« The Glenn Beck Program

Best of the Program | Guest: Colin Wright | 10/14/19

2019-10-14 | 🔗
Beto wants to discredit churches and parents who don’t teach gender fluidity. But Ben Shapiro threatened to meet the government at the door with his guns if his kids were taken away because of his religious beliefs — and the Democrats are using this as a perfect example of why we need red flag laws! California just passed gun laws so extreme that even the ACLU is against them. WE are the parents! The government will not make us babysitters of our own children, and schools need to STAY OUT of parenting. Evolutionary biologist Colin Wright argues that real science says nobody is born into the wrong body, period.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
Pay mons podcasts got a great one for you today. Do you as a pair, have any rights, or are you just a babysitter? Now we get into that? Also we get into the national. Gun registry and a story from the New York Times. That shows just how much the Democrats have changed their position on guns. Even the New York Times says it's pretty stunning and it is We talk about the rights of First Amendment and the second amendment all on today's podcast, the so the New York Times surveyed the twenty twenty Democrats on gun control and they found that there are. There are some fighting lines here, not a lot of dividing lines. I think between
the Democrats have been there a few but between anyone who believes in gun rights and the democratic field. There's some really really bright lines being drawn. The it seems a remarkable I'm, I'm gonna quote to the New York Times. If it seems on remarkable that every democratic presidential candidate wants to ban assault weapons, it's worth looking back just a few, years in twenty thirteen, the last time a band received a floor vote in the Senate. Nearly thirty percent of the Democratic caucus voted against it. The time survey adds to a pile of evidence that segment of the Democratic Party is headed towards extinction and that extinction that part of the party the one that believes in the second amendment it is no longer politically teh-
well to be a democratic presidential candidate and support the sale of an a r which is become the west, that weapon of choice for mass shooters. No, no, it hasn't hand guns also are used. Several other policies had unanimous support among the candidates who completed the survey so called red flag. Laws which allow confiscation of guns from people judge to pose an imminent risk to themselves or others. This is, this is one of the more dangerous ones. In my opinion, the so called red flag laws. We already have those if you think someone is a danger to cells or to others you already can call police and they will. Already take the gun away from them. They'll have to go to a mental hospital and be checked out, but that's the system we have. There has to be due process involved in what they I do is get rid of that yeah, it's too slow and the general
Too slow for due process and the left continually gives commercials to the warning signs of what's going on. You mentioned the Ben Shapiro thing earlier today where he talked about defending the lives of his children against someone coming in trying to take them from the government, and it was a big big issue over the weekend. Well, what was the response from Eric Swalwell, the former presidential candidate congressman? He said perfect use of red flag laws. The second someone disagrees with their opinion. Well, all the sudden, there too crazy to have their guns. If you're wondering how these things will be utilized. Eric Swalwell just gave you a commercial, or it he didn't like Ben Shapiro's rant on the internet, now take his guns, and this is the demonstration of why I believe in the second amendment. It's not because I like to shoot it's not because I
my family, and I we we do it all the time and we enjoy it. So not that I'm going Hunting for my food, I have my guy guns for one specific reason, and that is a check on the balance of power. If you think the United States government is not afraid of people with guns it's well well say that why would swallow will say? Well if you disagree with us, we have to come. Take your guns and he didn't say that. But he said what Ben Shapiro said was a was a good reason for the Reds flag laws. Well, what Ben said was my play children belong sing to me, and if you want to come, take my children away, because I won't teach them that there are no genders. I'm sorry, you meet me at the front door with a gun, because I will do
defend my right to teach that to my children and to keep my children. That to me is perfectly reasonable perfectly reasonable it. I would never think of the state going in and taking somebody away their children away because they they believe that there are ninety seven genders they would say. Well, you know what let the free market work that out. Let the public work that out. You know that kid is going to grow up and he's going to believe all kinds of crazy things. Well, that's ok, he'll believe lots of crazy things, but it's mom and dad's right to teach it to him, and we know over eighty percent of people who question their gender early in life wine and don't have the surgery wind up coming out on the other side and saying they're pleased that they didn't have the surgery.
