All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 8, 2025 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
46:15
Can Women Appreciate Men? Twitter/X Space
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Good afternoon, friends.
Family, blood, brains of thought.
Nice to chat with you this afternoon.
Had a couple of chunks of spare time and wanted to drop in, see how everyone's doing.
Also, I wanted a little bit of business from my show yesterday, which was, I think I was thinking about this.
I think that I was too harsh and dismissive with the first caller, and I apologize for that.
I won't even make any excuses, the reasons aren't particularly important, but I think I was too harsh and dismissive with the first caller yesterday.
So if you listen to this again, I apologize.
I will take note of that tendency.
I think I know why, but again, the why sounds like an excuse.
So just trust me that I, well, you can trust me, I hope that I will work on being more receptive and open in these particular topics around politics and activism and so on.
So thank you for the patience of the person who had the conversation.
I certainly was won over by the end, but I could have been less skeptical at the beginning.
And I apologize for that.
So what is on your mind?
How can philosophy help you today?
What are your thoughts, questions, comments, issues, criticisms?
I certainly have my own topics and thoughts.
But given that this is a call-in show, it's best if you have the questions or comments or issues or criticisms.
So if you do, just request to talk.
I won't make you beg.
I won't make you beg.
And I would be happy to hear what is on your mind.
And I'll just give people a moment or two.
I mean, if you're all at work and just listening in, that's totally fine.
I can do my rant or rants or plural.
So while we're waiting, you know, it is a peculiar form of aristocratic privilege that people have in the past.
You know, there's an old, it was a BC comic from way back in the day.
I offer my body to the Zunzart.
Must have blown a soul of use.
I can't remember.
I can't believe I remember all of these silly cartoons from many, many years ago.
But, you know, it's the old joke, oh, the peasants are revolting.
Yes, yes, they are.
And that process that happens in the mind of the privileged.
What does privileged really mean?
What does privileged really mean?
You do hear these terms, white privilege, male privilege, and so on.
But what does privilege really mean?
So I'll make a case here.
Tell me what you think.
Agree, disagree.
So privileged is when you can escape the consequences of your own bad decisions.
You're privileged.
And as a child in general, that's because your parents have to backfill, right?
I mean, if you get fired from your job as an adult, you might end up having to move back home.
But if you get fired for your job as a teenager, well, your parents will continue to pay the bills, right?
So it's not really privileged, not really privilege to say that kids are not, they don't have to swallow all of the consequences of their own bad decisions.
They do in the dating arena, but not in the financial arena as a whole.
So privilege is when you can escape the negative consequences of your own bad decisions.
And really what it arises from is feeling entitled, entitled.
I'm owed just for existing.
So of course, in the medieval conception of society, which varied from country to country, but there was a general pattern, that the king was the head of the nation, appointed there by God himself.
And the king would extend monopoly privileges to a particular religion, usually Catholicism, but then later it became various forms of Protestantism in some countries.
Of course, I grew up in the Anglican church in England.
And so the king would say to the priests, you can have a monopoly on religion on one condition.
And that condition is that you tell everyone that I am the God-appointed head of society, and that to disobey me is to disobey God himself.
And then you'll be punished with hell and struck down with various sequences of Job-like diseases and misfortunes in bad weather.
And your crops will sicken and wither, and your livestock will fall over and stick their hooves to heaven.
So that was the deal, right?
So the king says to the priests, I will get rid of anybody who competes with you, but you have to tell everyone that I'm basically a living man God who has to be obeyed.
And that's efficient.
I mean, not in terms of people's general freedoms and the economic productivity of society or the intellectual advancement of society, but that is the deal.
It's efficient for the king because he has installed a punishment device through the clergy.
He has installed a punishment device into the minds, hearts, and souls of every citizen.
Because it's expensive to rule people if they don't attack themselves.
If you can get people to attack themselves, then it becomes very cost-efficient to rule them.
So it was impossible to convert the indigenous population of North America into being slaves.
They simply resisted it and would fight and die and flee, and it just was not economically particularly productive.
So when you want to rule people, you have to get them to self-attack.
And really, that's what the media and propaganda and in the past religion now, wokeism, is to install in the minds of those most inclined towards freedom a self-attack for even having bad thoughts, right?
