All Episodes
Previous
Nov. 20, 2025 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
42:09
The Dangers of Female Doctorates?
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
All right.
So this is just warming up or gearing up for the call tonight.
I wanted to get some sort of thoughts organized about women and working.
So there's a young woman who posted on social media about her accomplishments.
She got a PhD in ants.
I'm not kidding, like ANTS.
She got a PhD in anting or ants.
And of course, she was doing the typical female thing.
I mean, you can get mad at it if you want, but, you know, she's posting a big picture of her rather than her thesis and so on.
And it's fine.
You know, you can get mad at it if you want, but it's just female nature.
And it got us to the top of the food chain.
So let's not complain about it overly.
But there was a lot of upset and anger and hostility and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
And listen, I get that.
It's not, that's rude, right?
It's not nice.
It's not good.
It's not productive.
And it makes women feel defensive.
You know, for men, like everybody treats us like crap as a whole.
That just is.
I mean, society treats us like crap.
War treats us like crap.
We're tax slaves.
We are, you know, women and children first in every, like we're disposable and society treats us like crap.
So when we get treated like crap or there are people mad at us or hostile towards us, it's like, yeah, that's that's the deal, right?
That's what it is.
To be a man is to be exploited and be treated like crap.
And I mean, it's because of the government.
It's not, you know, anything else.
But no, we are the tax slaves, the tax serfs, the tax cattle.
Particularly if you're a white male, you're just going to get treated like absolute crap from birth to death.
So we're kind of used to it.
I mean, I guess there are sort of some veins of bitterness that go through that.
These deep scenes of coal-like black-hearted resentment.
But for the most part, you know, we're kind of used to it.
And that's just the way things are.
But it's kind of different for women.
Women aren't used to negative feedback.
Women are used to being put on a pedestal.
Women are used to praise.
And women are used to women are used to being manipulated through praise.
Men are used to being manipulated through being treated like crap.
So for women, it's all carrots and no stick.
For men, it's all sticks and no carrot.
And it's hard.
It's hard for women to sort of process, perceive, and understand this.
And so when women get negative feedback, it's very different.
It's deeply, emotionally different.
If a man gets called an incel, women will generally pile on, right?
And men will generally, they might give him some support, but it's pretty minimal for the most part.
Whereas if a woman is criticized, then all the men and women flock to her defense.
Like you and I, we cannot comprehend what this is like.
We cannot comprehend what it is like that in any social conflict, people vociferously, vociferously take our side.
We cannot comprehend that.
We're so used to being ganged up on and abandoned and degraded and attacked and insulted and so on.
We are so like the moment we express a preference, we are misogynistic and controlling and whatever it is, right?
So we can't, it's very hard for men to comprehend what it is like for, you know, particularly a young, attractive female on social media.
I mean, that's the upside.
The downside, of course, is all the dick pics and semi-stalking and all of that.
But we can't process it.
So, for women, if they provoke anything negative, they can be absolutely, again, particularly young, attractive women, they can be absolutely guaranteed that all the women will take her side and very aggressively as well.
And, you know, three-quarters or 80% or 90% of the men will take her side and very aggressively as well.
So, she has a buoyancy.
She has a buoyancy to people who side with her in any kind of conflict.
She has a buoyancy that men, particularly white men, we cannot comprehend.
It is so, it is not just not our lived experience.
It's the complete opposite of our lived experience.
So, women are buoyed up with endless support, and men, again, particularly white men, are dragged down by bottomless contempt and hostility.
It is like going through the playground with a giant, my bodyguard-style big brother who will beat the living crap out of anybody who gives you even the semblance or the slightest hint of negative feedback, right?
You understand?
As opposed to just being the nerdy single mom, unprotected, pimple-faced, you know, four eyes, thick glasses, braces, you know, even the ones that wrap around all the way the back of the head.
It is, and being unprotected.
And so, we can't, we can't understand it.
We can't comprehend it.
We can't process it.
So, people who are so used to being beaten up and beaten down and bullied and aggressed against and scorned and insulted, they have some anger.
They have some anger, they have some frustration.
And so, when a woman posts about she's smart, she's pretty, she obviously has a good family because she's got a PhD.