You know that's just eventually people kind of figure that stuff out now, if you want to change the sex of your four year old six year old, even ten year old. Well, then maybe we should maybe we should talk about that is this society 'cause, that's a new idea. I I think that is abusive. Because you're making a change, they cannot change back and they might like princess dresses today, but it's too dead study show later they don't. So if you are fundamentally altering their body and their chemistry, Well, that's uh, that's something we should all discuss, but right now I totally fine. You can do that, that's totally fine. When did we decide that when did we ever? When did we ever voice that the elite
are voicing that and they want to jam that down my throat? No well, it's funny too, because it's it's really the reason why we didn't all the side. That is because a lot of times were kinda, none of our business yeah right they they they are taking advantage of the thing that they want to end the advantage of of parental choice and- and you can raise your parents. However, you want no you're talking about physical changes in you know, cutting somebody open for surgery. They don't need that's covered under other laws, but first arguing for those things teaching your kids there's ninety seven genders, but since that is a completely your right as a record, it might be something that you think it's nuts yep to write You know, I don't like it, but that's you're right. I I teach my faith this. You know it's so crazy is my faith came out with a pro
elevation of a family in the 90s- and I remember everybody going. Why did it? Why would they issue this and it was a very big deal. It's a cornerstone of our church and it talks about how sacred the family is and that gender is something that is a sign. Find eternally in Heaven that you are born male and female and they are not to be changed or trifled with. This is in the 90s it specific about that. So now, you're going to come and tell me that I have to teach my children, something that my faith says absolutely not absolutely not. No, you know what I have a right to my faith to my practice of religion of raising my children and if that means, I meet you at the front door with a gun, damn right,
I'll meet you at the front door with a gun. Now I don't believe my faith will say that, but that's the way I feel. So. Okay, so red flag laws, there's the first. It's only what we just got through one one of the policies proposed a ban On high capacity magazines, that's a dumbest thing. I've ever heard. Do you know that you have something called a 3d printer, an you can print magazines, the bad guys will just print them I mean people who have a 3d printer who will be the law they're not going to print them. You could print those add your howls, it's so ridiculous to me and and to think that you could stop them from being mailed around order on the internet is insane. A nun named relative of mine, recently told me that they got in the mail of a gift from a friend of theirs, which had
and to be edibles right B. Noam marijuana laced food. Okay, hi! Stop in that I'd like to know how I'd like right, the Texas doesn't have it legal Utah doesn't have it legal, but you're telling me you're gonna! Stop there. I think in individually inspected every package of gummy bears that gets mailed to see if there's marijuana in it. It's just affected Lee Legal in there in every state because of the sea. Things like this. Try to ban it. Anyone who wants it can get it right, and the same thing has happened with these tiny pieces of plastic or metal. They could easily we're talking about a container what it, what it's a container to spring a high capacity magazines. What it is anybody can get these things you can get the parts for them easily can three d print them. You can get the mailed you know from from. You would
make them you could make some room. You could make it it's ridiculous to think that banning them would do anything. No, no! It will keep them out of the hands of people who want to respect the law yeah. It will not do it for or anyone who doesn't give a flying. Crap right I mean this. Is this? Isn't I'm making a gun? This is and making a magazine it, and you can have this conversation with people who have never held a gun, because They have no idea what a magazine is they've. Absolutely! No, idea. What a magazine is an it to q awhile to really understand magazine and clip it's different, and you know what once you learn that you're like yeah? I understand it's like we're, not a republic or not democracy. Where republic, it's one of '
those things that people don't get an it drives people nuts, because you cannot have an argument with somebody who doesn't even understand the difference between a clip and a magazine because it shows you haven't been around enough to understand it. How am I going to have a conference conversation with you about a gun when you can't tell me about the little plastic thing that you put bullets in, that goes into the gun or a little metal thing that holds all the bullets together before you put him in a gun that you are at and if there's no way to have that conversation of the person you're talking to has no knowledge of the topic. No it- and this is this- goes to also what what stupid beddoes campaign said about all of this when they talked about you know people when you try to ban the rare fifteen or take it from the what's to prevent them from keeping these guns. There's gonna, keep them and beddoes representative said: look no
