unarmed strikes don't need hands free

It literaly says it can be a kick. you can be dual wielding scimtars as a monk and still be using flurry of blows. yet whenever someone says unarmed strike you need a hand free. please explain this for me.

The only thing you need a hand free for making an unarmed strike is to grapple.

yes, thats what I'm saying. that said, you might be able to forfiet your move speed to grapple with your legs.

An Unarmed Strike doesn't require a free hand except to Grapple at core. 

A DM could allow you to improvised an action where you Grapple with your legs but have the  Prone condition and or Speed of 0 for example.

Actions: Player characters and monsters can also do things not covered by these actions. Many class features and other abilities provide additional action options, and you can improvise other actions. When you describe an action not detailed elsewhere in the rules, the Dungeon Master tells you whether that action is possible and what kind of D20 Test you need to make, if any.

By the rules, you need the ability to hold somebody, which means hands. If you want to persuade your GM to let you circumstantially grapple with your legs, that's for them to rule on.

Quote from adammpettigrew2656b23ebb >>

yet whenever someone says unarmed strike you need a hand free.

Who says that?

alot of builds draw or stow so they can unarmed strike like for monks.

Quote from adammpettigrew2656b23ebb >>

alot of builds draw or stow so they can unarmed strike like for monks.

Well...a lot of builds are wrong, then. The actual rules do not include any such requirements (except for grappling, as others have noted) and I've never heard anyone suggest that they do.

There isn't much more to say, except that you are correct, as are all the other comments in this thread about it. If anyone tells you otherwise (and they aren't the DM and have a reason to change it), then point them this way, I guess...