No, Stefan Molyneux, promiscuous men do not “break” women

While some people consider Stefan Molyneux a “philosopher” and sing praises of him, my opinion of him is a bit less enthusiastic. It’s entertaining to listen to him, sure, but I rarely find myself not delegating his conversations to the background. His language is rather fluffy and he assumes the moral high horse a bit too often. The biggest problem, though, is that he speaks with a certainty that is simply unjustified. I find this rather baffling as that is not what you would expect from someone who has undergone rigorous academic philosophical training in the analytic tradition. In that regard, he is a lot closer to someone trained brainwashed in your typical mediocre leftist university.

One such example of Stefan Molyneux making an absolutely outlandish claim and not backing it up in the least can be found in the video I embedded in my last post, Stefan Molyneux vs Single Mom Trainwreck. At one point, he seemingly breaks the fourth wall, addressing the presumably male listener, and admonishing with, saying that “young men break girls with their penises”. That is one ham-fisted metaphor gone wrong, but let’s ignore that.

Stefan Molyneux provides no justification for his statement but instead postulates it as absolute truth. No, not Western whores are to blame if guys pump and dump them, instead Chad and Brad need to be chastized for “breaking” all ’em bitches with their boners. What a bunch of baloney! Listen, Stefan Molyneux, the problem is not with Chad and Brad but with Western whores. Of course red-headed males want to get laid. We can take this as fact. However, if Western women wouldn’t spread their legs so readily, Chad and Brad would have to do what their horny grandfathers had to do, before the sexual liberation great whorification of the West, namely pay a trivial amount of money to fuck a whore. How many women did Brad Sr. and Chad Sr. “break” with their jigglestick? How about a grand total of zero because the first and only women they fucked without paying were their wives?

The problem is that today’s Western whore does it for free, so instead of going to hookers, Brad just pulls some slut from the local club, week after week. Chances that he’ll settle down with any one of them are slim as none of them are wife material. However, not all women are like that. There is still a conservative minority around. Thus, the only women Brad could “break” are worthless broken whores anyway.

But where do all those worthless Western whores come from? That’s right, they largely come from single mother households. Therefore, instead of trying to shame Brad for banging all the sluts that are queuing up to gobble down his cock, we should instead take a long hard look at how broken Western society is. Of course girls who grow up in broken homes are vulnerable. They witness their mom bringing home strange men, so how should little slutty Susie figure out that it’s better for her if she keeps her legs together? Long gone are the days were daddy and mommy would point to some strumpet who got fucked by every other guy in the neighborhood and who ended up alone and miserable. Susie isn’t getting that lesson anymore. Instead, she’ll call in to Stefan Molyneux’ show, wondering why her life is such an incredible mess.

I’d like to ask the philosopher king Stefan Molyneux how Chad with his thundercock would be able to “break” broken girls that come from broken homes and who have grown up in a broken society? He can’t because those girls were already lost. Besides, let’s not blame good ol’ white Chad. The much bigger problem is that Western society has disintegrated so much that there are now gangs of Muslims operating who engage in large-scale systematic child abuse, operating at industrial scale. The muzzies of Rotherham, UK, went through well over 1,000 girls in about 20 years, for instance. Compared to that, a young virile stud pumping and dumping a few Western whores before setting down, or going MGTOW, is not even worth mentioning. Besides, it’s by far the better outcome for Susie anyway.

19 thoughts on “No, Stefan Molyneux, promiscuous men do not “break” women

  1. Nice 270 at the end there. You took it to your go to place when the initial post had nothing to do with it. Uncle Roosh would be proud.

  2. I dunno, man. Stefan bashes single mother’s quite a bit and is always going on about peaceful parenting and the importance of raising a generation of unabused men and women, for the greater benefit of society. He’s even admitted to the trauma of having to grow up in a single mother household (crazy bitch) and the years of therapy he had to endure to heal somewhat from it.

    So now he’s blaming men for ruining women? I think his big thing used to be big governments and women marrying the state and all that. I haven’t listened to the interview personally, but it might be that he’s advocating for women not to hookup with chad’s and brad’s in the first place and to be more cautious when choosing any certain man to enter a relationship with/marry/have kids with.