The thought police.
So you want to create a mindset wherein people self-attack for thinking things that are negative towards the rulers.
So for the medieval conception of society, the king was the head, and the clergy was the heart, the soul, and the serfs were the muscles, the hands, the feet, the body that moved and grew and so on, right?
And of course, you would say, well, look, the hands can't think and the brain can't do.
So we each have to do what is appropriate to the great body of being known as the medieval conception of society.
So the hands should not bother themselves with thinking and the brain should not bother itself with doing because it's impossible.
And therefore, the king commands his subjects and the subjects do not command the king back.
The brain tells the hand what to do.
The hand does not reason and think and plan and then tell the brain what to do.
Now, of course, it's dehumanizing.
It's dehumanizing.
And what you have to do in order to have privilege is you have to dehumanize those whom you force to shield yourself from the consequences of your own bad decisions and to supply you with coerced goods and services.
So the king can command the peasant to join the army.
The peasant cannot command the king to join in the collecting of the harvest.
So the king has to view the labor that supports his privilege and the laborers.
He has to view the labor as entitled.
He's entitled to it.
And he has to view the laborer as humanistically invisible to him.
Dehumanize.
You're just a hand.
You're basically one step above the livestock, right?
The farmer does not trouble himself with the rights of the livestock or the preferences of the livestock, except insofar as he needs to exploit them.
He may give them a little bit more land if they're beating their heads from side to side in the stalls to the point where it becomes difficult and expensive and inefficient to keep them in such a small enclosed area.
So he'll give them a little bit more room, but only because he wants to Exploit them further, not because he wants their liberty, right?
The next step for a chicken on a chicken farm is not being a free chicken, but being a chicken McNugget.
So, to have privilege is to view those who supply your labor as psychologically invisible to you as your fellow human beings.
So, the king recognizes that the serfs are technically human, but does not recognize them as psychologically or morally equivalent to himself, because if he did, he would not be able to exploit them.
Exploitation and dehumanization go hand in hand, which is why empathy tends to bring equality.
It's an Aristotelian mean: too little empathy and you get exploitation, too much empathy, and the empathetic get exploited by the cold-hearted.
If you care about other people's problems to the point where you pour resources into solving their problems, then people will claim to have problems or invent problems or create problems so that they get your resources.
Empathy is one of these things you have to be really strict, too little, and you exploit people too much and you get exploited by people.
Got to find that right balance.
And only the free market can show that balance.
Statism never can.
So, consequences for thee, but not for me, is foundational to a privilege.
If I make bad decisions, you pay the price, you pay the consequences.
And the labor that I force out of you to support my privilege results from dehumanizing the other, refusing to acknowledge the humanity of the people you're exploiting.
Because if you acknowledge their humanity, you can't exploit them.
Because when you recognize other people's humanity and you put themselves in their shoes, you can't exploit them because you say, Well, I don't want to be exploited.
And if that person, that serf laboring in the field, if that serf is a human just like me, and I were in his position, I would be unhappy and resentful.
Therefore, I cannot exploit him.
So, privilege is forcing other people to pay for the consequences of your own bad decisions and dehumanizing those whose resources you take.
The king does not think about the labor in the fields.
The aristocrat does not think about the humanity of his serfs or his slaves.
So, privilege is dehumanizing others to gain their resources, often proportional to the bad decisions that you make.
So, if you make a bad decision to say, invade Iraq on the fantasy that there are weapons of mass destruction, they are imminently pointed at American cities, as Condoleezza Rice said.
And prior to the invasion of Iraq in 03, well, we don't want the mushroom, we don't want the smoking gun to be in the form of a mushroom cloud that Saddam Hussein was about to turn an American city into ash.
Well, that's a terrible mistake.
I mean, that's a terrible, terrible mistake.
But you see, being punished for mistakes is the opposite of privilege.
Being punished for mistakes is the opposite of privilege.
You see, the Lord can kill the peasant for hunting on the Lord's land, called poaching.
And there was a death penalty in many places for that.
You take one rabbit from the Lord's land and you're caught and you're punished.