And a PhD almost always means a sort of very supportive family.
Also, they know that she's not saying or doing anything, doing anything controversial.
She's studying ants, and that's not going to be anything that's going to offend anyone.
So, she's a conformist, she's got a great family, she's pretty, she's smart, she's navigated the system, which is very tough to do.
Like most of the people I know who succeeded in academia had a father or mother or significant family member who was herself or himself an academic or had experience in that realm, or they at least had an uncle or aunt, someone who could help them navigate the process of becoming getting a PhD.
So, the hostility is the hostility is interesting.
Sorry, I know it's interesting.
That's why I'm doing, that's kind of why I'm doing a show about it, right?
But the hostility is interesting, and it is something that it's hard to comprehend for women.
So, again, this woman, you know, pretty put together well.
She's funded it somehow.
She's definitely had preferential advantages, not just for being a female, but being for a young, blonde, pretty female.
She got a good family, she's smart, and so on.
And she takes it as look at what I've done, right?
Look at what I've done.
Look at the great thing that I've done.
Look at me, as if it's an individual or singular achievement, as opposed to, well, you know, the men, the men are being excluded from academia in favor of women.
So the fact that she's got some level of diversity hiring to her, almost for certain.
And also the fact that she's a pretty young female means that she's more likely to get mentored and she's more likely to get that kind of positive feedback and all that kind of stuff, right?
So the ease in which this woman has her life structured and organized, you're young, pretty, good family, smart, good advice, people who've been able to fund her.
You know, she didn't sit there and say, you know, like I've worked two jobs to sort of get where I am.
But that sort of life on easy mode stuff can be really frustrating for outsiders.
So when women are posting the sort of life on easy mode stuff, and listen, I'm not saying, look, obviously very smart.
She worked hard to get the PhD.
So I'm not talking about like she's done nothing and it's all handed to her and she, you know, she didn't do anything.
I'm not saying that.
But when the life on easy mode people post about their successes, and this is, I talked about this in my presentation on the French Revolution, right?
So when the life on easy mode people post about their successes, then the life on really hard mode people feel resentful.
Now, to have some humility in your success is really important.
Because if you don't have some humility in your success, then you appear to be a somewhat vainglorious braggart who's taking entire sole credit for the success.
So again, I'm not saying this woman didn't work hard.
Of course she did.
I'm not saying she doesn't deserve a PhD.
Of course she does.
But if we look at the sort of steps and sequence necessary for her to get her PhD, and I don't know anything about this woman, obviously, right?
And I'm not trying to say anything about her in particular.
I'm just talking about these issues as a whole.
So she would have from the very earliest time as a sort of pretty blonde, I think she's got blue eyes or something like that, as a sort of pretty blonde girl, baby girl, she's going to have, oh, so cute, incredibly positive feedback.
She's going to have little boys who have crushes on her.
She's going to get teachers who praise her and think she, you know, she's got parents who obviously care about her and that's a good thing, right?
So she has just lived a life of a fairly immense privilege, a female privilege, pretty privilege, and so on, right?
So she's and family privilege.
And she also happens to have been born with a really good brain.
And to be born with a really good brain is not something you should be proud of.
It's not something you should, you didn't earn it.
Now, what you do with that good brain, you can be proud of if you use your accidental IQ inheritance to help further and better the species as a whole.
And you recognize that you are in fortunate possession of a collective good known as intelligence that you did not earn, but you can earn your pride in how you utilize it to benefit the world.
But, you know, the fact that she was born with a good bone structure, the fact that she was born with blonde hair, the fact that she was born pretty, the fact that she has a family who fed her well and obviously got her, I assume, got her involved in sports and all of that.
And the fact that she was able to do all of that and the fact that she had the resources, I assume, upper middle class, to do all of that.
And then she says, look what I've done.
Oof.
You know, I got to tell you.
Oof, I got to tell you, it's rough, man.
It's rough.
It's rough.
And so the reason why people, and I'm not saying it's fair, I'm not saying it's just.
I'm certainly not defending any of the sort of abusive comments that she's received.
I would never do that.
But what I'm looking at is I'm looking at causality.
If I say smoking causes cancer, I'm not praising cancer.
