotation.
Like, she'll say that I'm weird, but, you know, like, she's, you know, there's no negative attachment.
She's like, yeah, well, you know, that's her.
That's her personality.
There's no negative attachment to her.
I mean, when she says it.
Just different, right?
Not running the mill.
Yeah, exactly.
Okay.
Right.
Okay.
So who's called you weird that this is what sticks for you?
It's hard for me to think of the first person.
It's just I've always been called weird.
I don't know.
But was there anyone in your family?
Oh, yeah.
Some people in my family have just called...
They'll say what I'm doing is weird, especially.
I'm into weird things, and I do weird things.
Right.
Right.
That's not friendly.
That's not loving.
Especially in the family, because your family has a lot to do with who you are, right?
Mm-hmm.
Not everything.
I mean, there's innate stuff for sure, but...
You know, I mean, to some degree, the parents are the sculptors of the children, and if I think there's something wrong with the sculpture I've made, I don't blame the sculpture.
I mean, I've got a chisel and a hammer.
What the hell did I do, right?
That's true.
That's whenever they call me weird.
They're just like, we didn't arrange you to be like this.
That's when the weird comes out.
They had an image in mind, and they're trying to sculpt me, and I guess I didn't fit.
No, I guess.
You know, it's funny, yeah.
Yeah, and it's...
Sorry, go ahead.
No, I wasn't going to say anything after that.
Well, it's kind of funny because if you were, you know, if you'd won some trophy or you'd become some internationally, or if you become some internationally-reliant scholar or business person or whatever, the parents don't say, well, we didn't raise you to be like that.
In other words, it's a great gig because you take credit for all the great stuff and you can disavow and withdraw yourself from all the stuff you perceive to be negative.
It's a great gig.
If you win, I'm a great parent.
If you lose, well, I didn't have anything to do with it.
That was all you.
I mean, it's not a very positive or inspiring approach to take.
So, here's the thing.
I do not think This is the guy for you.
This guy in the next town who we talked about.
You need someone available.
The last thing we want to do is reproduce that which has hurt us in the past.
I call it Simon the Boxer.
I talk about it in my free book, Real Time Relationships, at freedomainradio.com slash free.
And there is a repetition compulsion for trauma, I think, sometimes.
And if you are used to being rejected, if you're used to feeling solitary, this guy is not going to help you with feelings of solitude, is he?
He kind of has.
He's been helping me be more social.
He's been giving me tips and stuff.
But he's not emotionally available to you in the way that you want him.
Oh yeah, that's true.
He's not.
So he's not going to help you with loneliness or solitude in the long run.
But you are, sadly, practicing the skills of distance you've developed your whole life for one reason or another, right?
Yes.
You're good at solitude, right?
That's your cave, right?
And so I'm concerned that if you're in a relationship with a guy who's not available and who's traumatized by crazy exes and so on, and if you're with someone who does not know why he makes solitude, Bad decisions in who he dates.
It's kind of a compliment to you that he's not dating you when you look at the other girls he's dated, right?
Yes.
But you need to figure out, and I don't think you know this yet, but in my opinion, you need to figure out why you're choosing the guys you're going out with.
I don't know the answer to that.
I mean, I would first of all look at your relationship with your parents and other significant factors in your life, maybe.
Your relationship with religiosity, where it is now and where it was when you were growing up.
But I don't think you know why you're choosing the men that you're choosing.
I think you're smart enough that if it's pointed out to you, you will See it, but it's really hard.
For you, for me, for everyone, it's really hard to see ourselves in the mirror.
We can sort of catch ourselves sometimes in peripheral vision turning quickly, but it's really hard to see ourselves in the mirror.
Like in the same way it's hard to see your own eyeball without a mirror because that's what you're using to look through.
So it's hard to see ourselves.
But I think this question of why he chose crazy women and why you chose crazy guys, to use as nice a phrase as I can, until that question is answered, And really answer it.
Like you know.
And know how to change it.
And can change it.
