 And Mitch asks, he says, you mentioned Harvey Weinstein. I don't think I mentioned him today, but I have mentioned him in the past, assuming that everything he did was consensual in the most literal sense of the world. Do you see anything he did as immoral? Yeah, I mean, the guy's completely and utterly, thoroughly immoral, even if it was consensual. Morality is not about what you do with other people primarily. Morality is what you do with yourself. And he is a world-class creep, an irrational emotionalist who views sex as superficial and materialistic. And that's him all. To have sex with women when they don't really want to have sex with you, to have sex with women when you're basically blackmailing them, let's assume that it was consensual, that he didn't literally force them at a point of a gun, is morally wrong, even if you didn't rape them. It's the equivalent of rape from the perspective of morality, even if it's not the equivalent of rape from the perspective of legality. And the two are not the same. Morality is not primarily about the use of force against other people. That's the altruist perspective on morality. The egoist perspective of morality is how should you live? What should be the standards for your life to make your life the best that it can be? How do you live up to what it means to be a human being? To what it means to flourish as a human being? To what it means to be a rational being, a conceptual being? What does it mean to have self-esteem when the sex you have is because women want you to give them a role in a movie? I mean, imagine that they flip it. Imagine having sex with women and this inducing you because they want a role in a movie. And you're having sex with them because they're pretty. That's not a moral way of living. I mean, read what Ayn Rand says about sexual promiscuity. And I think she's right. I mean, I'm not a sexual prude at all. But the playboy is not a moral character in Ayn Rand's view. And Weinstein is much worse than a playboy. Capitalist Nick, I saw, but I'm in the middle of answering another $20 question. So I can't do yours before I finish that one. But thanks for the $20 question. I'll get to it in a minute. So you can't live a moral life by manipulating other people. You can't live a moral life by exploiting other people. And while he didn't use force against them maybe, let's assume that's true, he exploited them. It wasn't win-win engaging purposefully. In non-win-win transactions, it's not moral. It's not living up to the highest standards that you could live up to. It's not living up to you, living the best life that you can live. And put aside this idea of masturbating in front of women who don't want you, who are not interested in this. It's not some who offended by it, who don't like you, who find you pretty despicable and disgusting. I mean, the whole thing is this is a guy who has no self-respect, no self-esteem. He is really a low, in this sense, in his sexuality, a low human being. And I remember, I think it's in Angela Shrugge says, show me the person you sleep with, and I'll, you know, that tells you everything about your, in a sense, moral character. And look at who Harvey Weinstein slept with, how he slept with him, how he got them to sleep with him. And it tells you everything you need to know about his moral character. He is a disgusting human being. All right. What we need today, what I call the new intellectual, would be any man or woman who is willing to think. Meaning, any man or woman who knows that man's life must be guided by reason, by the intellect, not by feelings, wishes, whims, or mystic revelations. Any man or woman who values his life and who does not want to give in to today's cult of the stare, cynicism, and impotence, and does not intend to give up the world to the dark ages and to the role of the collectivist broads. All right, before we go on, reminder, please like the show. We've got 163 live listeners right now, 30 likes, that should be at least 100. I figure at least 100 of you actually like the show. Maybe they're like 60 of the Matthews out there who hate it, but at least the people who are liking it, you know, I want to see a thumbs up. There you go. Start liking it. I want to see that go to 100. All it takes is a click of a thing, whether you're looking at this, and you know the likes matter. It's not an issue of my ego. It's an issue of the algorithm. The more you like something, the more the algorithm likes it. So, you know, and if you don't like the show, give it a thumbs down. Let's see your actual views being reflected in the likes, but if you like it, don't just sit there, help get the show promoted. Of course, you should also share, and you can support the show at youronbrookshow.com slash support on Patreon or Subscribestar or locals and show your support for the work, for the value, hopefully you're receiving from this. And of course, don't forget, if you're not a subscriber, even if you just come here to troll, or even if you're here like Matthew to defend Marx, then you should subscribe, because that way you'll know when to show up. You'll know what shows are on, when they're on. You'll get notified, right? So yes, like, share, subscribe, support. Like, share, subscribe, support. There you go. Easy. Do one, all of those, please.