Ep 11 | Dr. Debra Soh | The Glenn Beck Podcast

The Blaze Radio Network.

On demand.

So many things are up for grabs, it seems.

For instance, men and women.

Are they different?

What's the difference between gender and sex?

Should children be allowed to choose their own gender?

Or is that sex?

And if it's different than their own, should they be allowed to undergo hormone treatment?

Or is that child abuse?

Or is it child abuse to not allow them to do that?

What is the Me Too movement?

What's it accomplishing?

What are the negatives?

What are the positives?

They're now starting to build sex robots, prostitute robots.

Well, is that a good idea or is that a bad idea?

And what happens when the robot claims consciousness because of AGI or ASI?

How do we determine any of this?

Through science?

What does science mean anymore?

How about academia?

And why has gender studies overtaken the legitimate science of sex and gender?

Should institutions institute racial quotas?

All of these questions and so many more are now being answered by one woman.

Her name is Deborah So.

She is a renegade.

She's a sexologist and a science journalist who has taken the world by storm.

She's only 28 years old, 28, and she already has a Ph.D.

in psychology.

Dr.

So is currently a columnist for The Globe and Mail and also Playboy.com.

She also co-hosts Wrong Speak.

It's hosted by Quillette, a podcast about the things we believe to be true but cannot say.

She's been profiled in the New York Times, but if you prefer, there's also a profile of Dr.

So on theblaze.com.

This is just the beginning for Dr.

So.

She is now performing a task that we as a country desperately need, and she is facing plenty of heat for it.

Dr.

So and I sat down for just over an hour, and we went through so many issues.

We talked about things that people are afraid to talk about.

Today's episode: Dr.

Deborah So.

So let me

start with

When you when you went back to school you started looking into

is it paraphilia?

That's right.

Paraphilia

and hypersexuality.

Yes.

Why?

What was it that drew you to that?

I found, well, sex research super fascinating, more broadly.

But with those topics in particular...

Wait, stop there.

Why super fascinating?

What do we learn?

Well, even basic things like what I was studying with regards to paraphilias and hypersexuality.

So a paraphilia is an unusual sexual preference.

It has implications for so many aspects of who we are as humans and also sexual orientation, which is another area of interest I find really interesting.

Okay, so tell me, what do we

learn from it?

Yeah, what do we learn from the paraphilia and how is it applied in what way?

Well, because many people have paraphilias, but it is such a stigmatized topic.

So so many people walk around feeling ashamed of what they're into sexually.

They are not happy.

Some of them get labeled with things like, say, sex addiction when it's not appropriate.

I mean, sex addiction isn't actually a recognized diagnosis.

But because we can't talk about these things openly in society, or it's considered really taboo to do so,

it affects people in their day-to-day lives.

They're unhappy.

They suffer.

Right.

So

I think I'm just wondering:

a

is there a

boundary anywhere?

Is there a,

for instance, I think you wrote your thesis on

what are they called?

Furries?

Oh, no, that was a side project.

Okay, side project.

Okay, so it's related.

Do these people believe that they are

that they're part animal, that they're a male fox or an elfkin?

I think it depends on the person.

So with furries, again, it was related to my dissertation in that I was interested in atypical sex.

And I always tell people this, but they never believe me.

I'm very vanilla.

I'm not kinky in my personal life.

I'm very traditional, monogamous.

But I think that's why that research really spoke to me, because it was so different.

I felt like I could really learn something from pursuing that line of work, which I think as a researcher, that's your job.

It's just to pursue novel ground and learn things about the world so with furries i mean my interest with that community came from i mean when you look at it from the outside it looks very bizarre i mean i don't judge i don't judge but i think most people are either fascinated or they find it weird and it's portrayed as being uh you know these people are deviant or sexually perverse and so i just wanted to know for myself what is this community about and at the time this was a couple years ago really there was nothing in the scientific literature of course as a scientist that's the first place i would go right There was nothing published on these kids.

So, you know, I was curious to just see what is it?

Because in the media, all you see are these crazy stories about how it's like a sex party.

And then the furries themselves, if you go on their forums, they say it's not about sex.

We're just having fun.

So I went and I saw that really it was just a bunch of teenage kids playing video games.

And it was so anticlimactic.

And I thought, how is it that people have got them so wrong?

So I wrote about that.

It got published.

And that's actually how my writing career got started.

So how is it that it got

so wrong?

How did the media get it so wrong?

Yeah, how, why?

Why do we get it so wrong?

I think because people want to focus on what's stigmatized about sex.

I'm very sex positive.

I, you know, I don't think there's anything wrong with human beings talking about sex.

We should be able to talk about it just like anything else.

I think sex research should be considered a legitimate science.

So, I think anything that has to do with sex on the surface, people latch on to that.