However, the Lord can take 25% of the harvest of the serfs, and that's totally fine.
See, he can take your property, and that's good and right because God commands and he's better and superior and so on.
But if you take one rabbit from him or his lands, and even calling them his lands is kind of dubious.
Aristocrats were generally the most efficient hired killers for the state, and that's why they got all their lands and serfs.
It was a capacity for obedience to those above them and unlimited violence to those below them That got them their lands and their privilege and their weirdly ornate rituals of power.
So it's asymmetrical.
You take and you do not acknowledge the humanity of those you take from.
And you do not thank those.
See, thank you, one of the reasons why politeness is very important in society is thank you, please and thank you, indicates equality.
The king does not thank the jester for making him laugh.
He just allows the jester to continue living and get some crumbs from the bloody table of power.
The Lord does not thank the serf for providing the labor and food and resources that the Lord takes to himself.
You don't thank people.
You don't thank people.
So thank you is a way of saying we are on an equal plane.
So when you sort of put all of this stuff together, what does privilege mean?
It means dehumanizing others, taking their resources, punishing them for their crimes while never being punished for your crimes, having other people backfill and be forced to pay for the consequences of your own bad decisions.
And the dehumanization and exploitation is so wrapped in together.
I mean, I felt a little bad about having been fairly sharp with the first caller yesterday.
I thought about it a couple of times and I thought I should apologize for that.
It was too sharp and too harsh, too skeptical.
Not open, not warm-hearted, and that's fine.
I mean, it's not fine that I did it, but it's not the end of the world, right?
Didn't hurt the guy, didn't take any of his money, or didn't drive over his dog, right?
But it troubled me.
So I apologized.
Now, the people who start wars, get hundreds of thousands of people killed and maimed and genetically destroyed through these depleted uranium weapons in Iraq and so on.
The people who spent 20 years and billions, trillions of dollars to replace the Taliban with the Taliban in Afghanistan, well, they're not troubled.
They're not troubled by it because others are not human to them.
Others are not human.
They actually have less affection for the soldiers and the civilians who got maimed and killed than a farmer has for his livestock because the farmer actually does care about the livestock because the farmer's income depends upon the livestock.
But government power does not depend upon the taxpayer as an individual or fundamentally because they can just borrow a print money as well.
Giving the government or taking away the power of the government to borrow print money would make the government at least significantly more responsive to taxpayers, but they don't want to be responsive to taxpayers because that's going to limit their power.
So they want to be able to borrow in print so that they can bypass the demands or requirements or preferences of the taxpayer.
In the same way in England with the grooming gangs, you know, I mean, the staggering number of British girls who were, I can't even, okay, go look it up yourself if you have the stomach.
It's beyond my capacity to put into words.
How many people are really troubled by that?
How many people at the BBC were troubled by covering up the absolutely appalling serial predatory pedophilia rape fest of Jimmy Seville?
Because people in the media claim to be able to identify evil from a great distance.
Somebody said a bad word.
That's evil on the other side of the world, but they can't even recognize one of the most horrendous predators in human history walking their own halls and so on.
Same thing, but Prince Charles.
See, Prince Charles is really, really good at figuring out negative behavior in 100 years through climate change.
But he was asking Jimmy Seville for advice on his marriage.
It's absolutely stomach turning.
So one of the things that seems completely invisible to modern women, and I'm using this collectively, of course, there's exceptions, but one of the things that seems invisible to modern women is the huge amount of labor that men Perform to keep civilization running.
I mean, you can think of it all like the electricity system, the sewage system, the water system, the roads, the carpentry, the fishing, the farming, and so on.
It's overwhelmingly men.
Overwhelming, like 90, 95, 98%.
It was just logging.
Very dangerous, very dangerous business, by the way.
And so all of this labor that goes into making women's lives comfortable and survivable is invisible to women because there's no thank you, men, for keeping the infrastructure running.
There's no appreciation of that.
There's no recognition of that.
It's just called male privilege.
The male privilege is to have backbreaking, gruesome, bitter, ugly, difficult, and dangerous labor.
While women often buff their nails in air-conditioned offices in made-up HR pink ghettos of productivity.
Where's the thanks?
Where's the recognition?