We believe the american people are law abiding and when it comes down when these laws were passed, they're going to follow the long handle them in well, then why are you passing the law if you believe that they are following the law? Why are you taking their guns they're going to cross the line on keeping their gun, but not this evil murder, the people? You are talking about you're, admitting that your law has no effect 'cause you're, only taking them from the people who care about the law care about the law, to not, let's say shoot up a movie theater right like these, are not the people you need. Worry about killing others, the people that are going to willingly turn in their budget only taking them away from the most compliant people, because this honestly is not about guns yeah, as I wrote in the book called control, it's not about guns. This is about control, and our founders understood that
he knew that's why you have the second amendment. You know, England, England, everybody had guns. In England, everybody had guns until the king decided. You know they're getting a little unruly here and they don't like the things that I'm doing take away all their guns. That's what that was the lesson our our founders understood Weinman. How did the king get outta control? Oh, he got out of control when he took everybody's guns. That's how you know. Why did the scottish throw it have you ever seen the Scottish when they take the polls and they throw the pull? You know like the logs you've ever seen that yeah. You know why they do that because they, weren't allowed to have any guns or any swords or any weapons of any type, because they the king, knew these guys were fighters and they
never going to give up, so it was illegal for any of them, so they trained by throwing big rocks. They kept their milk very people strong. By how far can you throw that tree because you didn't have any other weapon, so you needed to be able to kill them with rocks and with big huge branches? I was going to guess utter boredom. No, no! No surprisingly, that was that was my in two. It was kind of like the Canadian of the sweeping on the ice. Now this one actually had a military purpose for it, the best of the Glenn Beck program. Hey. It's and and you're listening to the Glenn Beck program. If you like what you're hearing on this show, make sure you check out Pat Gray unleashed it's available wherever you download your favorite podcasts. Let me start here
so you know exactly where I'm coming from my church has made a proclamation called proclamation of a family. Now they didn't do this because they were freaking out about what is happening right now and rushing just to say something. So they could keep their bigoted view. No, they made a proclamation to the world on the family and they did this in the 1990s. And, quite honestly, anybody in the faith went Dah when it came out now it looks a little prophetic second paragraph. All human beings, male and female, are created in the image of God. Each is a beloved spirit, son or daughter of heavenly parents and, as such, each has divine nature and destiny. Gender is an ascend
shall characteristic of individual premortal, mortal an internal, eternal identity and purpose, so my faith has been teaching forever that gender is not fluid. Gender is not a mistake. You are not a mistake, but now bed- oh and the others democratic Party would like to remove that responsibility, and if you think that it's not happening think again now it we did one hundred percent support behind better. What is the second amendment for, if not to protect the first amendment.
And I said: if you want to be a parent, that's more of a babysitter just go to Canada. Are you a babysitter, or are you a parent as a parent? Do you get to direct the affair, the decisions of your kids, while still respecting their basic human rights as human beings? You help them determine their course in life, what they wear, what they don't at the beginning, what they eat when they sleep the books, they read what games they play when they get a bike when they get their first BB gun. It's an awesome and terrifying experience and responsibility
every single minute and if you're, a good parent. You worry all the time about that. One kid that's going to come in and influence them and steer them in another direction. After all of the hard work you've done, and then we pay a university to do it. The responsibility of not screwing something up, and I got news for you- we all screw kids up. We all do we all make mistakes. What if you let them eat too much candy what if they sit too close to the tv and get eye cancer would have letting them play with your apple watch results in accidentally sending dozens of pictures of your nose hairs to your pta president. As far as your kid is concerned, you are a bit of a benevolent dictator, at least until he
into their teens and figure out that you're, mostly full of crap. You really don't know what you're doing those are fun days as a pair Aren't you and your spouse run the show when you have a babysitter. They only have a select set of discretion, Gary powers that you delegate to them. They run the set of plays that you select feed them. This put them in bed at nine video games. Only after homework is done, babysitters, the good ones at least simply do the list of things that you tell them to do. They don't have any authority to engage in life, altering actions for your kids. There. They hadn't there at two ten before a very short period of time, tend to your children, but not decide who your kids will be or how will be raised.