I'm just saying this is the causality, right?
So the causality is people look at, you know, pretty blonde girls with PhDs who are saying, you know, look, look what I've done, right?
Then what happens is they look into their own minds and hearts, right?
And they say, oh, so this is what you've achieved.
Why haven't I achieved something similar?
Right.
And it's a tough call, man.
It's a tough and fairly brutal thing to examine within yourself.
Why haven't I?
Why don't I have a PhD in studying ants or whatever she was doing?
Right.
Why don't I have all of this?
Now, some of that has to do with choice.
Some of that has to do with laziness.
Some of that has to do with what?
So I'm not saying it's, you know, again, she deserves definitely some proportion of pride in her success.
But if people get the sense, and I'm not saying it's right or fair, but if people get the sense that I did all of this, I am responsible for 100% of my success.
I am responsible for 100% of my success with no humility and no sense of gratitude or talk about the fortunate circumstances.
Then what happens is people resent that because of the implicit condemnation of their lives.
So let's say that I were to say, well, look, I was born poor, a single mother household.
Mom was on welfare when she got older and my father abandoned us and we were broke and there was violence and mental illness.
So if I were to say that and then I were to say, yes, but I've, you know, I've made something of my life.
I've done something.
I've escaped all of that, blah, blah, blah.
And if I were to just say, well, that's all on, that's just me.
I just willed it.
I just, I guess I'm just more staunch, more resolute.
I focus, I grind, I, you know, all of that.
Then there would be an implicit condemnation of everyone who failed to achieve what I have achieved.
And they would be upset at me.
Now, you could say, ah, well, you know, Steph, they're not upset with you.
They're upset at their own bad choices and they're blaming you and all of that.
But I don't agree.
And I'll give you an analogy.
So let's say that into a poor section of town, like real poor, like trailer park stuff, Lean Two sheds, sugar shacks.
Let's say into this really low-rent, fairly trashy section of town is born a woman of uncanny beauty, like that sort of eerie, half-alien Shannon Doherty style of beauty.
Let's say she also has a great figure.
The fat deposits have all gone to the right place.
And she ends up marrying a wealthy guy because she's very good looking.
Now, I mean, she does work to overcome some of the more trashy aspects of her upbringing, but that's in part because she is in possession of a rare beauty.
So, I mean, we're talking like the Marilyn Monroe, right?
Came from a, I mean, somebody literally sought her dog in half when she was, she came from that trashy and she was sexually abused and so on, right?
She came from a really trashy background.
And if Marilyn Monroe were to say, well, look, I became a movie star.
I married Jody Maggio.
I married Arthur Miller.
I converted to Judaism.
I did all of this, you should too.
Well, she had a very pretty face, she had great hair, a nice singing voice, she was a good actress, she had a great figure, and obviously was very intelligent.
And so, just do what I do is odd.
I mean, it is like Freddie Mercury saying to everyone from Zanzibar, well, you should have become an internationally renowned rock star as well.
Why didn't you just do that?
Well, no perfect pitch, no particular musical ability, no great singing voice, you know.
So when men see this woman post about, yay, I got a PhD and all of that, and there's no humility in it, then men, and I think a lot of people experience this as a significant attack upon themselves because they look at somebody, you know, the Eloy and the, I can't remember from the time machine, H.D. Wells Time Machine.
There was a great speech from Gary Sinis about that in some Mel Gibson movie about a kid who got kidnapped.
But all the people who are cavorting around in the sunshine while the slave laborers down in the coal mines work their muscle to the bone gristle just to get their daily bread, there is a resentment.
There is a resentment.
If you don't know how lucky you are, if you succeed, if you don't know how lucky you are, you are sowing the seeds of your own destruction.
And again, I'm not, it's an Aristotelian mean.
I'm not saying, of course, it's all environmental.
I'm not saying that it's all luck.
I'm not saying it's all will.
It's not all will and it's not all luck.
But luck plays a significant element in it.
If I were to go back to my friends from junior high and see where they were, it seems pretty unlikely that they would have, you know, fairly world famous/slash infamous philosophy shows online or some level of sort of worldly success.
In fact, I don't think I know anyone who became as prominent as I did over the course of their lives.