Where's the appreciation?
Well, appreciation is equality.
To not recognize the labor and sacrifice and suffering of others is foundational to privilege and defies any sense of egalitarianism.
In the same way that some women, a lot of women, view the work that they do at home as really, really important and difficult.
And at times it is for sure.
But what happens is the man just goes away and then comes back, you know, 10 hours later, and there's just money in the bank account.
But because it's out of sight, out of mind, the woman is vividly aware of the labor that she does in the home, the child raising, the laundry, the cooking, the cleaning, the groceries, the bill paying, if that's what she's doing, the managing of the finances, if that's what she's doing.
So she's vividly aware of her own labor, but is not aware emotionally, foundationally, because of privilege, she's not aware of her husband's labor.
Because women expect to be appreciated, and there's nothing wrong.
Appreciation is important in a relationship.
And, you know, I will say to my wife, she makes a lovely meal, this is fantastic.
Thank you so much.
And I thank my wife, like, thank you for keeping the household running.
Thank you for doing all of the wonderful things that keep everything smooth for me and liberate me to do the work that I do.
And she says, thank you so much for working so hard today.
It's appreciation because equality, right?
But if you're only aware of your own labor and not aware emotionally of the labor of others, then you have dehumanized them.
My labor matters.
Your labor is invisible to me.
That is dehumanizing the other.
And you can see this, of course, in the basic phrase women say, unpaid women's labor around the home, unpaid women's labor around the home.
It's unpaid.
Now, that's a dehumanizing phrase.
It is as foolish as the people who say, we don't need farmers because we get our food from the grocery store.
That is just dehumanizing the farmers.
Unpaid domestic labor is oxymoronic and moronic as all dehumanizing formulations are.
There's no such thing as unpaid labor around the home.
I mean, if a woman wants to truly experience unpaid labor around the home, then she should go and build a cabin in the woods and she should cook and clean in that cabin and see how much money she makes.
I mean, she'll starve to death.
Unless she's, you know, maybe hunting herself or whatever it is, in which case she's very unlikely to be able to produce enough food to survive.
When I was a waiter, I saw what my boss went through.
One of the first places I waited at was a place called, well, you know it, Pizza Hut.
And they had a five-minute or free lunch deal when I was a teenager.
And they'd actually put a little digital clock timer on the table.
And you had to get the person's drinks out.
And then you had, or the groups, they had to get the table's drinks out.
And then you had to get their pizza out all within five minutes.
But if you've got six, seven, or eight tables is a serious amount of hustle.
And I remember my boss would sometimes throw up after lunch.
He was so stressed because he'd poured all of his money into this, and then the head office was putting this crazy deal forward, and it was nuts.
It was nuts because you couldn't cook the pizza in five minutes, so you had to guess how many people were going to order what.
And if you guessed wrong, you lost money.
Horribly stressful.
And I remember thinking, like, wow, you know, if I was just, if I was just carrying pizza around in the woods, nobody would be paying me for anything.
Somebody has to build a whole restaurant around and order all of this stuff and pay all the bills and the taxes and the electricity bills and order all the raw materials and print up the menus and create the computers.
And, you know, even the little aprons that we had.
I sounded like a chainmail knight.
This is back in the day when most people paid by cash and there was a lot of coins.
You didn't have these sacks of coins.
You're walking around like a knight about to joust in chainmail.
Just carrying stuff around in the woods doesn't make you anything.
So I was aware.
You know, I'd read enough economics at that point in my teens that I was giving up part of my pay so that I could make the rest of it, right?
Because I don't get paid anything carrying stuff around to the woods, but somebody builds a restaurant around me.
I got to pay them for that so that I get paid for carrying pizza to a table.
It's unpaid female labor.
It's just a way of provoking aristocracy, entitlement, dehumanization, and resentment.
And it absolutely dehumanizes men for women to claim, A, that they're underpaid, and B, that there is such a thing as unpaid domestic labor.
Someone's got to pay for it.
Someone has to pay for it.
Ladies, the house doesn't just magically sprout out of the ground.
Your washing machine doesn't run on good intentions.
Somebody's got to grow the food, bring it to the grocery store.
Somebody's got to pay for the groceries.