School is not a babysitter. School is not apparent. Are we parents anymore? Do we get decide how and when our child develops, should they take the stone vitamins are not should they get all their vaccines? Things are not. Are they ready to learn about the birds and the bees or not? Are they mature enough to have a sleepover to carry a cell phone to ride bikes across mains to buy a soda the dairy queen? These choices? Aren't you or is any more? You can't send your kids walking down the street just to go to dairy, Queen God for bid. Somebody sees that child and says you're in you're, responsible parent, what they were going to the park to play. I, yes,
How much hate mail from people not only really wanted rights, headlight lost, but living in Canada? A lot what rights do I'd lost living in in great Britain, a ton ask Charlie Gard's parents, the child, whom british socialized medicine decided. It was too expensive to treat for a severe disorder and they eh two feeding tubes to die despite the parents, please to remove him from the hospital and take him to another country for attempted treatment. Despite the court battles in the global, press coverage the death panel? Yes, the death panel decided he would set a bad precedent and then all the parents that didn't have the chance and the choice to treat their children will they might they might up that Bobbi. An uprising
even though even though the children could be taken outside of the country at zero cost to the to the government, you can't allow the parents to do that. What about in Canada, where it's considered legal child abuse not to address your child with their preferred gender pronoun at any age? elder abuse, that's what it is in Canada. Now, child abuse that could result in your child being removed for your home and placed in government ordered foster care with you in jail as if but beating your child with a tire iron. The same goes for teach your children that homosexual Mohammed sexuality might be a sin in the eyes of God, also federal offense punishable by potential jail time. Even if your religion beliefs indicate that it's a sin, that's why my people came here to America and not to can
we came here because we knew we had certain rights that no one else guaranteed, but our car institution guarantees our right of freedom of religion. How about in the EU, where parents can be fined if it's determined that they're not giving Islam fair and equal coverage to Christianity or Judaism in their home schooling program?. No matter your religious traditions, your scriptures, if you teach your kids, that Moses was a prophet but Mohammed was not in in Europe. They can take your child because you're engaging in hate speech the hate speech of teaching christian theology, it's being superior to muslim theology, not in your own home, not in all of Europe. What right have I lost? How about this? Are your kids ready to learn about sex and what
age are they? When do they learn where babies come from and believe me, they start asking way before they're ready to know much detail. Whoever invented the stork story was genius cuz, you do you can delay for a little while seriously parents parents decide that in even in their own home, each child is different. How and when and and how you have that discussion and what you say or maybe not not anymore, that ship has sailed. After all, his parents were not really parents anymore it in most of the world. Here in America, it's holding on by
thread, and I mean that thread is not good, maybe we're just all babysitters. Maybe the government will leave us a note on when the children should be in bed what we should teach when we should teach what they can watch what they can't watch in twenty fifteen advanced sex education came a required curriculum in canadian public schools, including primary and secondary school for kindergarten through 12th grade announcing the controversial program. The education minister named crew indicated the program would include what he turned age: appropriate instruction on LGBT Q and gender expression issues, sexual orientation, sexual assault, as well as traditional sex education topics such as preventing s t d
although Mr Prue Knowledge, some parents and teachers may be a pro opposed to this content, the instruction is necessary, saying quote: I know it's not an easy subject. I know the questions are sensitive, but we have to respond to a society and a societal issue. The new program, was developed in collaboration with sex ologist, as well as public and private organizations, including planned parenthood. When asked. If parents who objected to the content would be allowed to opt out of the new sex education program is to prove indicated such waivers would be allowed only in exceptional cases such as if a student had been the prior victim of sexual abuse other than that no exemptions would be allowed for moral or religious belief, Canada and all those who tweeted me. What if I lost you lost did long ago, and you probably don't care America
At least some of us still do because we are guaranteed is that right? You never had that right. We were guaranteed that right. And Ben Shapiro is right. That is the only reason the constitution exists or the government exist. This is the only reason guns governments are in, Instituted among men to protect those rights, but that's not all. It gets worse, not only in Europe, but will take a look at what's happening here as well and continue to ask yourself. Are you a parent or are you a babysitter? This is the best of the Glenn Beck program.