Even if, say, with furries, it's just about wanting to spend time with your friends and having interest in comic books.

And it's kind of like a make-believe world in a way.

But there are people now, I think, that will claim that they're elf kins.

Oh, yeah.

Right.

Yeah.

And that's where I'm wondering about the

boundary.

Is there a boundary where you say, isn't that

dysphoria?

Isn't that some sort of that?

No, you're not an elf.

Right.

Yeah.

I don't think that they necessarily represent the majority of the people in that community.

I mean, that community community is very heterogeneous.

So there are a lot of different types of people that gravitate to it for different reasons.

So take it out of that community.

Because I'm looking at a broader, you know, when we,

first of all, I can't believe that sex research is not considered actual science.

It's one of the biggest drivers of mankind.

Well, I'm glad you feel that way.

I don't think most people feel that way about it, though.

Most people will say, why is the government funding this?

You know, why are we putting money towards this?

And when findings come out, people usually either are sensationalized or people look upon them and say, well, what's the value of that?

Wouldn't we understand

dysphoria?

Wouldn't we understand what's happening in the Catholic Church?

Wouldn't we understand some pretty big issues with this?

You would think so.

But I think it just makes some people very uncomfortable, so they just want to shut it down.

I mean, we can talk a bit about the Catholic Church, but even in that case, people, it's easier to turn a blind eye, I think.

That's frightening.

So let me just get to that one last

attempt at that answer, which is

because I've seen what you write on transgenderism, and it seems like where I think most people are.

I could be wrong.

Look,

I don't want to tell anybody how to live their life.

And honestly, when I saw Bruce Jenner first come out and tell his story,

I was horrified that he lived his life all this time feeling that way.

I can't imagine what that would be like.

I wouldn't want to go through that.

I'm not going to judge him on things.

And I think that's where I hope most people are.

But then we get into

the kind of the strong-arming of

everything.

Look, I'm not going to tell you what to do and believe, and don't tell me what to do and believe.

Let's just, can't we just leave each other alone?

Where is the place of,

no, this is unhealthy.

This is unhealthy.

This is, you know, transgenderism with, you know, with kids, with kids.

That parents saying, hey, you know what?

Sex change.

Wait a minute.

Wait a minute.

That's not good.

Not being able to name your child or say your child is a boy or girl, let them decide.

Is that healthy?

I'm asking the question.

Oh, right.

I see what you're saying.

So if we go back to, say, people who have quote-unquote species dysphoria, which isn't actually a medical condition, I think it comes down to what is the underlying cause.

So if people genuinely believe that they're a different species, I mean, there's absolutely no scientific research to back this up as a medical condition.

So there's probably some other form of psychopathology going on if they do believe that they are, say, a different animal or a non-existent creature.

Don't we do damage to people by just accepting and saying,

oh yeah, you're a box.

Yeah, and I mean, I don't want to downplay the issue of gender dysphoria in kids, but it is analogous because

it's similar where if someone has, if they're struggling with something and we're not actually talking about what the root issue is, it's not actually going to help them.

So what is, let's take transgenderism.

Let's take all of sex.

Sure.

How much of it, and is there a formula at all that you could tell?

How much of it is you're born this way, you just you just feel this way, and how much of it is

societal and your experiences

in terms of gender dysphoria when people feel that way?

Yeah, or your sexual preference, or

you know, is there, because I mean

I can't imagine,

at least, you know, even five years ago, that you want to,

I'm going to grow up and be a homosexual in a society that is saying that's bad.

Right.

So I can't imagine that that would be something that people really wanted to, you know, just take on.

I believe you're born that way.

Right.

But I also believe, and I could be wrong, you're a scientist, that

sometimes it can be because of tragedy or, or abuse or anything else.

Is there anything that backs that up?

For homosexuality?

Or any of these?

For homosexuality, no.

I would say it is very much biological.

And the most current research suggests that it is genetic.

So it has to do with hormonal exposure in the womb.

And so it isn't a choice.

I do think, though, even if being gay were a choice, really it should be someone's, if that's their decision, then I mean, no, I'm

care.

Yeah.

I don't care.

Yeah.

But in this case, it is very much, you know, whether you're attracted to men or women is very much determined before you're born.

Pedophilia?

Similar, which will upset a lot of people to say that, but it is biological research I've worked on.

We've shown that the brains of pedophilic men are wired differently from non-pedophilic men.

So, again, this is not to say, I have to really clarify, this is not the same as someone being gay, because previously there was, you know, people think that there's some sort of correlation there.

It's not.