Somebody's got to build the fridge.
Somebody's got to build the air conditioning.
Somebody's got to build the sewers and maintain them and the water purifiers.
Someone's paying for it.
And if you're not paying for it, your husband is.
There's no such thing as unpaid female labor around the household.
The moment you say the household, someone's paying for it.
Maybe it's not your husband.
Maybe it's the mostly male taxpayers who are paying for it, but someone is paying for it, honey, and it ain't you.
But the dehumanization of others is to view the products of labor like the reality of physics.
And the fact that women, modern women in particular, do not appreciate the men who work very hard in dangerous, dirty, unpleasant jobs to create the civilization that has made modern women the most comfortable and privileged group in almost all of human history.
I mean, you'd rather be a poor woman in the 21st century than the king of France in the 18th century, because he didn't have air conditioning, fridges, freezers, antibiotics, cars, any of, I mean, you could just go on and on, right?
The king of France, there's a report that he opened his window to take in the view of Paris and fainted at the stench because people would crap into bowls and dump it out their window.
And that was pre-sewage treatment, Paris.
And I mean, I went through this to a small degree myself when I spent a year and a half gold panning and prospecting after high school.
And of course, gold is used in a lot of industrial applications.
It's used in cell phones and so on.
But, you know, a lot of it is used for ornamental nonsense, foolish, frippery jewelry that women like and, you know, delightfully incomprehensible, more power that they like jewelry.
Doesn't make any sense to me, but, you know, why do I want a hole in my ear to hang gold from?
I don't know, but women like it and delightfully incomprehensible, more power to them.
But the amount of slog and hard, gritty, dirty, dangerous, bug-infested, freeze-your-balls off labor that I had to go through to try and get some gold, which was mostly going to female adornment, is not to be under.
Now, I only did it for a year and a half.
And, you know, there were dangers.
People got injured.
I never did, Partly out of luck and partly out of care.
But yeah, taking a flamethrower in minus 40-degree weather in order to get something out of the ground that a woman can clip to her ear or in her navel piercing is a bit asymmetrical.
Now, again, I was paid.
I'm not saying that they're pure serfs or anything like that.
But, you know, I was paid and then a lot of my pay was taken to give to women because women make bad choices, and particularly when it comes to having children, who they have children with.
So it is very aristocratic for women to not view the labor that supports them as real, as a value, of something that they choose not to do, and thus, and maybe they can't do in any practical sense.
And thus, men have to do it.
If we're to have a civilization or any degree of creature comforts at all, where's the appreciation?
Where's the appreciation?
Now, men get paid.
I'm not slaves, right?
I get all of that.
But again, we're vastly overtaxed to pay for bad female decisions.
But we're paid.
But we are dehumanized.
The labor that we do is dehumanized for women as a whole.
And that's aristocratic to not acknowledge the labor of those who are forced to pay for you and through taxes, right?
80% of taxes come from men.
80% of benefits go to women.
Men don't have mandates about getting hired, but women do.
Men don't get wage supports, and the government doesn't step in to negotiate on behalf of men, but it does on behalf of women.
Equal pay for work of equal value.
There's no mandates for businesses or universities to bring men into the fold, but Endis mandates to bring women into the fold.
So we don't get any of that.
In fact, we're specifically excluded from the workforce to the degree to which women are artificially inserted into the workforce.
Our pay is lowered because women are artificially inserted into the workforce in many places and ways.
Our wages get lowered, right?
If companies are forced by mandate to hire more women, then the wages go down for the men.
And then, of course, the men have to backfill the women's labor when the women, as they often do, and I'm not complaining about this, we've got to have babies, but when the women go to have babies, men have to do more of the work, even if it's just as little as training their replacement, which in a complex job can be quite a long time.
So it's female aristocracy, it's female privilege.
And women do love to feel privileged because that's a sign of very high status.
I mean, men have their issues and addictions to status as well.
But I remember some woman telling me once that she was offered an in-home pampering to be pampered.
And of course, when you want a woman to be high status at a movie, you have her be waited on by other women, right?
They'll go and fetch her things.
They will bring her things.
Even in stores, they'll be catering to her and wrapping her things up and high status and all that kind of stuff.