It's Glenn. And if you like what you hear on the program, you should check out Pat Gray unleashed his podcast is available wherever you download your favorite podcast hi, it's Glenn. If you're a subscriber to the podcast, can you do us a favor, an rate us on Itunes? If you're not a subscriber, become one today and listen on your own time, you can subscribe on Itunes thanks that, oh, has said in the last few days that if you, if your church of your school, is not teaching, you know gender fluidity and everything else that you'll be forced to because the laws are changing. Well, no you're not going to force me, because this is a really for me- This is a religious doctrine. My doctrine of my church is that- and this wasn't just made up this is
thirty years ago that gender is part of your identity of your soul. There are no mistakes and that male and female are specific. And they are assigned, you don't have to believe this, but that's what I believe the they are assigned when you, spirit, is created. There is no mix up on that. Now again, you don't have to believe that but I have a right to say it. I have a right to believe it and I have a right to live it in public.
Now I don't have a right to hate people that are different. Well, I actually I do. You do have a right to be an idiot in hate. Whoever you want, but that would be idiotic doesn't mean that I hate anybody and I certainly am not teaching my children that there should be You know violence or they're, half people or anything like that. I don't even know who would do that well makes up for people who believe we came from monkeys because there's got to be some half people around here: half monkey half people. After all it it was the survival of the fittest, species I'm not sure which ones are fit or not. If you think that this isn't an issue. Ben Shapiro was used this weekend. As who said I'll defend my right in my synagogue's right to teach whatever it is. They teach
if you come to my house, to take my children away, because I believe in these things well, you'll meet at the door with a gun, because I have a right and the left immediately. Freaked out CLI got a gun crazy. This would be a red flag law if they have their way Ben Shapiro would have his rights taken from him. But that is exactly what the first amendment is for to defend the first amendment and the government makes the sexual active, ization and grooming of a twelve year old child as state policy, using the threat of fines or jail time for parents who may not choose to have their chill and instructed how to develop sexual relationships. You're right as a parent are gone when a state is teaching five and six year olds how to identify and spell vagina vulva anus penis instead of cat dog mom and dad your rights as a parent or gone,
when the state is requiring first grade teachers to read my princess boy, that reads: Dyson loves, pink sparkly things. Sometimes he wears dresses. Sometimes he wears jeans. He likes to wear his his princess tiara, even when climbing trees, he's a princess boy, then that is Rick when that is required for seven, an eight year olds to to be read. But Huck Finn, cat you're in the rye and the jungle book are all banned. Your rights as a parent are gone. Schools in Canada and the UK, an increasingly so here in America, had become nothing more than sexual training. Centers grew young children as young as five and six years old for sexually active lives, gender fluidity and bi sexuality.
In the name of remaking the world into a politically correct, safe space for every possible gender identity, every sex will behavior in Brooklyn proclivity. They have made it the government's business, a hyper sexualize, our children, normalizing ultra rare behaviors such as gender dysphoria and they're teaching our young children how to develop a plan around sexual activity and figuring out what could possibly be different and sexually pleasurable. These lessons happen when the kids are preteens well, children are going to become. Sexually active anyway. It's a societal problem. We have to deal with your damn right. It is one hundred percent of societal problem. And that's why I don't want society fixing it. We.