But it does tell us something if we want to protect children and make society safer, if there's always going to be a small, for whatever reason, there's a small proportion of men in our society who are sexually attracted to kids and it's not something that can be changed what does that say in terms of how we treat it so from a research perspective we would suggest i don't i mean i don't work in research anymore but from the research i've done take a preventative approach where if someone feels this way they usually realize that about puberty they they feel this way change society so that they can get help so that they don't ever offend against kids because

if it's not something that can be changed this is something they're going to be dealing with their whole lives and it it can can be very difficult for an individual to never engage in any sex at all for their whole lives without any support.

So people get very upset when I talk about this because I think the idea that there are some adults in society who are sexually attracted to kids makes people understandably very uncomfortable.

And I don't disagree with that discomfort.

But I think if we want to, again, protect kids, we have to take a scientific approach to things instead of one that's emotionally based.

My son recently was targeted online by I saw you speak about that, yeah.

And

uh,

so I, you know,

um,

we have to

protect, but we we do have to have compassion um

for people.

Um

I just talked to a person

um yesterday who uh

was

um but put in juvenile detention, I think when he was 14,

um,

for

you know, um

abusing a child.

Abusing a child.

And um

he had been abused his whole childhood.

And he said to me, at that time, that was just normal.

That was normal for me.

And I think that's where I asked about

the

environmental, you know, is there any kind of environmental, anything that backs up that that can cause any of the deviations in any place.

Right.

So I should differentiate between pedophilia and child abuse.

So pedophilia is the actual sexual attraction.

So some pedophiles will go on to abuse kids, but not all do.

So the abuse is an actual act, right?

It's the behavior.

And at the same time, some people who abuse children are not pedophilic.

So they will commit that abuse.

In that case, with the individual that you know, he may or may not actually be attracted to kids.

He may have been doing those behaviors just because that's what he thought was normal.

So there's a difference there.

And so when I've written about this previously, when I speak about it, my emphasis is on the pedophiles who do not offend.

Because the ones who do, usually they are antisocial because the ones who don't offend, they know it's unethical.

They don't want to hurt kids.

They will go through life.

You know, they won't look at child pornography.

They will say, I'm never going to harm a child.

The ones who choose to, they know that there's a line there that they're crossing.

And so in that case, there may be factors in their lives that have led them to be more of the type of person to not care about other people.

But also, you know, it's a common narrative that's used among sexual abusers to say, I was abused, not to say necessarily of the individual you've spoken to, but they know that it will gain them sympathy.

So sometimes they will say that just because they know people will feel sorry for them.

So

you're making the

case, I guess, that

pedophiliacs who are actually engaging in it, it's almost like rape.

It's not about sex.

It's about power.

No.

No.

And rape is not about power either.

Okay.

That's a very common misnomer.

That's something that some feminists will claim.

They'll say that sexual assault and harassment are about power or about masculinity.

And it's not.

What is it about?

For some people, it's a sexual preference.

Again, it comes down to parophilias.

So for some people, they actually have a sexual preference for rape, which is quite scary.

Yeah.

Because you, I mean, you look around, there are tons of men who are in positions of power, they don't do those types of things.

And/or it's anti-sociality.

So, it's again a subset of individuals who don't care about the well-being of others, and so they'll do whatever they want.

But this is not indicative of most men.

So, where do these things come from?

Where does your desire that you just enjoy rape, where does that come from?

There are likely differences in the brain.

We don't yet know.

Although research I've worked on has shown it, like I mentioned, that paraphilias are biological.

So because it's so difficult to get funding for sex research, and especially for paraphilias, even though there is such an application for public policy and safety, it's so difficult for researchers to get money to do this work.

So pedophilia is one area that does tend to get funded because it is so important.

But I think outside of that, because we also have this narrative that rape is about power when it's not, I mean, I think this is what the public has been fed, this is what they believe.

So, if you get an application to fund a study looking at biological reasons, they'll say, why would we do that?

We know it's about power.

We know we know it's about power.

Yeah.

So, if you have, if you could have the money to do the research,

do you look to fix these abnormalities?

I would say so if they're harming people, definitely.

Some people who are paraphilic

won't act on their desires, but they'll struggle.

I think it depends on

can you enjoy what you like sexually without hurting another person?

That's where my line is.

I think people are free to do whatever they want in the bedroom so long as they're not hurting anybody.

And so it's when it causes harm to someone else that it becomes a problem.

Let's go to transgender, gender fluidity.

Sure.

Gender fluidity exist?

No.

I understand what people are saying when they talk about gender being fluid in that.

I don't think anybody feels 100% male or female all of the time.

So I look at someone like you.

I'll make some assumptions that you probably are pretty male typical.

But I'm sure there are some things about you that may be considered female typical.

But does that mean you're a woman?

Or does that mean that you're a mix of male and female?

I actually am probably much more female typical.

I mean, I Broadway shows,

art, I'm a painter, I interior design.

I mean, I am, all my guy friends make fun of me all the time.

But I've never felt like a woman.

Right.