Now, would I say to them, well, you should have done what I did.
You should have just done what I did.
Well, I think that would be unfair.
I think that would be very unfair because they can't do what I do.
They can't.
I mean, there are things that they can do that I can't do, but in terms of generating ideas, arguments, analogies, and conversations on the fly, I mean, I really don't have any particular parallel.
I mean, obviously, there are people who are infinitely better at creating poetic language on the fly, Shakespeare, of course, but Shakespeare, not philosophical reasoning from first principles.
And I would, obviously, I'm not saying it's like Shakespeare, but I would put my narrative prose with its sort of leanness, content, and efficiency and power up there with the best writers around.
Every time I listen to or read some of my writing, I'm like, man, there's like not a syllable wasted in terms of value, every sentence you can read and get something pretty deep and significant out of it.
So they can't do.
And I remember when I first started writing my novel, The Jealous War, it all just came pouring out.
When I first started writing poetry, it all just came pouring out.
You know, when I sat down, you know, 20 years ago and said, I'm going to solve the problem of secular ethics and I'm not getting up until I do, I just knew that I could.
And I did.
And that is a singular ability to have solved secular ethics is a singular, and I would argue the most important Forward stepping in the history of philosophy.
So, history of philosophy, 3,000 years, whatever it is, obviously longer, but in terms of recorded or written philosophy, history of philosophy, 3,000 years.
I'm the guy who did it.
And again, I don't say this with pride.
The willpower to do it was important, but the ability to do it was not earned by me.
So the willpower to sit down and do it, yeah, that was me.
And the willpower to work through it and to continue on with the reasoning, even when it was frustrating and I felt like this is an impossible task and so on.
So the willpower to keep pushing is me, but the ability and to sort of have that gut instinct that if I keep pushing, I'll get there, that is not me.
It's like giving birth, right?
I mean, the willpower to keep pushing is the mother's.
Even when you feel like I can't, I can't, you push again.
So the willpower to keep pushing is yours, but the baby and the biological process is not.
So the willpower is mine, and the way in which I've chosen to focus my philosophical intelligence, that is mine, but the actual raw philosophical intelligence is not mine.
Like when I'm having conversations with people, and this was from sort of the very beginning of the show, when I'm having conversations with people and I'm trying to explain something and the analogies come up, right?
The analogy of the pretty woman who marries the rich guy, who says to other pretty, who says to non-pretty women, you should just marry a rich guy.
Well, they can't.
I mean, how many people from Marilyn Monroe's Norma Jean's old neighborhood ended up marrying world famous playwrights and converting to Judaism?
Well, no, that was not a thing that happened because they didn't have her talents, her looks, her abilities, or anything like that, right?
So if I were to say to people who had my kinds of upbringing, well, you should just do what I did, that would be incorrect.
That would be vain.
That would be to take the accidental possession of a very good philosophical brain for granted.
So for this woman to say, yay, got a PhD and she's young, pretty blonde, and obviously comes from a good, caring, invested family and so on, and holds it up like it's all her.
There is, so what you get is vanity and what you inflict is anger.
Vanity is when you take personal and you take as a personal achievement accidents of birth.
You know, the old thing that is born on, born on third base and thinks he hit a home run, right?
So when you take personal pride in accidents of birth, that is vanity.
Well, why don't you just do what I did?
Well, you know, like a friend of mine when I was growing up, he got his summers off.
He never really had to work.
And he spent his summers by the pool reading.
And then his father was a head of a department in university.
And he became a professor.
And, you know, hey, you know, he earned it.
Yeah, he earned it.
He worked hard and all of that, but he inherited the brain.
He inherited the ability he inherited.
And he happened to have all of the good advice and wisdom.
And here's how you do it.
And here's what you negotiate.
And here's how you navigate and all of that.
And he also had the leisure.
I was working three jobs and he could spend his summers by the pool reading books on his subject.
And again, it's not a hate thing.
Like, you know, good for you.
I'm not going to hate it because, you know, I hope obviously the sort of purpose of my parenting is to have my daughter not go through all of the stuff that I had to go through.
So it's complicated.
It's complicated.