I have a problem in our society when we believe that by law, ten and twelve year old kids need to learn about anal intercourse as a way to not get pregnant, but not abstinence. It is a societal problem. The problem is Our kids are more likely to be exposed to pornography than the last generation they're more likely to be be bullied. If they're gay. We have solution for those kinds of problems, and parents have to do their job in the solution. The same as it's always been, the problem is, we have somehow come to believe that the only way to solve any perceived ill in the world is for government to act. That is against the constitution. I have rights as a parent
Now could churches in and religions help provide a framework for understanding relationships, self worth sexuality in love? No, that goes. In the sky he's not real. Could Prince determined the right way in the wrong way to discuss sexual feelings and urges with their kids? No parents might make their kids feel Uncomfort Obel. Only in the scientifically based classroom setting can children freely discover and express their sexuality. If, in your state, your province country, your local school district, you don't have a choice about sending your kids into a classroom or teachers are required to teach this kind of content. Don't even pretend you have any rights left as a parent? Are you delusional? Have you fallen that far that we we somehow able to believe that some,
how our duty as a citizen is to let our children be psychologically and philosophically molded by some government stooge into sexually active gender and sex orientation, fluid agents of change there are children. These are the people we've been working so hard to keep them away from their whole life and now they're in a position of authority. I don't know about you, but as for Mister Shapiro, I'm with you Ben I'm with ya Bed don't show up at my door, demanding my kids learn about developing a sexual plan at the age of twelve, because, if you do we're gonna, have a serious disagreement and also have a serious disagreement with me. Many of my neighbors about the second amendment as well. This
second amendment is not there for hunting. It's not there for sport. It is there to keep tyranny at bay. It is therefore the citizens, so they have a way he to rise up against that contain at an out of control government that wants nothing more than tyranny. They want the guns, because they that way you can control the populace. I think it was said best buy Charlton Heston out of my cold ed hands. It is never outrageous or radical to defend the bill of rights, don't be a babysitter. You are a parent.
Do your job and do not surrender this ground. Better stay out of my house stay out of my home school stay out of my kids lives, you're, not welcome there, I'm a parent, that's my job! That's my wife's job and we may hire the occasional babysitter, but believe me, I would know, never hire some creep out of Washington to watch my kids we're parents. No, no others need apply. This is the best of the Glenn Beck program
like listening to this podcast. If you're not a subscriber become one now on Itunes, but while you're there, it was a favor and rate the shell, if you red will yet you need to we'll, is a place for thinking. People, if you don't mind, if I think getting angry at somebody else's opinion is the way to go. Don't read quill at if you like, into actual stimulation. That makes you stretch and think read: Collette Quill, dot com Colin in right has just written an article for quill at no one is, born in the wrong body he's an Eveleth, a biologist and I'm not I understand, all of all of his his charts and everything else here, but I think I do, and I thought you should hear it to Colin Right- welcome to the
ram thanks for having me on. I appreciate it yeah you bet so tell me your date. Tell me your point, which is heresy today, yeah, so I think before we get into sort of what the the article is about. It's important really briefly talk about what it's really not many have kind of haven't continue to paint. This is sort of like this anti trans or transphobic article. We were, we think the trans people don't really exist. Doesn't what we're saying at all? We acknowledge gender dysphoria is very real, often debilitating so logical condition, serious cases, maybe transitioning ones, body to appear as the opposite sex you know could probably reduce symptoms. We we don't deny any of that. What we are concerned with, however, though, is that vulnerable children who may be displaying sort of sex eight, local mannerisms or personalities still be tomboyish. Females, effeminate males, they're, being told that
maybe have been born in the wrong body or are trans, whereas in reality these cross x, stereo, typical, bitch, this is completely normal and is far and away more pretty have later homosexuality than being trans. So I guess we we are saying is that we were that our society is sort of pathologizing gender, a tip behavior, which is contribute a dramatic rise in adolescent Jenner. To forget that we're seeing so there's a couple of things that come to mind on this and and- and this is the point of when I was introducing you on our we, you know we're just accepting these things and just throwing them in and are we doing more harm the play- gender dysphoria is being taught and and so widely embraced. You I agree with you, I mean there's all kinds of things that happen with our children, but studies show and what is it? Eighty or eighty, five percent of those who are