And that translates into being sexually desirable enough to the point where the man's going to want to pay all the bills.
It's just a status display.
But yeah, in-home pampering, women like to be pampered.
They like to have things done for them.
They like to have doors open for them.
They like for the man to pay the meals.
They like for the man to pick them up and they like to be pampered.
And I'm not complaining about that.
It's just a simple fact of life.
But appreciation is the fundamental coin of equality.
It's the fundamental coin of equality.
And without appreciation, you grow cold-hearted, exploitive sociopathy.
I don't have to thank this person, means I don't see them as human.
I don't have to appreciate what this group does, means I don't view them as human.
If a woman likes to be thanked for the meals that she makes or the meal that she makes, which is fine and should be the case.
If a woman likes to be thanked for the meal that she makes, great.
But the man likes to be thanked for the work that he does.
And a lot of women will withhold appreciation out of an odd fear that their man will become complacent if he is appreciated.
Nope.
Men flourish on appreciation just as much as women do.
We do better when we're thanked and appreciated.
We'll go to the ends of the earth for a grateful woman and we'll sit in our car gathering ourselves to come into a fractious house with an entitled complaining and nagging woman.
Men will do almost anything that we're nicely asked to and almost nothing that we're told to.
And not showing appreciation is also a way of making people feel unwanted, unneeded, and putting them on the back foot when it comes to negotiation.
I mean, I know this is a more extreme position, but it's definitely out there.
There are women who genuinely believe that without men, their lives would be better.
Women wouldn't last two weeks without men.
Men could survive without women, for sure.
We wouldn't be able to reproduce, of course, but we could certainly make it to the end of our natural lifespan without women.
But women, in the absence of men, how are they going to know how to run the infrastructure?
They don't.
And again, this is not a complaint.
There's nothing wrong with that.
It's natural.
There is a division of labor between the sexes.
But women, you know, tottering around on their high heels with their long nails and pencil skirts and makeup.
I mean, the idea that they're going to go down there and unclog a sewer.
And again, there are, you know, hardworking women who do manual labor and so on.
They don't do it as well as men because men are just 40% greater upper body strength at a minimum and so on, which is largely the result of what women chose or who women chose to mate with in the past.
But the idea that women can run the infrastructure, I mean, that's like asking King Louis XVI to run a farm and birth a calf.
Won't have a clue what he's doing.
Dehumanization is dissociation from reality and it's dissociation from the need to be grateful, to be thankful, to show appreciation.
I love what women do in the world.
I really do.
I love what women do in the world.
I happen to live with two wonderful females, my wife and my daughter.
I love what they do in the world.
And I appreciate it.
I really do.
But if women are coaxed and like now it's what?
Emotional labor?
Oh, all the emotional labor that women have to do.
Oh, just there's something, there's something appealing about martyrdom to women that, to a lot of women, that I don't understand, if anyone can explain it to me.
I would certainly appreciate there's something that women are drawn to just feeling like martyrs.
And what was it?
There was a painting of a black woman during the last election.
Well, here's another election that black women have to carry on their backs and sigh and the martyrdom.
Oh, it's so for men, martyrdom is like the only, I guess men are drawn to, you know, okay, I'll cover your escape while everyone flees and I'll take down as many of the pursuers as I can.
Like there's a kind of martyrdom perhaps in war, but that's not the, it's not the norm for men.
And I don't think we're particularly drawn to that, right?
The purpose of war is not to die for your country, but make the other bastard die for his country from Patton or something like that, right?
But men are not drawn to martyrdom in that way.
But women, oh, give a woman a chance to be a victim and a martyr.
Nine times out of ten, she'll embrace it with both hands and grab onto it tight.
I don't understand why martyrdom is attractive or appealing.
But if you say to women, oh, you carry such a heavy load.
And what's that old, the rose?
I know the blues because I'm a woman.
But yeah, you give a woman a chance to feel her done by it, and it's like semi-orgasmic for a lot of women.
It's a wild thing.
Again, not the women that I know or work with, but it definitely is very common out there to be a martyr to, oh, you know, like the Bridges of Madison County, that movie.
