All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 14, 2025 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
21:02
Is This 'Gentle Parenting'? Social Media Review
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Yo, good morning everybody, it's Stefan Molyneux from Free Domain, and this is interesting.
This is, and you don't see a lot of this kind of stuff, but this is a severe apology, sorry, severe, sincere apology to the unvaxxed.
This message is for the unvaxxed.
Thank you.
I got double vaxxed, and I even pushed friends and family to get vaxxed too.
I was under the impression that the government had our best interests in mind.
And, you know, there was only one person in the place that I work that refused to get the, you know what, and let go because of it.
And everybody the whole time was like, just do it.
You know, they're not going to put it out there if it's not safe.
I call them selfish.
Uncaring, whatever.
And this is a funny thing.
I mean, a pretty tragic thing, of course.
But this was a test of just, I mean, honestly, basic reasoning.
And it really just, the whole COVID thing helped me understand just how bad people were at thinking.
And, of course, the government doesn't teach you how to think.
And the media doesn't teach you how to think.
They just...
Inject you with prejudice, fear, and conformity.
But, you know, when they've tested a particular novel intervention for only a couple of months, they can't possibly know the long-term effects.
It's not a matter of motivation.
Well, the government wanted this, the government wanted that.
It's just a matter of you can't shorten time.
I mean, you can't shorten time.
And again, I said this.
Way back in the day that the average vaccine takes 10 years to develop and has a 94% failure rate.
So if they say they can do it in a couple of months, I just need to know what steps they skipped.
And just tell me what steps they skipped.
And of course, if they were fully confident that it was safe and effective, they wouldn't have said to the manufacturers, you get a removal of liability for all negative effects.
I have to divine the minds of the people behind it and try and figure out their hidden motivations.
This was just basic facts, right?
This was just basic facts.
If you get a bunch of contractors who say, oh, I can, let's say, put in a basement.
I can put in a finished basement for you, right?
And all of the contractors say it's going to take Six months, and it's going to cost you $150,000.
It's going to be six months, and it's going to cost you $150,000.
And then one contractor comes along and says, I can do it in three and a half days for $50.
I mean, you'd have some questions, right?
And everybody knows, of course, that medical interventions take a long time to test in terms of safety and so on.
And of course, the fact that they didn't want to release the data of the testing until they were forced to by a judge, they wanted to wait for 75 years or something like that, right?
So this wasn't a matter of, well, I didn't quite know what the government had in terms of, you know, wanting the best for us and so on.
And yeah, I'm sure that there were many people who wanted it to work, who wanted the best, who were genuinely scared of COVID, who felt it was like, so defining motivations is a form of mysticism.
I mean, I've been pushing back on people on the show for like 20 years about this.
Defining people's intentions is just a form of mysticism.
Thank you.
And it's not a matter of mind-reading the people in charge.
It's just a matter of looking at the basic facts.
I don't know where this modern thing has come from.
I think it's just kind of an excuse where somebody says, well, I thought so-and-so had the best intentions.
Turns out they didn't.
of avoiding the real issue.
Because you can always forgive yourself for failing to divine the intentions of others because we are not psychic.
We cannot enter into other people's minds.
Some people can be very cunning lighter.
So I think it's just a way of avoiding these issues.
And I think it's...
A way of avoiding your own culpability, right?
So when everyone's like, hey man, just get it, just do it, just get it, just do it.
Well, you know, we were kind of all raised to not do that, right?
If everyone jumped off the Brooklyn Bridge, would you do that too?
Think for yourself, right?
Going along with the crowd was never something that was encouraged, at least when I was a kid.
I'm sure it's the same now, right?
Well, why did you do this stupid thing?
Well, all the other kids were doing it.
It's like, well, that's not a good enough reason, right?
So, yeah, I just wanted to point out that This is still a cope, right?
My level of sympathy is tough, right?
It's tough to have sympathy for people who were kind of cheering on your losses of freedom, right?
It's kind of tough to have sympathy for that.
But there's still a cope here, right?
What he needs to say, in my humble opinion, right?
What he needs to say is, I did not think it through.
I went to the crowd.
I didn't even try to think it through.
I didn't read any counter-arguments.
I am 100% responsible for this.
Not, well, I had this impression of what people wanted, the good for me and so on, but it turns out it was incorrect.
And that is still a cup, right?
Absolutely taking 100% responsibility for your choices is really, really tough for people.
There's always an, and I have the same issue, right?
I mean, this is not, you know, nobody's immune, right?
At least I don't think.
I'm certainly not immune.
But the act of taking 100% and saying, well, it wasn't that I failed to divine the hidden motives of others.
It's that I just didn't think it through among the crowd.
And if you really want to get down and dirty and really honest with it, I liked being with the in-group and I liked attacking those.
Deemed to be selfish, bad, and enemies.
I liked running with the in-group.
I liked being with the cool kids.
And I got a little bit of a thrill out of attacking others for not going along.
That's the level of honesty that I think is needed for people to really heal this stuff.