probably now being told have gender dysphoria they grow out of it either become straight: gay, lesbian, bisexual, but not trans, gender. So aren't we actually targeting the lg and and bees and and leading them into saying? No, you are definitely a ti. Isn't that wrong yeah. I think it's been sort of disk as a sort of sort of new conversion therapy, whereas, whereas where the you know, we've been against conversion therapy trying to tell you know how much we use or even adults that try to convince them out of their of their same sex attraction- and now we should be doing- is we're conflating gender atypical behavior with being born potentially in the wrong body, and so instead, just allowing these use to grow up into what most it's going to be. A homosexual adult were
eventually now doing a new form of can version therapy were things no. Actually, you have these sex atypical stereotyped behaviors, your maybe more likely to be born in the wrong body, so we're converting them homosexuals to and identities instead of out of their homosexual behavior in as we've done in the past. So what's driving this Colin yeah, that's hard to say, there's been an uptick in sort of gender identity, replacing our discussions about biological sex must across the board, so I've just been noticing this just in the last, maybe five years. But this is the last two, maybe even even more prevalent, where I I individuals, individual are academic. Caesar
people who have Ph Ds or in grad school and their sort of, I guess, having this narrative, that biological sex is sort of a spectrum or it's a social construct, and that we need to listen to people of what they say about their biological sex. Actually, is you know we see this ideology of people now not being you know, having their sex described at birth but they're having their sex assigned at birth, and so this completion, just with with sex a typical behaviors with biologic sex itself, whereas in reality over ninety nine point, ninety eight percent of all, visuals, are going to fall unambiguously into one or the other sexes. But this gender sort of ideology which has made definition, sometimes many conflicting and there's many times. The definitions are quite circular seems to taking presidents and we're not really our society is not really prepared, for
what will actually what it actually means if we were to replace a biological sex with this objective identity in law. We're seeing this in sports we're seeing this in the prison system using this and who is admitted to a certain rape, shelters, for instance, so the consequences or quite dramatic, and we don't seem to really appreciate that- or at least half of society doesn't to be appreciated. I was going to say: there's lots of us that appreciate that and and are saying wait, wait, wait I mean you're and then. What I fear honestly Colin, is a is a backlash because it's starting to affect average people who don't have any the hatred or anything else, but you know I've got a daughter and she's in volleyball and a guy you know comes in volleyball he's just he's built differently and you know, or if she's, a runner in long distance, running or whatever and some
guys I identify as a female will. Now he can run on the team and you're just you're hurting women, you're hurting women yeah we're seeing this can relation, usually the the univariate fallacy and it's basically people were point at any single trait that exist between males and females and they'll. Show that, like oh, look, there's there's so much overlap in these traits that you know we can't if at any one, traitors spit strictly male or female. So we have males are on average taller than females, some people will say you know bill. I know some woman who's a lot taller than most knows that. I know, and so this is evidence that there's no real sex differences. The thing is that these these small differences, the small app differences in many different traits. These often stack up as well. So if you look at sort of a multi varied approach to me in females we see that males are, by and large, quite different than fee,
especially in the realm of athletics. So we can't you commonly hear will say that you know males and females come in all shapes and sizes or something like fat and that you know we shouldn't prohibit any mail from competing in emails, because you know here's here's an example of a really tall female and that's just frankly, quite a bit word because you know, even though females come in quote unquote all shapes inside. So it's it's, no random chance that no female has come in the size and shape unable to compete in the NBA or the NFL, and these are leagues that don't actually bar female athletes from competing. It's just that no individual has ever know female has ever been able to compete in these leagues. One quick thing to point out to is that these small differences in just the average traits the height or strength, even though there might be substantial overlap among the general population when we're talking about things like sports were talking about the the elite of the elite. When you look at the tail end of these distributions
and of the elite of the elite, we see that these are way are dominated by males like proportion wise. So we can't look at our everyday experience. Kind of use this as a as a metric for how the extremes- Argo to behave, started calling right he's in evolutionary biologist at Penn State is a piece in Quizlet is no one is born in the wrong body, I'm thoughts on being in this community, because we here lot of the experts who would disagree with you who would the exact opposite of everything that you said so far. Is you know when it comes to summarizing these things would say that it is more of a political oppo, mission to what you're saying or is it a scientific one? Is there a large scientific community that actually does see the things that I think the average person sees as basic human facts of existence? Yeah? So I do.