But if what you do is you take pride in the accidents of good fortune, if you take pride in the accidents of birth, genetics, and circumstance, then you will generate hatred and hostility in others, if that makes sense.
Now, of course, another thing that men notice, I mean, not just men, but I think primarily men notice with these kinds of, I got a PhD on how ants divide labor.
And this is sort of an instinctual thing with regards to men's understanding of battle, right?
So, of course, as you know, battle takes many forms, right?
It used to be that war, like a lot of kids were born, and then war was used to destroy populations by enemies, or you'd fund wars, the bankers, wars, and so on.
But now, the purpose of war is not to kill those who are born, but to prevent births.
Arguably, it is a more effective strategy for destroying a people is to prevent births.
So, how do you prevent births in a population?
Well, you promote hedonism, you promote education, you denigrate the family, you denigrate motherhood, you turn it into just being a broodmare and wiping dirty diapers, and you deserve so much better.
And you make the having and raising of children a low-status occupation, and you endlessly praise the career women, and you endlessly praise the educated women.
And education, of course, you know, I'm not talking about reading books and learning things and going to museums and all of that.
I'm talking about sort of the sort of formal hyper-leftist Marxist indoctrination stuff that goes on in universities and so on.
You bribe women with status in order to avoid having children.
Oh, why would you get married so young?
You should go find yourself.
You should, what was it, Sheryl Sandberg who did this in Leaning In or whatever it is.
You should go and experiment and date a lot of people.
And then, of course, you promote laws that harm men in divorce.
It's a very, very big one.
So, you make sure that men get stripped of children and security and safety and money and resources when they get divorced.
So, you relentlessly promote the joys of the single life to women, the intense necessity to be endlessly educated, and then you promote travel.
And, of course, you promote pornography and things like that, which make people hypersexual and give them erectile dysfunction and weird sexual tastes and so on, all of which would be to diminish and strip down the pair bonding and all of that.
And so, you also would make sure that you transfer as many resources as inhumanly possible from the smarter and more responsible segments of the population, and you give them to the less smart and or less responsible segments of the population, thus creating an undertow that drags down the entire economy.
And then you make sure housing prices are as high as humanly possible so that people delay family foundation and formation.
And then you make sure that inflation is as high as can be at least in the short to medium term sustained so that people lose purchasing power and therefore can't get their lives really started.
And now you glorify cleanliness and tidiness.
So you always see these damages with Glen Close was one of these shows where she played a real sociopathic lawyer and she would recline at home with a glass of blood-red wine on a perfectly white sofa in a perfectly clean place.
So what you do is you promote tidiness and quiet and serenity and drinking and things like that.
And then you will constantly promote children as noisy, as intrusive, as screaming, as chaotic, as destructive, as messy and so on.
And that way, women will imagine that they get peace of mind through solitude and a clean place and a glass of wine when they don't.
They feel depression with a deadly quiet and empty house.
And so the way that you destroy a culture is twofold.
One, you promote lower birth rates.
And two, you try to keep the women away from their own children as much as, again, inhumanly possible.
So what you do is you'll have some mat leave and you'll say the mat leave is good and you get six months, maybe a year.
I think it's less in the US and so six weeks sometimes.
But you'll promote that mat leave and that's fine.
But you will then say, well, you have to go back to work.
And then, in general, you also promote moving around.
And the reason you promote moving around is so that families don't have access, easy access to grandparents, because grandparents not only are going to transmit the cultural values, but the older cultural values as a whole will be transmitted by the grandparents.
So you give people a lot of sort of artificial ambition.
And what they do then is they move around.
They don't have access to grandparents.
And then where do they put their kids, right?
Well, they put their kids in daycare.
And then you work as hard as possible to make sure that the daycare workers are as cheap as possible.
Because if the daycare workers are very expensive, let's say that daycare workers all had to have a master's degree or at least an undergraduate degree in childhood development or something like that.
I mean, I was a daycare worker.
I was 15 years old.
What did I know, right?
But you will keep daycare as cheap as humanly possible for two reasons.
One is that if daycare is, say, four grand a month or three grand a month US, say, for kids, each kid, then it makes no sense for the woman to go into daycare.