And have changed it to a significant degree.
Until all of that is done.
In my opinion.
And it's just my opinion.
It's very risky.
To date.
I think that you're going to.
My guess would be that if you keep dating.
You're going to continue to.
Get your heart broken.
I don't want that for you.
Guys I want when you become a mom.
If you choose to become a mom.
I want your heart to be open, rich, full of love and security and contentment, self-regard, love, happiness, so that your children can have a feast where it seems like you were raised with a famine.
What do you think?
I think that's a pretty good assessment.
I don't know if I'm going to be able to let go of the affections of this guy very quickly, but I think all of your points are valid.
Nothing you're saying is coming out of left field.
I'm tracking what you're saying.
And what do you feel?
Uh, well, there's a lot I have to, I have to think about.
Thank you.
I need to figure out what you said.
No, no, no.
I didn't ask you.
Hang on, hang on.
I didn't ask you what you need to figure out.
What did I ask you?
How do you feel?
Oh.
Not what you need to figure out, what you need to think about.
What do you feel right now?
What I feel about them.
No, just what are your feelings right now as we're talking?
Oh, um.
They're kind of hard to, I guess, put in towards...
I don't know.
It's like I've reached this kind of, like, emotional door, and it's like...
You know, everyone has, like...
I don't know the right way to say it.
Everyone has, like, this emotional door.
It's like they open it.
It's like the emotions they stuff in there, and they don't want to look at, like...
Almost like skeletons in the closet or something.
So I'm like right there.
I'm like right in front of that emotional door.
It's just...
Mad, sad, bad, or scared?
Did you say mad or scared?
Mad, sad, bad, or scared?
Kind of sad and like scared.
I don't know.
Those two would be the best.
Right.
Right.
I appreciate that.
I appreciate that.
And listen, I really, really appreciate.
You're very good at conversation.
You really are.
It's a challenging conversation to have, right?
Oh, yeah.
That was not very easy sometimes.
But you did magnificently.
I mean, you'll listen back to this if you're like, I have a problem with conversation.
You haven't stuttered the whole time.
In some of the most challenging questions you've probably ever been asked in your life, not one stutter.
Yeah.
And with Interruptus monologue bot over here too, right?
It's not always the easiest to get a word in edgewise with me either, right?
Yes, but I wanted to know where you were going with what you were talking about.
Right.
Right.
Well, will you let us know how it goes?
Yes.
Although I don't know what...
I don't know...
What an answer would be?
No, just how you're doing.
That's all.
I'm going to sort of push you off into the void like we're sending off some Viking ship with a body in flames to go and take you to the great beyond.
I mean, I like to know in general what happens afterwards, but I hope that you'll keep us posted.
And I really, really do appreciate your openness, your honesty, and everything in this call.
Thank you.
All right.
Thanks, Emil, so much.
Appreciate your time, and let's move on to the next caller.
All right.
Up next, we have Sebastian.
Sebastian wrote in and said, However, the question remains whether it would actually be good of them to cease their teaching in state colleges.
If they did so immediately, the colleges and their students would lose a lot of good lectures, which, if only slightly, helped fight against the leftist narratives.
Moreover, the professors themselves, especially the less accomplished ones, would find themselves in tough financial situations, sacrificing much of their personal income.
How much merit is there in those professors staying in colleges versus leaving them?
That is from Sebastian.
Yo Seb, how you doing?
Well then, hello.
Can you hear me?
Yes.
Okay, that's nice.
Just a small preface, I might not be at my best.
It's 3.43 here o'clock.
Oh, right, right.
Um...
Yeah, I was basically going in the overall direction about how much merit is there, because personally, as I see it, we need to seek an opportunity in this direction.
Of course, it is hypocritical of those people, but like I said, I believe that there is some merit in them teaching in those state colleges.
Well, sure, you can find merit.
I mean, I'm not going to disagree that there are people who are exposed to free market thinking who otherwise might not be exposed to free market thinking, but so what?
