As reported by The Daily Wire, on this week’s episode of The Ben Shapiro Show: Sunday Special — that’s Nazi troll Ben Shapiro, by the way, who, according to a doctor, should be placed in a straitjacket (here) — astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson stopped by. I guess that would be, then, Nazi supporter Neil.
And the fan of the Führer had stuff to say about his latest book, in addition to offering a word or two on transgender sports.
Ben posed the following:
“Moving on from climate change, which is an area — as I said — where some people on the Right are not particularly interested, to areas where it seems like the Left is militating against the advent of science. One of those areas is the area of transgenderism, where the argument…”
Neil pointed out there are “no transgender letters” in his brand new Letters from an Astrophysicist.
Ben went on:
“It’s true — nothing in the book. We’ve strayed now far from the topic of your book. But since I have you here and you’re a science person, I’m going to ask you to science for me a little bit.
“[W[hen it comes to transgenderism, the argument that is typically made by gender theorists is that gender is entirely separate from sex. You’ve seen the argument made that it makes no difference, on average, if men are stronger than women are — that if we were to allow transgender women to compete with non-transgender women, then this would somehow not disadvantage biological women. This seems to me absolutely a-scientific, that if we’re actually gonna have a discussion about gender and sex, that [discussion] should be based in data, which suggests that mammals are in fact binary in terms of their sex, unless you have intersex birth defects typically, or genetic defects.”
Neil was happy as a pig in slop. Or something like that:
“I’m happy to opine on this. … So there’s the matrix of what you are biologically, how you express yourself, who you choose as a sexual partner. If we actually live in a free country as we tell ourselves, people’s freedom to behave in any of those ways should not concern you at all. Nor are they requiring that you behave that way. Okay, this is for their own freedoms because we live in a free country.”
The space man thinks maybe athletics should be parted based on hormones rather than sex.
Take it away, Tyson:
“Now, what is unresolved here is, what do you do with sports? It’s unresolved, and I’ve followed that closely. And I don’t see any — I don’t see any meaningful solutions to come down off of that. We know that hormones manifest differently in different people, and — that’s the whole thing with steroids, steroids are hormones — we rallied against steroids in professional sports because it gives you an undue advantage. So, I try to think of what the future of sports would be in the world of a gender spectrum, and it may be, you don’t specify whether it’s a male or female sport. You just take measurements of what your hormonal balances are, and so you compete based on your hormones. It’s a thought I had, I don’t know where it’s going to land.”
Ben wanted to talk tykes:
“So, you talk in your book about the education of children and teaching children about science. Right now, children are being taught about the quote-unquote ‘gender spectrum,’ which is not scientifically based. That is a theory-based idea.”
Neil for the block:
“No, wait, wait, wait, hold on. People express themselves on a spectrum, so you learn that.”
Ben asserted that’s an expression, not something related to science.
The older dude between the two dudes was interested in a different kind of fact.
Do it, deGrasse:
“So, whether the fact that people want to express themselves on a spectrum, on a gender spectrum, whether that fact is something you want to put in a sociology class or in a science class, maybe that remains to be determined. But it is a real fact about real society.”
The reason: Those hormones are coursing through a body — a big, tall, wide-spanned one, in the case of a man. And that man has male hips. And male bones. And all that brick and mortar was transformed by male puberty.
The difference is so great, as Joe’s stated, that an untrained male’s reaction times are superior even to a professionally-trained female’s.
Neil is certainly right, of course — people do absolutely have the freedom to identify how they wish.
And despite the fact that expression doesn’t affect physical reality, the two are being merged right quickly — consider a medical form from a California doctor’s office. The document asks new patients their gender — Male of Female.
Then we seal our masks and point our fins toward the surface:
Which best describes the patient:
- Identifies as a Male
- Identifies as a Female
- Genderqueer neither exclusively male nor female
- Additional gender category or other, please specify
- Choose not to disclose
If the patient is taking hormones, that is — of course — important to know, as symptoms from the intake or blood work results will be interpreted accordingly. But what’s the relevance of a patient declaring their “additional gender category” of identity, when medicine — like athletics — only concerns itself with biology?
If I’m my own original, never-before-having-existed gender, “@!#[email protected]!” — named after Q*bert’s cuss word (and I believe the Q
Man might also have his own gender thing going on) — how does the doctor differently care for my arm? Or my more difference-making parts? Is there a @!#[email protected]! prostate check? Or a special mammogram? @!#[email protected]!, both of those hurt.
But what do I know? I’m just someone eating a turkey and swiss omelet paired with high-pulp OJ.
Someone better traveled — Chelsea Clinton — knows differently than I, as she recently dished:
“How can you treat someone if you don’t recognize who they feel and know in their core they are?”
So take it from her — she’s the First Daughter. Or Son.
Or @!#[email protected]!.
However she wants to identify.
See 3 more pieces from me:
Find all my RedState work here.
Thank you for reading! Please sound off in the Comments section below.