So you'll make sure that the standards for daycare workers are very low, which keeps the price relatively low, which gives people the illusion that it's economically profitable to go to daycare.
You put your kids in daycare, you know, maybe you'll make a couple of bucks an hour after all of the expenses, but you just spend that later in stress and worry because your kids are overly influenced by peers rather than by your values.
It doesn't save anything at all.
So what you do then is by keeping the requirements of daycare workers low, you get foreigners, people who are not part of the culture, people who don't even speak English that well.
I mean, I remember when I was in daycare, the woman who was In the room with the 15 to 30 kids aged five to ten, the woman who was, and some even older, but the woman who was in there was from Jamaica and she spoke with a very heavy accent and had all of her genetic Jamaican values and all of that, and did not translate too well to the couple of tidy-whitey kids in the daycare.
So you get the kids to hand, sorry, you get the moms to hand their kids over to daycare workers who will not transmit the mother's culture.
So Western culture is complex.
It's not as complex as, say, Japanese culture, but Western culture is complex.
It's a lot of Aristotelian means, well, you want to be honest, but not rude, right?
You want to be courageous, but not foolhardy.
You want to conform and comply, but not at the expense of your conscience.
I mean, it's a lot of, it's a balancing act, Western stuff, because it has to balance a lot of different viewpoints.
I mean, particularly Greek or Roman and Christian, and also secular and rationalistic.
So it has to balance a lot of things.
So learning absolutes for kids is fairly easy.
Learning how to balance things takes a lot of feedback.
How much should you sacrifice yourself in relationships is complicated.
Not so much in other belief systems such as Islam.
So you take the children from high complexity cultural transmission into all of the sort of basic management that goes on in daycares, where you're just trying to keep the kids alive and have them not hurt each other too much.
Then you are destroying the transmission of a complex culture that took thousands and thousands and thousands of years to evolve.
And you're handing it over to some, I don't know, Jamaican or Sri Lankan or Filipino woman who does not have the same cultural history as you.
And then the cultural transmission that took thousands of years to evolve is destroyed.
It's a great way to do a terrible thing.
So when men look at the pretty blonde who's got a PhD in studying ants, what do they look at?
Well, they look at and they say, well, she's not had children.
And if she does have children, she will be unlikely to stay home with them and raise them and homeschool them and so on, right?
Why?
Because she has a PhD.
And you don't get a PhD in order to be a housewife and a mother, even though being a housewife and a mother is a very noble thing, but she won't perceive it that way.
So either she's going to hand her children over, or either she's not going to have children, which is pretty catastrophic, right?
Because we need smart people to have a functioning society.
So she's not going to have children because she would prefer to study ants, which is bizarre.
Or she's going to have children, but she is going to hand them over to strangers to raise, for the most part.
Or she's going to have children and stay home, in which case society burned $2 million educating her to have her stay home.
And some guy could have got those social resources who would have stayed in the workforce.
So you understand, there's no outcome, at least from the male perspective, there's no outcome to this woman getting a PhD that is not a huge negative for society.
Either she doesn't have kids, she has kids and strangers raise them, or she has kids, stays home, in which case all of the social investment in her education, I mean, unless the kids are dying to learn everything there is to know about ant formation or ant social formation, all the social resources that are poured into educating this woman have been largely wasted.
And a man could have taken the social resources, probably not to study ants or whatever it is, because what the women want to study tends not to be particularly economically compelling, to sort of put it mildly.
But all of the most of the stuff that women want to study is not petroleum engineering and computer science.
And they're not going to go out and found companies and work 18 hours a day as a whole.
I mean, there are exceptions, but not many.
So men see the unseen, right?
So men are better at seeing the unseen, ghosts.
So by the unseen, what I'm talking about is men are better at not seeing, oh, there's a pretty girl, sorry, a pretty young woman with a PhD.
Wow, yay, good job, right?
What the men are seeing are what's not there.
And what's not there are babies raised by an intelligent woman and homeschooled to continue the Western, the complicated Western intellectual traditions of straddling the Aristotelian mean, right?
Think of the young.
It's important for you to be honest.
And then she goes to her aunt, why are you so fat?
You can't say that.
Well, you told me to be honest.