I mean, the question is not, is there merit?
The question is, if we're just going to look at utilitarian considerations, is there merit compared to what?
This is not the only avenue.
I mean, you're calling into a show which gets over 100 million views and downloads a year, substantially more than, like, thousands and thousands of times more than I could ever teach directly if I were a college professor.
So you're calling into a show saying that we have to expose people to free market thinking in colleges, but this show exposes people to free market thinking in Not in college.
So, I'm not sure what you...
You understand that I reach a lot more than most universities put together in this area, right?
Yes, I do understand that fact.
However, it is that many people are exposed to different modes of thinking not through voluntary measures, as in people who watch this show, for example.
People who just, you know, want to go to college.
And they do.
So...
Even though you reach many more people, and it is no doubt that some of those professors, should they leave their state colleges, they might actually reach more people.
Many of them wouldn't reach anyone in this way.
They would only reach personal people.
Are you saying they're really bad teachers and nobody would want to listen to them?
No, I'm not saying they are bad teachers.
Oh, so if they're good teachers, then people would want to hear them, right?
What are the odds?
But should they all immediately, say, leave?
Or teaching?
Oh, no, no, no, no.
Hang on.
That's a question of implementation.
We're talking about direction.
If they're good teachers, if they're personable, if they're charismatic, if they're entertaining, if they're engaging, if maybe they're a little funny, and if they have a good ability to synthesize disparate information into digestible chunks for the common person, the common intelligent person, then they'll do far better on the internet than they will.
In the classroom.
I mean, it's going to be a big step up.
Now, if they're bad teachers, if they're bad teachers, then nothing harms a cause more than being incompetently taught.
Right?
So if they're bad teachers, they're actually doing harm to the cause of the free market by explaining it in a way that is bad or annoying or they can't rip out objections or they're not engaging or they're whatever it is, right?
They're doing harm to the transmission of information if they're doing it incompetently.
They won't have any big impact.
The more likely they are to have impact on students, the more likely they are to have impact on the world in a much larger context.
In the perspective of the bad teachers, this is absolutely true.
In the perspective of the good teachers, how many of them do you think would actually succeed?
Because being a good teacher isn't all that you need in order to succeed in the free market.
Well, what do you mean?
I don't know.
Being a good teacher means that people...
Hang on, hang on, hang on.
Hang on, let me finish my sentence.
No, no, hang on.
Hang on.
Let me finish my question before you start answering it.
See, this is why you might be concerned about the free market.
But if they are good teachers, by definition, people value what it is that they have to say.
That's the definition of a good teacher.
People find value in what it is that you're saying.
Where will they go?
That's the point.
Not everyone can start their own teaching...
What was the word?
Venture, like you did, for example.
Why?
Why not?
Because not everyone has business skills.
There are people who can, of course, start something by themselves, and then there are people who are much more prone and fit to be employees.
This is a fact, I believe.
What do you mean?
But they're teachers.
I mean, you need a camera and you need a microphone.
You can get started with a webcam and built-in stuff.
I mean, look at Pat Condell's videos.
I mean, the guy sounds like he's recording himself through an AM radio in 1952.
And he gets hundreds of thousands, if not more.
So there are...
Maybe they have a language specialty.
Maybe they speak Portuguese or Spanish or, I don't know, Urdu, you know, or some African clicking language.
Maybe they can hit that kind of market.
Maybe there's a subspecialty that they can get heavily involved in.
Now, I'll tell you this, I don't succeed in what I do because of my business skills.
I mean, I have business skills out of being an entrepreneur, but it's not because you don't need a lot of business skills to point a camera at yourself, talk intelligently, and ask for money.
That is not very complicated.
This isn't like, I must become the lead in the Bolshoi Ballet.
This is like, can I look at a webcam and speak intelligently and ask people for money and provide a donation link?
You know, it takes you all of 20 minutes to set that up as a whole.
And so I don't think it takes a massive amount of business skills.
I mean, I haven't done marketing in years.