But it's not about to come.
Rachel Wilson is a great Twitterer.
This is kind of true, right?
I've been noticing this for decades, right?
So she writes, you cannot talk sense into young girls who are acting insane because if they are even mildly attractive, the simp industrial complex will not allow.
They will form a barricade, build a wall, and dig a moat to make sure that you can't reach these girls.
The internet has not only caused a 304 epidemic, it has also caused a simp epidemic.
So simp is...
A man who sells vanity and money and a lack of consequences to a woman in return for romantic or sexual attention.
Oh, it wasn't your fault.
Oh, he was just a bad guy.
He aligns himself with the woman's excuses in order to get sexual attention.
So look at this.
So this is a kid who had a conflict with his mother.
No yell at mommy.
Ever.
You understand me?
You also slammed the door, didn't you?
Okay.
Would you have slammed the door if I was home?
Okay.
So, you yelled at mommy and slammed the door.
So, peaceful parenting is, of course, that behavior is not good.
And this kid is, what, four?
Maybe four and a half?
Kids have different growth rates at this age, but this is a very little kid, right?
This is a very little kid.
And I'm just going to say he's four.
Maybe he's five.
Could be four.
Probably older than three.
Certainly younger than six.
So this is a four-year-old kid who had a conflict with his mother, right?
So the question is, how did the yelling and door slamming arise?
Has the child ever seen...
Yelling and door slamming.
Has he seen it in his own family?
Has he seen it in other people's families?
Has he seen it as his grandparents or aunts or uncles?
Has he seen it if he's gone to daycare or preschool or anything like that?
Has he seen yelling and slamming of doors?
If he has, you can't blame him for it.
If he hasn't, still the behavior is not good, of course.
But the question is, why?
Why did it escalate to this point?
So why did he yell at his mother?
Most likely, he yelled at his mother because he yelled at his mother because his mother wasn't listening.
And his mother wasn't listening, was saying no, and wasn't explaining anything.
And that's the most likely reason as to why he He yelled at his mother.
Frustration at not being listened to, not having things explained, and not understanding what is happening.
So that's the question.
When there's bad behavior on the part of a child, and yes, yelling and door slamming is bad behavior.
I get that.
But when there's bad behavior on the part of a child, then the question is, what is the root cause of it?
Now, you can either try and figure out the root cause, or you can just manage the symptoms and suppress the symptoms, right?
So, if you have some sort of allergy, then you can just, you know, keep chugging some cover-up medicine for it, or you can try and figure out what you're allergic to and change your diet or your exposures or something like that, right?
So, this kid also says, you would have slammed the door if daddy was home, and this is interesting, right?
So, look what happens.
Okay.
Would you have slammed the door if he was home?
So, the kid says yes, right?
And look at the fear in the kid's face, right?
So, this dad is being very intimidating, right?
Obviously, he's not yelling, and he's not standing, he's not looming over, he's not hitting, of course, right?
But he's being very intimidating, right?
This sort of, this deep, dark seriousness stuff that is absolutely unacceptable.
It's totally wrong, right?
In my view, the father is being...
Intimidating.
This isn't just a conversation.
This is an interrogation, right?
This is not a conversation.
What happened before?
What did you feel?
Did mommy listen?
Who yelled first?
You know, just trying to figure out what actually happened.
This is just an interrogation and this is part of the simp army that was being talked about before, right?
Because this person who posted this said this man handled the situation really well.
Gentle parenting.
Is it gentle parenting?
This is intimidating.
If you've ever been on the receiving end of these kinds of lectures as a kid, right?
I mean, the size difference is important.
So, the dad says, if I was home, would you have slammed the door?
Watch.
Would you have slammed the door if you were home?
And the kid knocks.
The kid nods, right?
So, this is, the father did not get the answer that he wanted.
So, what he does is he repeats with a slight escalation of intimidation, he repeats the question.
If it was home, you would have slammed the door.
No, you wouldn't have, but...
Okay, so that's interesting, right?
And a little chilly, right?
Look at this again.
Did you have slammed the door if it was home?
Kid nods.
Yes, I would have slammed the door, right?
So the kid is not answering a question.
The kid is trying to reduce the escalation of the father.
He's trying to escape the situation of intimidation.
Because the kid is not saying anything.
They're not having a conversation.
This is just an interrogation, right?
If I was home, you would have slammed the door.
Right, and so the kid says, because he's not really following, right?
Because he's so young.
So the dad says, in an intimidating fashion, would you have slammed the door if I was home?
The kid nods.
And then the dad repeats, you wouldn't have slammed the door if I was home, would you?
And now the kid doesn't know what to answer, so the dad answers for him.
Doesn't answer?
Right, so then the...
The father then answers for him, right?
Would you slam the door?
Kid says, sure.
And then he says, you would have slammed the door, right?
And then the kid doesn't answer because he doesn't know what to answer because it's not a conversation.
And nobody's asking the kid why he did what he did.
Nobody's getting to the root of the kid's frustration and anger.