He is being driven largely by politics at least that's influencing their conclusions. Uh. I wouldn't say that this is done in ten. Only. I don't think these people are being dishonest, but I think they may be more difficult for them to release spot the policies in their own arguments that they're making such as when I reference before times. People will look at a univariate metric of differences between the sexes and that feels to take into account the mulch the ways that males and females differ. I've tried to point this out on threads on twitter and articles that I'm writing, but I haven't seen this actually refuted in any coherent way, and the fallacy is pretty much just Dan for themselves, and even if we criticize them, they tend not to go away and the main method they seem to be using to sort of silence, voice like mine and others doesn't seem to be at engaging with with our idea
in the content of what we're saying, but it usually is sort of just uh you're, a bigot you're a transphobe. Oh look, you're publishing, Ecolab! This is a magazine. That's known for publishing, race, science or whatever they want to just sort of guilt by association? Will point to some problematic? that might agree with you in okay, like in the U. I also agree with this one person who's, you know of some fat in the big, so. Therefore, you are bad too. So largely this silencing tactics that are being used, which is really quite angry, So does this make Colin you or world? I assume you always. You grew up always wanted to be a scientist. Does this make Is science in a golden era or a or not dark ages, but headed towards a seeming dark age where, if you're, if you don't agree, you're a heretic yeah and he took
sort of lump all of science into this. So there's certain fields that are more played by sort of ideology than others. So I wouldn't I don't think particle physics is particularly influenced by by gender. In your, is a biologist is evolutionary biologist yeah. So I def we see it among grad students and even faculty, and before it got published. Another quote before called the new evolution deniers. Where I mentioned similar types of things- and I sent this mentors of mine people that I that I knew sort of agreed with me in my professional circle and the consensus from basically everyone I sent this too was that you're absolutely correct, but you cannot say this. This could be just career suicide, you know I'm I'm a postdoc right now. If I don't actually have a faculty job, I'm applying to fact but the this could be just for my career and I spent over a decade of going to school in five years in grad school. To get my phd in
you know this could just be made. You know nullified overnight if the mob would decide to just you know right. One big hit article where, if someone googles calling right this, you know they just see transphobic, you know what have you so there. It is Def an issue within my field. It gets worse. I think, when you go to the psychological sciences, worth when you go to sociology worse when you women's studies, etcetera, etcetera, but these other fields are definitely influencing my feel to and there's there seems to be it's sort of a sort of almost an orwellian thing going on where, if we criticize social justice, social justice in their minds, the a lot of people for a quick look at the queen that with just civil rights. So if you say I'm against this social justice ideology they're here, like oh you're, against civil rights, and so you they can't win almost you know, you think I disagree with the you know. The department of truth is like well, you disagree with.
Truth, so there's sort of this language game going on where it's hard to actually engage with he is without him you leaving just painted as a as a bigot and anyway, they want to thicken to Smith. You quickly. It's only got a few seconds, but what made you decide to do it anyway, because I've always been interested in sort of the larger meta narrative around science and defending science? I used to defend evolus from the young earth creationists back in the mid to late two thousand, and I just realized how much I kept sort of self censoring. As I went through graduate school and and after, and they got to a point where I realized that I just much rather live a life where I can speak my mind Lee then sort of lives for this zipper lift life. As an academic just go, this one now, where I can to study my ants and wasps in my narrow field, but have to remain silent on every email so that wasn't that wasn't something I was willing to sacrifice. I supposed for you good,
you call in right evolutionary biologist, Quille, Quillette Piece is called no one is born in the wrong body. You can follow him on twitter at swipe. Right spelled with a w. Thank you. So call appreciated the blaze radio network on demand
Transcript generated on 2019-10-15.