I don't do advertising.
I don't, you know, do any of that.
I don't have product placements.
I don't take ads on my show.
So this is not a big complicated business thing.
This is just point a camera at yourself, speak intelligently, and ask for money.
It's really not that complicated.
And they have way more experience, these teachers, in speaking intelligently Than I did when I started.
Because they've been professors or they've been teachers for many years.
And I hadn't.
I was in IT. And I had never been a, quote, teacher or communicator of ideas in a general format before I started doing it.
So they can, of course, also start part-time.
And they can, as I did, right?
I didn't sort of come up with an idea to record podcasts in my car and then immediately quit my job.
And so you can start part-time and start working your way from there.
Nobody's saying they have to jump off the cliff without a parachute whole hog and hope that they land in someplace soft and squishy.
They have companions.
They can, of course, get into shows where they can get very quick exposure.
I mean, I've helped to start public exposure for a wide variety of people.
I'm enormously pleased at that.
I think it's thrilled.
I hope they vastly outstripped me over time.
You know, you're always grooming for your replacement if you're at all competent in what you do.
So there's lots of different options about what they could do.
And then they will actually be in consistency, like they will be consistent between their words and their deeds, between what they say they value and what they actually do.
Because my concern is that when people hear somebody who claims to be very pro-free market, state-sucking government subsidies and legal protections and not being able to be fired and having their summers off and nice sabbaticals and working, you know, maybe half a dozen hours a week and all of that kind of stuff, you know, this person may be Waxing eloquent about The value of the free market and how important the free market is and how wonderful the free market is.
But you've probably heard that old saying, I'm sorry, I can't hear what you're saying over what you're doing.
So they may be saying, oh, free market, great, free market, great.
And all the students here is, blah, blah, blah.
I like government money.
Free market is really great for other people because if people like me created cell phones, we wouldn't have any cell phones.
And if people like me created cars, all we'd have is Lardos and Matchbox cars.
So free market is great for everyone else.
I want to have nothing to do with it whatsoever.
Hypocrite, hypocrite, hypocrite.
And then what do they think of free market philosophy?
You said quite a lot and I had a few things I wanted to relate to this.
How many of those people would actually have the incentive to start something up by themselves?
It would be much easier for people who are already at least somewhat accustomed to being employees to Join someone else's adventure, and there are barely...
I mean, I don't know for myself, but as far as I know, there are very few, in comparison to the amount of colleges, universities, and so on, there are very few private ventures of this sort.
Of which sort?
Are you saying that there's not that many people trying to monetize their expertise on the internet?
No, there's not that many.
I mean, it's that important.
That's all the internet is.
No, no, no.
There are not that many private schools which are trying to, you know, garner views outside of the governmental paradigm of schooling.
Oh, my God.
I know it's late for you, man.
Did you not hear me talking about a webcam?
I have not mentioned private school whatsoever.
What on earth are you talking about private school for?
Because I believe, but I don't know how much truth is there in it.
If those people were to stop teaching in colleges and so on, they wouldn't all flock to webcams.
Why couldn't they do the webcam thing?
I mean, it's basically doing everything that they've done already.
I mean, they've already been teaching.
They already have years and probably decades, right?
Because they were probably teaching when they were teacher's assistants.
So they probably already have decades of experience synthesizing information and bringing it across in a way that is comprehensible to laypeople.
That's what they've been doing for decades.
So, how could they possibly talk comprehensively about subject matters that they've been talking comprehensively about for decades?
I don't quite understand the objection.
The objection is not that how could they do it.
No, the objection is how would they do it in a completely new environment all at once.
The environment, as in the internet, will instantly get over-saturated with the amount of teaching the I know that, of course, this is the very point of the free market.
If you know anything about economics, then there's, I think it's called Say's Law.
It's that supply creates its own demand.
People didn't know they wanted smartphones until there were smartphones.
So there's not a fixed amount of demand for knowledge in the world.
And everyone who adds to that, well, that's just that much less demand for knowledge in the world.