It's a very famous movie with Clint Eastwood and Meryl Weep Street Street.
And yeah, she's very hard done by, you see, because the door slams.
You know, when her sons And her husband go out the door, it just slams.
And that's very tough for her, you see.
So she has to have sex with a stranger because the door, the screen door, can be loud.
Now, I mean, she's home.
Her kids are grown up to a significant degree.
So she's home.
So she could go.
I mean, there are cars.
She can go to the hardware store and pick up one of those little arms and put it in the door so that the door doesn't go bang when they leave.
Just, you know, it's not that complicated.
Costs a couple of bucks, 20 minutes to install.
You're good to go.
If she doesn't know how to do it, she could ask her husband to do it.
But no, gosh, no, that would be far too sensible.
It is far, far better to wince every time the door slams than put one of those stupid little arm cushions in that has the door not slammed because she loves the martyrdom.
Oh, if only they thought of me, they wouldn't slam the door.
Yeah, they're men.
We're allowed.
We're noisy.
We're in a rush.
We're physical.
And this delicate little flower is just so upset at the door.
The door slams.
It's just the victimhood.
The victimhood.
Oh, they don't care about me because the door slams.
If they cared about me, they wouldn't slam the door.
Well, if you cared about them, you would say to them, This door slamming is kind of getting on my nerves.
What can we do about it?
Or I looked it up, or I talked to a guy, or last time I was in town, I dropped past the hardware store and said, Hey, the door slams.
What can we do about it?
And solve the problem.
No, but she doesn't want to solve the problem.
She wants to have an exclusive, an excuse.
She wants to have an excuse to sleep with Clint Eastwood.
Hey, who doesn't?
He's a pretty tasty slab of man, hunk, back in the day.
So, yeah, the aristocracy of the female is modernity, and the men are invisible serfs who aren't even acknowledged.
Like at least the king would say, Yes, I suppose it's the peasants who produce the food, blah, blah, blah, but God has put me in charge and blah, blah, blah.
Women don't even, women don't even know for the most part how any of this stuff works.
There's a great meme of somebody goes back in time.
And by the way, I'm almost done my speech.
If you want to have questions or comments or pushbacks, I'm happy to hear.
But there's a great meme about, you know, I'm going to take all my knowledge of maternity.
I'm going to go back in time.
And all of the people back in time say, wow, electricity.
What is that?
How does it work?
I have no idea.
I have no idea.
I remember once visiting a friend's place.
And I mean, I grew up in apartments and so on.
And this is the first time I'd heard of something called a sump pump.
Now, I thought that was like the Harlem shuffle, like a jive kind of dance move.
No, no, no.
A sump pump pumps out the water that gets into your basement.
No idea.
No idea whatsoever that there was ever such a thing as a sump pump because it's not really part of your apartment experience at all.
Didn't know how it worked.
He said, Oh, yeah, if some pump went out last flood, I had to carry all the water out in buckets.
I'm like, why are you speaking Aztec to me?
Just use English.
And so that's the big question of appreciation.
Those who do not acknowledge your labor or thank you for it have dehumanized you and are exploiting you.
Because for the king to say the peasant is just like me, and everyone's had that thought that the king is just a dude in a funny hat, right?
But for the king to say, well, the peasant is just kind of like me, and I sure as hell would hate to be in the peasant's position, right?
The moment he empathizes with the peasant, the whole hierarchy and structure of the medieval world collapses, as it did, for the most part.
So if people don't acknowledge your sacrifices, if they don't acknowledge your labor, but they demand that you acknowledge theirs, then they have dehumanized you.
And you're not in a relationship.
You're in a vampiric exploitation, enslavement.
Not physical.
You can get up and walk out anytime.
But yeah, I remember the only woman I really lived with long before I got married.
I was working, building a company.
I was working very hard, you know, crazy hours, crazy entrepreneurial hours.
I was in my 20s.
And I was paying the bills.
And she was looking for work in her field.
And I would come home and she'd say, well, you've got to do half the housework.
And I'd say, I don't.
In fact, because I'm paying all the bills.
Oh, so you don't have to lift a finger.
No, no.
Just because I'm at work doesn't mean I'm sitting in a hammock.