Yes, but, you know, it's complicated.
It's complicated.
I mean, you could say hypocritical to some degree, but I get it.
And there's a time and the place.
The truth is not a sword to be drawn at all costs, as my character Notted Bob said once.
So when men look at that picture, they're looking at vanity.
They're looking at the cost of that vanity, which is the condemnation of others who are less lucky.
And you can't condemn people for bad luck.
You just can't.
I mean, you can, but it's a real douche move.
And look, I'm not talking about this woman in particular.
I don't know really anything about her.
I'm just talking about why there might be this reaction or why I think there is this reaction online.
So why?
Well, because the men are seeing the destruction of everything their forefathers worked for, which is a woman who's really interested in ants and is not having kids.
Or if she has kids, she's going to put them in daycare.
Or if she doesn't put them in daycare but raises them herself, then there could have been really great stuff that could have gone to educating a man who would have stayed in the workforce and society would have got a good return on investment.
And what the men see is the invisible hand of an enemy, of an enemy who praises and convinces a brilliant, attractive woman to not have kids or not raise those kids herself.
So they see this hand that is karate chopping the lineage and the culture and the history.
And they say, oh, what's wrong with women being educated?
And it's like, well, look, society has limited resources.
If you educate women and they don't have children, then you're killing off the culture physically.
If you educate women and they do have children but don't raise them, then you're killing off the culture by having strangers raise the kids.
Again, it could be grandparents and so on, right?
Or, but at this point, the grandparents are boomers who have fairly repulsive beliefs as a whole.
Or the woman gets a PhD, has kids, stays home, and homeschools them, in which case you've just destroyed a million or $2 million worth of social investment in this woman's education.
And for what, right?
So we're going to have to pay those bills in one way or another.
Men have to pay those bills in one way or another.
So it's not hatred of women.
It's actually, I think a lot of it comes out of to some degree sympathy for women.
Maybe that's a bit of a stretch.
Maybe it is some sort of hatred or frustration.
But it's hatred and frustration of the situation as a whole.
Because men understand warfare.
We understand combat.
And the West is having a war waged upon it.
And it's not just the West.
Intelligent people are having a war waged upon them.
The intelligent and the powerful are waging a war against the intelligent who wish to be free.
The intelligent psychopathic powermongers are waging a war against the intelligent who want freedom.
And so I think men's chaotic and aggressive response, I'm not saying it has a lot of self-knowledge to it.
Of course, I don't think it does.
But to understand why men are hostile towards a woman who got a PhD studying ants.
And also the other thing, sorry, one last thing is that people, oh, it's like an incel and so on.
It's like, it's not exactly an incel thing, but when there's a pretty woman with a PhD, men are like, well, she's not going to date me.
She's out of my league.
She's got a PhD.
And because women, because men understand women's hypergamous nature, then the women, men understand that the women are going to want a guy with at least a PhD.
She's not going to date a normie.
She's not going to date the average, so to speak, right?
So that's a problem too.
They're off the dating market.
And because a good-looking guy with a PhD is probably going to be able to date a whole bunch of women, then he's probably not going to be settling down either, right?
And so it's just, it's catastrophic all around.
The more that you raise women's status, the smaller the pool is of men that she's willing to date.
But when you have a situation where men have a large number of women who want to date them, the men are less likely to settle down.
So by raising women's expectations, you raise the status of men, and therefore you lower the chances that those men are going to have kids and raise them.
So just it's a general assault on the intelligent and it's a general assault on one culture.
And men understand, men understand that this woman is, in a sense, a victim and in a sense is propagating this, right?
Because she's saying, oh, look how cool it is for me to get a PhD.
Look how pretty I am.
And then, of course, a lot of other women are going to be like, oh, yeah, she is really pretty.
Oh, I want a PhD too.
And it's just part of a whole propaganda campaign that is slaughtering our entire society.
And men get that.
Now, of course, they shouldn't be taking their anger out on this woman.
I get that.
But it takes a fair amount of self-knowledge to understand all the inkoate responses that men are experiencing with regards to this stuff.
So anyway, I hope that helps.
And lots of love from up here.
And I hope you have a lovely afternoon.
▲
Export Selection