It's not like I have crowded out other people who might want to come on and talk about philosophy on the internet.
I'm sure there are tons of other shows where people talk about philosophy on the internet.
And, you know, I reach millions of people, but there are Billions of people in the world.
And it's not like people just, oh, well, I've listened to three shows from Stefan Molyneux this week, so I'm not going to listen to any more, right?
I mean, that's not how it goes.
Supply creates its own demand.
If you have a way of synthesizing people's disparate experience into something that is cohesive and meaningful, people will pay through the nose for that.
Because that's what people want out of life.
They want a life that makes sense.
They want a life that has purpose.
They want a life of understanding and of wisdom, of comprehensibility.
Most people, not everyone, most people want that.
And so, if you are genuinely providing value in a classroom where you're speaking to 50 people or 100 people, if you're genuinely providing value, in other words, if you're not ripping people off, So I don't know what the course costs are these days, but let's just say it's $250 for a course.
And let's say that there are 100 people in your course.
So you're providing, let's just say, just in that one course, what is that?
$25,000 worth of value.
Now, either that's real value.
In other words, you genuinely are providing $25,000 worth of value for teaching one course to 100 people or 12,500 if it's 50 people or whatever it's going to be.
If you genuinely are providing that value, then of course you'd want to speak to more people because then you're providing more value and will probably make more money.
May I interrupt?
Or at least the same, right?
But if you're not providing that value, then you're ripping them off and you're doing wrong.
Yeah, go ahead.
You've just made me realize that there was a very basic misconception.
In my understanding of this, which probably was born of the academic environment in Poland, which isn't exactly too good on the internet, considering that the best people usually have maybe 2,000 subscribers.
Regardless, yes, this is absolutely right.
But there's another point in regards to teaching libertarian or free market views in college universities.
What do you think, what do you imagine would happen if these people actually just, you know, gave up their teaching and gave up the jobs and the state colleges would all turn to center and just left, massive left?
Like some of them already are, of course, in the West, but do you think this would speed up the fall of this crooked system?
Oh, absolutely.
Without a doubt.
If the people of intelligence and skill and wisdom If the people who have intelligence, skill, and wisdom left universities, they would be replaced by idiot leftist Marxist proselytizers and sophists and junk merchants.
And then what would happen is the value of your education would decline precipitously to the point where even people of average intelligence, who shouldn't be in college but now are, would get that it's a bad idea and would begin to boycott it, and then you would crash.
This would start riots.
What do you mean?
Riots from who?
This would start riots because considering how much, at least in Poland, the government is focused on trying to make the education system important, but at this point everyone in here at least accepts that the mature eggs and all of those things that you really need are only bits of paper.
But bits of paper which are necessary, regardless of the fact that you don't even know anything out of it.
No, but they're not that necessary.
No, no.
Okay, there are lots of employers who still...
Look, I'll let you talk because clearly you don't want me to talk.
So you go ahead and finish your point and then I'll try and get a word in edgewise.
I'm sorry.
When I'm trying to make a point, just let me make the point.
Now, I know I interrupt people, but that's usually when I don't understand.
So you make your point and then let me make my point.
My point is that After so many years of this sort of education which was forced by state, I'm not speaking from the American paradigm here, after so many years people have grown accustomed to the fact that schools don't teach all too much, but there is a social stigma that you necessarily need those papers because you would need them in a government job, you would need them in a job mandated somewhat through the government, and almost everything is of course controlled in this modern era.
Yeah, so you're saying that it would be more helpful if people, like it would help people get government jobs?
Do you think that's my goal?
No.
It would help people get anything, any job related to government and now even the free market jobs are related to government because of how hard the government regulates the free market.
I don't think it regulates, I don't know about Poland, but I don't think it regulates you talking to a webcam, does it?
And asking for money?
No, but it regulates you, you know, trying to be an electrician or something like this.
But we're not talking about being an electrician, are we?
We're talking about college professors teaching about the free market.