I don't know what people, I don't know what women picture when men are working.
He's working very hard.
And so, yeah, you gotta, you gotta do the housework, right?
Because I'm paying the bills.
So I go to work for 10 hours or 12 hours.
That's, you know, five or six hours that I'm putting in.
Well, I mean, if we split a 50-50, right?
But let's say, you know, I go to work for 12 hours, 10 hours.
Well, that's 10 to 12 hours I'm contributing.
I mean, it's just the two of us, not a big place.
You're not doing 10 to 12 hours of housework.
And even if you were, it would still be even out.
I'm doing 10 to 12 hours of economic labor, you're doing 10 to 12 hours of housework.
Well, it's not true.
I mean, the men invented labor-saving devices for women before they invented life-saving devices for themselves, right?
So washing machines and things and ice boxes were all invented before basic filters to keep coal dust out of men's lungs, keep them alive for a little longer than have the black death in that way, right?
So she wanted to avoid acknowledging my economic contributions so that she would have to do less housework.
Well, that's exploitive.
And that's why that relationship, no lastie.
But don't be in a relationship.
This is sort of my, you know, can't do much about the tax system or whatever it is.
I'm going to talk about it.
I can't do much about it.
But I will say this: that if you're in a relationship, whether you're a man or a woman, and there's men don't appreciate the female labor that gets done at times as well.
So I'm just talking about this from one side of things.
There's another side, of course.
I get that.
But just talking to my bros, talking to my brothers in thought here, if she's not appreciative of what you do, she's exploiting you.
She's privileged.
She's aristocratic.
You're a serf, a slave, a lackey, not even an employee.
Most bosses will thank their employees.
But if she's not appreciative of what you do, then she's exploiting you.
And that's why appreciation is so important.
Appreciation is the reminder that you're human to them.
Appreciation is the reminder.
How many times do women say, you know, we've got to have at least one international male taxpayer day?
Holy crap.
Those guys pay three quarters, 80% of the taxes, and we get three quarters, 80% of the benefits.
We really should show a male taxpayer appreciation day.
Now, the fact that this is incomprehensible to people tells you just about everything you need to know about the modern world.
If you were to try a movement, say, look, we got to have a male taxpayer appreciation day because we pay most of the taxes and get very few of the benefits.
Or how about let's do International Men's Day to thank them for the fact that they can get drafted and we can't, right?
In America, you've got to sign up for selective service, right?
Means you can get drafted and women can't.
Let's have that.
How about International Men's Infrastructure Appreciation Day?
Thank you for all of the things you do to make our lives infinitely more comfortable than our ancestors, which we don't do for the most part.
Now, if there were to be any kind of movement to thank men for their sacrifice, their service, their productivity, their labor, the dangers and difficulties of what men do, if there would be this massive revolt and rebellion and eye-rolling.
And I mean, honestly, you would get attacked.
Like you would literally get death threats for trying to organize something that showed any kind of appreciation for men.
I mean, straight men, you can do all the gay stuff you want, right?
But straight men who work in infrastructure and do get drafted from time to time, or at least have to, have that as a thing that happens, right?
If you were to try and organize anything that showed appreciation for men, I mean, women as a whole and society as a whole would lose their shit completely.
They would go absolutely mental.
In the same way, if the slave stands up to the master and says, You better appreciate what I'm doing, the master would just smack him down, right?
You get back in your fucking place.
You shut up and do this work.
You don't ask for appreciation.
My appreciation is not beating you and letting you live.
That is where we're at in the West: that for men to ask for appreciation, to ask to stop being dehumanized, to ask for thanks for what we do, provokes a psychotic level of rage and contempt and hatred from a significant portion of the rest of the population.
And it's a great way to take over a country because you make men's life so unpleasant that they don't want to defend the system.
You can walk in and take it over, which is kind of what's going on.
All right.
Have yourselves a glorious afternoon.
We will see you tomorrow night for Wednesday night live with video and all kinds of great stuff.
And freedoman.com/slash donate to help out the show.
Really would appreciate it.
And thank you for your attention today.
Have a glorious afternoon, my friends.
I will talk to you tomorrow night.
Let's let them up here.
▲
Export Selection