  3. We’ve talked about a while ago, but:

    Is there a sweetspot between a girl who is virgin (with no absolute certainty of not getting curious after losing her virginity) and a girl who has some experience under her belt (love sex, suck dicks like a champ) but know the limit and stay under control of a strong-willed man?

    Perhaps you can relay some examples from your experience about this type of woman?

    BTW, as usual with your style, going over the top to highlight certain unpleasant features is fine and good, but there is also a subtlety that need to be mentioned here. Maybe, Alex Novy could chime in for he does like to convey such a complexity in human sexuality.

    I am gonna say that there are women who have up to 10+ guys in their bedroom and CAN decide to settle down with a guy if she wants to (no single trait of craziness like our great French American actress portrays so successfully . There is also women who have no interests in a monogamy relationship at all (they’ve tried, and did not cheat but quit), still engage in sex and love with a circle of men who know each other well (their KIDS know this).

    I am gonna go further and say that sexual variety is indeed coded in your genes. The model of relationship you prefer might be inherited from either your father or your mother. The type of family you comes from could decide this.

    The last point is something a bit personal, but I am gonna put it out there anyway:
    As a player who has probably reached 70-100 notches in his bed, don’t you have the urge to fuck other chicks as well when you finally decide to settle down? I know I have this urge after my first 10 laycounts. Let’s be real, highly conditioned sex men might not have a good time with just one wife, you are quite an exception, perhaps your self-control is exceptional for such a man (understanding well trade offs).

    As for this blog, you and Alex Novy sits on two different lifestyles that have both goods and trade off. Novy doesn’t seem to stop his gun anytime soon, who am I to speak for him but he might very well be an eternal bachelor.

    1. There was research about this. The more partners someone has had before settling down, the more likely they are to cheat and for it not to last.

      People who were virgins or at 1-2 lays before their one big relationship are the most likely to last.

  4. Molyneaux is a pompous ass who has a pseudo cult built around him. Given his general orientation, it is a bit odd that young women have no agency in this particular area. The women getting “broken” by penises tend to be very enthusiastic about the whole thing. Obviously, this may not play out well for the women in the long run, or especially any children who grow up having a vague clue on who “daddy” is, but while you can punish people who break the law, you have to let people make decisions in their personal lives. The single mother in question made a whole pile of incredibly dumb decisions, like most single mothers who have children with a bunch of different guys. But, we can’t lock up or sterilize these people.

    1. It’s a good questions why we cannot lock up or sterilize those people. Seriously, why not? Frankly, what right does a single mother have to put one defective child after another into the world? In that context, the case Buck vs. Bell is relevant, where the judge found the actions of a doctor who sterilized a patient without her consent lawful. In the justification, he famously wrote, “three generations of imbeciles are enough”:

  5. “This only applies to women, though.”

    That is what I disagree with. Truly true to you as you can do, not so much true to others “studs” as they cannot.

  6. Stefan Molyneux often gives women a pussy pass. He wants white western people to reproduce and marry. He wants to get more women to join in this quest. If he would bash his female callers with the truth they wouldn’t call him anymore. That’s the problem i have with most traditionalist. They always let women off the hook. They put all responsibility on men. Often expecting men to pretend feminism never happened. You cant fix the problem this way. The problem isn’t with men. It’s with women and the feminist laws. The biggest problem is that women would never vote their own rights away. And you can’t convince large groups of women to join your side with the truth. I believe MGTOW had more impact then all the traditional people and MRA’s together. It’s only now MGTOW is getting larger that women are getting scared. This fear is driving women to the conservative camp more then all the traditional advertisements do. Only now they really start to fear ending alone and childless are they willing to negotiate.

    1. To be fair, that makes him a pragmatist. He only bashes them to the extent that he can whilst ensuring enough of them still call in.