What the fuck are we talking about electricians for?
I kind of shifted here.
Please don't be another person who can never admit that they're wrong and just changes the subject in random ways.
I absolutely get that I was wrong in the beginning.
Okay, so let's not talk about being an electrician.
That's a different kettle of fish.
Oh yeah, in regard of economics, at least.
Well, that was your question, wasn't it?
Yes, yes, yes.
Teaching about free market economics, you can do that in Poland without being thrown in jail for lacking a license.
I think, I don't know, maybe you can't.
I'm sure Turkey would be a problem, but I think that you can talk about free market principles on the webcam and ask for donations in Poland without a government license, I think.
Yes, you absolutely can, but you would not get...
You would not get, what was it?
All about, there would be a boycott coming from the government.
That I am certain of.
What do you mean a boycott?
What does that mean?
Anyone who would not be mandated through governmental schools, so would not go as a professor from the school or something like this, would immediately not be allowed to hold any sort of position related to government.
And soon enough, I guess, they would become licenses even to be an economist.
Wait, I'm sorry, I don't understand.
So you're saying that people who want to be in the free market because they value the free market might not be able to get government jobs if they go into the free market?
Yes, one of the things.
Good!
Because they value the free market, so they shouldn't want to work for the goddamn government anyway, right?
Yeah, but the point I'm trying to get at is that there is a social stigma attached to the idea of being able to work for the force in a heavily… For the what?
…socialistic, so to speak, place.
Sorry, you said there's a social stigma to being able to work for what?
For government.
Yeah, but we're talking about free market people, people who value the free market, people who say the free market is great, the free market is efficient, the free market is quality, voluntary interaction.
What the fuck do they care about people who think you ought to work for the government?
They know better.
That's like saying, well, scientists should really care about the opinions of people in astrology.
It's hard to find anyone who will listen to them because of that.
It's hard to find listeners?
Then they shouldn't be teaching in colleges because they're not providing any value.
They're ripping people off.
If they can't find anybody who's interested in their topic, then they sure as hell shouldn't be taking government money because they're ripping everyone off.
People who will be educated by those people will have it hard to find any jobs.
That is my point.
Because of the people who will be potentially employers, unless they...
But they don't sort of become employers, in which case...
Hang on.
Do you think that I care whether people who listen to me get a raise because they listen to me?
No.
Do you think that's why I'm doing what I'm doing?
That they can then go into their boss's office and say, hey man, I listen to free domain radio.
You better double my salary.
That's not my philosophy.
Philosophy is not now with more money, now with more social approval, now with infinite joy.
It makes your penis bigger.
It makes your boobs bigger if you're a woman.
It's perfect.
It makes your life wonderful.
Your hair will come back.
Your teeth will rotate to be perfect.
Tombstones of milky whiteness.
I mean, the philosophy, all it does is promise you a methodology for pursuing truth.
That's all it does.
I mean, what would the effects are?
I mean, I think that critical thinking and all that will help you in your career, but I've never said, listen to my show and you'll get a job as a, you know, you'll get a raise of a, you know.
I mean, I've always said it.
Yeah, it's going to be difficult.
So what?
I mean, why do you even care?
I mean, of course people who believe in the free market should go practice what they preach and work in the free market.
Of course they should, because they're helping to prop up and legitimize a corrupt system in academia.
But why do you care?
I think I saw my problem here.
It's basically that most people who go into education nowadays do it exactly because they expect a raise.
And few people, unfortunately, comparatively to those who go there for the raise, go there for the education itself.
And that was what I was trying to get at, but then those people in the long run don't matter because in the end, I guess, the market will sort itself out.
And those who don't exactly have any ability but got a raise will eventually be held placed by those who do know what they're doing.
You make what you want in the world.
You don't wait for someone to offer it to you, in general.
You make it.
I mean, do you think that I thought 10 years ago that there was going to be this big giant market for philosophy and that I was going to be listened to 100 million plus times a year?