So then the father just answers for the kid.
My door.
Okay.
So this is the my house stuff.
This is such a terrible idea as a parent.
Oh my God, I can't even tell you what a terrible idea.
My house, my rules, and so on, right?
So, what the father is saying here to the child, and, you know, a lot of us have heard this over the years, right?
But what the father is saying to the child here is quite simple.
You have no right to live here.
You have no right to live here.
You're not even.
A tenant.
You're not a renter.
You're just here with no rights whatsoever.
My house, my door, and your entire environment is my property, which means you have no right to be here.
You can be kicked out at any time, and so on, right?
Now, children who are told that they have no right to the house that they live in and are there by the whim and grace of the parents get deep insecurity, right?
The child, has a right to the house because the parents voluntarily chose to have kids and brought the child into the house.
It is not the parents' house.
Right?
My daughter's room is her room.
My daughter has a right to live in the house.
It is not my house or my wife's house or both of ours' houses.
It is not that at all.
My daughter has an absolute perfect moral right to the property that she is surrounded by.
It's her house.
She's not a tenant or a surf crasher, a couch crasher or something like that.
So saying it is my daughter and that is why you don't have the right to slam it is not an argument.
It is an assertion of property rights.
And now the kid is sitting there saying, so I have no right to be here.
Even a tenant has rights.
I have no right to be here.
I could be kicked out at any time.
It's my father's house.
And this is, you know, justice is an act of desperation.
So, I mean, I obviously don't know this family, but in these kinds of situations, what usually happens is the mother Is, has done something mean or insensitive or thoughtless.
And, you know, that happens, right?
And then the kid has escalated and rather than have a conversation with the son and try and figure out what happened after she calms down, she goes to her husband and says, this is what your son did.
He was rude to me.
He was mean.
You need to go talk to him.
And she whips the dad up into a frenzy.
And then the dad goes in and is the interrogation heavy.
To aggress against, in a way, I mean, he's not obviously physically aggressing, but to intimidate the child into changing his behavior.
This is the hand puppet.
The mother is angry and the mother then gets the father, the mother gets the father to act after anger.
And this is her form of punishing the child for rebelling.
And look!
Children very often have good reasons to rebel.
They very often have good reasons to rebel.
Okay.
That is my door.
That's not your door.
That's Daddy's door.
You understand me?
So you do not slam my doors.
Not in my house.
Okay?
Okay.
You will respect Mommy more than that.
You will respect Mommy more than that, but okay.
So respect means to...
Take seriously the other person's preferences and thoughts.
Respect means to take seriously the other person's preferences and thoughts.
So, is the child being respected here?
Is this mutual?
In other words, is the father modeling behavior that he will respect in the child?
In other words, if the child decides to, in an intimidating fashion, Interrogate other people and tell them exactly what to do?
Would he approve of that?
Is this behavior universal?
Can the son sit the father down and interrogate him?
Right?
Let's say that the son was given a toy, right?
And the father is careless and breaks the toy.
Does the son get to sit the father down and say, that's my toy.
You will respect my property.
You don't touch my property.
Right?
No, because the father would never submit to that because the father would consider that humiliating and embarrassing.
But the father will do that to the son.
I reason with my daughter.
She's perfectly welcome to reason with me.
In fact, it saved my hide on a couple of occasions.
You know what respect is, right?
Being honest with me.
So it's important to be nice and to respect others.
So is the father modeling being nice and respecting others?
Is the father modeling good conflict resolution or is the father simply intimidating the child by saying, you have no right to be here.
It's my house and here are the orders I'm going to give you.
I get a kind of cop or fireman or sort of physical authority vibe from this father.
You need to be Muslim.
Right.
So if mommy's nice to you, then mommy's nice to you, which means that mommy is always nice to you and you never have any reason to complain because mommy is always perfect, which means that what the child did in terms of yelling and slamming the door is just bad and wrong and mean and so on, right?
So saying that mommy is always nice is not true.
Nobody's always nice.
Good lord.
Being nice to mommy.
Because mommy's nice to you.
Mommy gives you that respect.
So you need to do the same.
You do not yell at mommy.
You do not slam the doors.
You don't yell at mommy.
Right.
So, this is a kid who's just trying to figure out how to minimize the intimidation of his father's interrogation.
He's not learning anything.
And the father's just giving orders.
Right?
There's no curiosity.
There's no trying to understand what the child's motivations are.
There's no trying to understand the...
The causes of the conflict, the roots of the conflict, and so on.
The mother is perfect.
The child is immoral.
The child has no right to be there.
The child is mean.
The child is in the wrong.
There's no curiosity.
It's just a conveyor belt of a fairly intimidating interrogation that the child is just going to nod to and has learned nothing.
I don't think that's good parenting at all.
So, this is just some of my thoughts.
I'm curious what you guys think.
Of all of this.
And have yourself a wonderful day.
Freedomman.com slash donate to help out the show.
Lots of love from up here.
Talk to you soon.
▲
Export Selection