    2. ” It’s only now MGTOW is getting larger that women are getting scared. This fear is driving women to the conservative camp more then all the traditional advertisements do. Only now they really start to fear ending alone and childless are they willing to negotiate.”
      ben, while this sounds nice and has a bit of a schadenfreude flavour to it, I feqr it is just too romantic.
      I don’t see scared women. Sure I get to hear the “where are the good men gone?” complaint, but usually it is followed by a cry for more power to women to fix this, i.e. more of the medcine which doesn’t help. I think it’s quite game-over here in the West.

    3. I don’t think women are willing to negotiate. What I see, though, are more and more women in their 30s who are freaking out because guys are no longer willing to commit. This is also reflected in the fact that substantial numbers of those hags enter exploitative sexual relationships with refugees.

    4. Yes it’s game over in the west. There will be war and all the terrible things that come with it. After that? Who knows? As for the negotiating part i refer too the rise of the younger anti feminist women that pop up everywhere. It’s no longer cool to be a feminist. This started to happen when more men started to reject western women openly. This is a negotiation attempt. Men changed the game and women are trying to adapt. Women fear social rejection and go into damage control mode. As for the women going for the refugees, yes there are some. The numbers aren’t that great. Most women here dont want them. Only a few on the bottem of the pool would consider them for a partner. Most women here fear them. Maybe it’s a bit worse in Germany because of the brainwashing efforts after ww2 that have been enormous. It’s sad to see what happened with the German’s. They are only a shadow of what they use to be. I hope they rise again one day.

    5. ” As for the negotiating part i refer too the rise of the younger anti feminist women that pop up everywhere. It’s no longer cool to be a feminist. This started to happen when more men started to reject western women openly. This is a negotiation attempt. Men changed the game and women are trying to adapt. Women fear social rejection and go into damage control mode.”

      But, ben, wait, that’s the same opportunistic bullshit we’ve been witnessing since, like, forever. Women submitting to the strongest. It’s sugar coating to call it negotiation.
      Women are not revolutionaries.

      “It’s no longer cool to be a feminist. ”

      Yous said it yourself, it’s a trend question, not a moral one. I remember judgybitch had a video, where she argued that women without children should earn their right to vote by joining the military. Essentially her point was, that men have a view on morality which stands above everything, and women have moral views in a sense that whatever makes them feel and look good seem morally right.

      So this is it, it is over.
      I say there is one reason only why Switzerland has not gone full retard (but is well on its way there) to the same degree as the rest of the western world and that is because women were not allowed to vote until the late 1980s as opposed to the rest of Europe. The nonsense simply started later, but boy, we’re getting there with the god damn quotas, minimum wages, diversity shit, divorce-rape, open borders, cashless society, etc. – all that shit that makes me wanna puke.

      I fully agree with Aaron. Women will not negotiate. Fucking never. Submit? Oh yes. The question is to whom.

  7. Eugenics is horrible and totally unnecessary. You only have to let natural selection do his part. If people just stop helping the weak and stupid they will simply die out in time. Stop giving them (free) money and food and let their children die. If you keep them alive with aid you only make the problem bigger in the long run. Just let nature do his thing and it doesn’t matter they have 8 children. Because 7 will die anyway. It’s the same with lot’s of pray animals. It’s only a problem if the natural balance gets screwed by human interference. Their numbers are limited by the amount of food and predators. If we just leave them alone the problem will solve it self.

  8. I see some hypocrisy there. First, we spend hours describing women as childish creatures with no impulse control, that can only upkeep virginity if their father beats them with their belt if they go home from party 2 minutes past 8PM. Ok, let’s asume they’re childish.
    Then we praise the men as rationalbeings.
    So if men are rational and women aren’t, isn’t it our duty to stop hypergamy?
    Of course, it would be extremely difficult task, but if it was actually punishable by law to have extra-relationship sex, suddenly all PUA talk would be unnecessary. 4/10 guys would get their 4/10 girls.
    I could make girls unable to enter relationship by briefly chatting her once per week for half an hour. If I forget to “upkeep” her, and she met someone, I could destroy that relationship if I drank two beers and called her. So on whom lies the fault. On her or on me?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.