I mean, I didn't think any of that.
There was no market for what I was doing when I started.
I was one of the first people to start it.
And I worked my ass off.
To make this show the very best that I possibly could.
I have tried to gain some level of layperson expertise in about 6,000 different fields so that I can converse with relative competence with experts in the field.
I have ground through godless amounts of data.
People who've worked with me have ground through godless amounts of facts.
Mike, how are you enjoying it?
Your average presentation that's like 50 pages, five weeks of preparation, and then three days for us to go through it before I screw it up by recording something wrong.
It's a lot of work.
If it wasn't for that work, we wouldn't be succeeding.
I could never have gone to an investor and said, hey man, don't worry, I've done all the market research.
There's a really, really great market for a very radical I'd say, well, no one.
No one at all.
Thank you very much.
And how are you going to advertise?
Oh, I don't think I'm going to advertise.
Well, how are you going to fund it?
I'm going to just ask people for money.
And are you going to sell anything?
No, not really.
A couple of books, but that's just because we can't print the books for free.
What, are you going to write books?
Are you going to sell books?
No.
Are you going to charge anyone for making speeches?
No, not really.
I mean, it would be an insane business model.
I mean, it's challenging enough even now, but it would be an insane business model to have made A decade ago.
It would have been an impossible business model to have made a decade ago, right?
But you just, you follow what you love and you just make other people love it by sheer force of will.
That's what you do.
There's no other option if you want to do anything original.
I see exactly what I was wrong.
So basically I knew how it would go out, but I couldn't visualize it.
I couldn't see it.
I basically know that I should trust more my knowledge than the fact that I just can't see something.
You will produce value and your audience will guide you.
It's not me and a camera.
It's me and a camera and a couple million people over time.
We get so much feedback on this show and I love all of it.
I welcome all of it.
Even the curse words.
It is a conversation.
I'm guiding what I do with reference to the truth, with reference to the audience, with reference to what can be communicated, with reference to available materials.
I mean, there is a lot of...
It's a conversation.
I've always referred to this as a conversation.
And it is, of course, in these kinds of situations, you and I talking, it's a real conversation as a whole.
And so...
This idea that it's just isolated, that's how you start.
But you get into a conversation.
And like everyone, you go to the pizza place and they say, how did you like your pizza?
And should it be anything different?
And you're engaged in the conversation.
You're constantly tweaking what you do to further expand your market without compromising your core principles.
It's not a passive process.
It's an active conversation.
And it's far more engaged and engaging than anything you'd have with students.
You see, when you have students and you hold their grades in your hand, and you hold their academic future in your hand, and you hold their degree in your hand, you can't have an equal relationship with them.
Because you have power over them.
That is going to inevitably distort either their responses or your Responses or your initiation.
Are they going to be able to challenge you?
I mean, we had a guy call in.
A great show.
It's called Trump Derangement Syndrome.
Oh, don't tell me.
I've seen the first 18 minutes, and after that I was like, I'm not going to go through it.
Oh, come on.
Gertrude Lines put on your kryptonite cup.
But no, see, here's the thing.
Imagine, just imagine that I was this guy's political science professor.
Do you think that he would have spoken to me in that tone using that approach?
No!
I love that he was able to do that.
I love the guy for doing that.
I love him for treating me like dirt beneath his shoes because it means then he's not intimidated by me.
I'm not holding power over him.
I'm not...
I can't grant him some benefit or withdraw some benefit from him.
He can be the honest, open asshole that he was.
Beautiful.
Beautiful!
That's what we want in the sharing of knowledge.
I don't want to have this guy, ooh, I really disagree with Steph, but what if he downgrades my mark or gives me a bad mark and I've been spending so much money on this college degree and it wouldn't be terrible?
Bullshit!
There would be little problem with that if we still had the old university model in which bad teachers were actually punished for being bad.
Well sure, but that had a lot to do with the free market as well, right?
The teachers, the professors don't rely that much on students.
Anymore.
And the degree to which they do is the degree to which there's so much propaganda about you have to go to college, which again, for professional degrees where you need to, I can understand.
I mean, I would no more send my child into an arts degree than I would have her work in downtown Beijing these days.
I mean, at least you could wear a mask for the toxic sludge that passes to Chinese air these days, but you can't escape Marxist programming in the arts these days.
No, I love the fact that people can be complete douchebags to me.
How wonderful, how liberating, how honest.
I would hate to have power over them and have them all stifled and tense and knowing that they really disagreed with me but were afraid to say anything.
I mean, it would never be an honest relationship.
I love the fact that I don't have any power over my callers whatsoever, which is why I don't tell people what to do.
Even that influence I don't want.
Sorry, go ahead.
You have the power of arguments.
Yes, but I still have no power over them.
They can hang up anytime they want.
They can completely ignore everything that I'm saying.
They can take to the web and say that they were right and I was wrong.
Beautiful.
Fantastic.
I love the fact.
That nobody is afraid of me.
I think that's fantastic.
I think that's fantastic.
There's a great line.
You know, I'm so thrilled whenever I get to chat with Scott Adams and not use the wrong Douglas Adams.
Anyway, Scott Adams because there's some stuff in his Dilbert comic from years ago that has still Resonates with me.
One is, I think the boss saying, it's never too late to rule by fear.
Or something like, is it too late to rule by fear?
And I've always loved that, you know, that if you have a fairly friendly, it's never too late to rule by fear.
I think I've used that joke with my daughter once or twice and she finds it.
Quite funny.
The other one, which, you know, sometimes when you're facing the world as a whole and trying to bring reason and evidence to people, some people like it, and it seems like it misses the mark on a lot of people.
And there was a presentation that Dilbert was giving, which I read years ago, and people were just interrupting him and making fun of him and things went wrong.
Just in the end, he said, and in conclusion, I hate you all.
I just thought that was hilarious.
I think we've all been there from time to time.
It's not very common for me, but I'll turn this over to Mike.
No, I'm just kidding.
Yeah, right.
Mike, you were saying I don't even tell you what to do, right?
Not really, no.
Hey, Steph, I'm going to work on this today.
Good, good.
I don't know.
Basically my question.
Mike and I will occasionally play, well, my presentation did better than your presentation, but it's okay because we'll switch next month for reasons we can't ever possibly figure out.
Okay, so if I can say it, basically my question has been answered perfectly well.
But there's one more thing if I could.
The guy in the first conversation said that it is the intent of an action that decides whether it is moral, whether it breaks an AP or not, right?
And he came to that conclusion, and I think he wouldn't come to that conclusion if you told him something a bit earlier when you related to a surgeon, for example, saving somebody.
You said that because the surgeon will save the guy, this is not breaking the NAP. You should underline, I believe, that it is not the intent that matters, but the ability of the guy to save him.
He didn't hear that it was the ability itself.
The circumcision doesn't have any ability to save anyone from anything.
It doesn't help in any way.
It has no ability.
Meanwhile, operating on the brain by a surgeon does have quite a lot of ability.
Right, right.
I mean, another example, just about everyone has a cell phone these days, and if you saw someone in trouble and you didn't call, you could, right?
I mean, there's lots of different ways you could put it, but no, that's a good point.
All right, well, thanks very much for the call.
I wish you good luck in your free market ventures.
Let us know if you ever get a web channel going, and we'll do what we can to help get the word out.
Thank you so much, and thank you everyone so much for calling in.
Always a great and glorious pleasure to chat with Yowl.
And please don't forget, now that it is the current new year, 2017, still feels like science fiction to me.
My daughter has no idea what I'm talking about, but that's because she doesn't know 19 anything.
But please drop by freedomainradio.com slash donate to help out the show.
Massively, massively appreciated.
And follow me on Twitter at Stefan Molyneux.
Please do your shopping at fdrurl.com slash Amazon.
And last but not least, don't forget to share fdrpodcast.com.