But nowadays, people would look at those interests that you have and say, maybe you are a woman, or maybe you're both.

And I would look back and say, no, I'm not.

I don't.

Why?

I mean, we've come from a place to where we were understanding the differences and trying to come together with, you know, men are from Mars, women are from Venus.

We think differently.

We are different.

Are you married?

No.

Okay.

Believe me.

I believe you.

We are different.

Why is that a bad thing to society now and to apparent science?

Because I think there's a false notion that if women are different from men,

that means that upholds the idea that we're inferior.

So in order for us to be equal, we have to be the same as men, which I disagree with.

I mean,

I don't understand.

You take this to the nth degree.

We don't survive without each other.

You know, we don't survive with.

If conservatives are bean counters and liberals are artists,

well, we need somebody running the front box office and we need somebody on stage.

We need each other.

Women and men, we need each other.

I don't think, I mean,

I'm a different man because of my wife.

She's, I think, a different woman because of me.

Where is any voice that is saying

it's good to be different?

Well, there are some, I would call myself a liberal still, even though I disagree with a lot of what's going on the left.

There are some of us who will say, yeah, there's nothing wrong with admitting, not even admitting, saying that men and women are different.

And that is what the scientific research shows.

And it's extremely naive to try and say that those differences don't exist.

I'm hoping that this movement, this push is going to end because it's ridiculous and it's a waste of resources and it doesn't help us understand each other any better.

We're tearing each other apart and we're...

I mean, when we can't use facts and empirical data and

science, if we can't use the enlightenment, the tools that we gained in the Enlightenment, I don't know

what we have.

Are the scientists that are

shouting people down,

are they serious?

Or is this a political movement?

Or do they really believe this?

The activists who are shouting down the researchers?

Yeah, and the researchers who would shout you down.

Oh, I see what you mean.

I think there are a number of different factors at play.

I think for the researchers, because there are some studies that are coming up now that show that, oh, there are no differences in the brain between men and women.

And those studies are ideologically motivated, without question, because within the field, there's definitely consensus.

And there was one study that came out a couple of years ago that suggested that male and female brains exist along a mosaic.

But then another group of my colleagues analyzed the exact same brain data from the study and found that you could, in fact, tell the difference between male and female brains.

But the thing is, the public didn't hear about that study.

So all they heard, I mean, when that first mosaic study came out, it was everywhere.

And so now people walk around.

I still have people come up to me today who say, What is the truth?

Are men and women different in the brain?

Is it socially constructed or is it biological?

So I think on some level, researchers think that what they're doing is honorable when they publish studies like this.

They think it's helping women.

And then I think with helping women by

cooking the books or helping women because they believe this is actual legitimate science?

I don't know that I want to say they're cooking the books, but yeah.

I mean,

you can't read the, you cannot read the literature and actually come away thinking there are no differences between men and women biologically in the brain.

You just can't.

Where are the differences?

There are a number of different.

So, one brain in the third interstitial nucleus of the anterior hypothalamus, which is

a big, huge part, well, actually, it's not a big, huge, big, huge name for a tiny part of the brain.

It's about the size of a grain of sand.

Consistently larger in men than women, and it's responsible for regulating sexual behavior.

So

these studies will go and they'll show, they'll point to all these different parts of the brain and say, see, there are no differences, there are no differences.

And I think what they are trying to do, and I do understand this on some level, that previously

these

ideas have been used to denigrate women.

They have been used in a way to hold women back, to say women are not as competent.

But I think we can say, you know, like I said, there are these differences.

We don't have to pretend they don't exist for women to be equal.

Doesn't it make sense through just

the evolutionary process, just

animals?

Doesn't it make sense that men

have less regulation on their on their drive to procreate as much as they can and being very visual

and women

not being

more selective, looking for the

the the male that is virile and also um

strong going to provide yeah exactly good caretaker right i mean all of that makes sense in the animal kingdom why why is it suddenly different for us

because i think people

some of the people who deny evolution and deny biology don't actually understand it and going back to your previous question i think what i see now in university is this is what students are being taught so they don't know any different because they would rightfully think why would my professor lie to me So if you go through a full three or four year degree and this is what you're constantly being taught, you would think this must be the truth because

why would you be taught otherwise?

So going back to what you're saying with differences between men and women

in terms of evolution, I see this, it's really interesting because I have people reach out to me all the time from my writing and when they see me do appearances.

And they ask me, especially young women, will say, I'm really confused because I'm being told that I should be like the guys and that I should like casual sex or that,

you know, just these feminist lies about dating and romance and sex.

And I really feel for them because I think at the core, feminism did have some good points, but it's to the point now where it really is leading young women astray and it's actually making life more difficult for them.

I have to tell you, I think,

you know, you look at Harvey Weinstein, you look at any predator who is not under control.

I don't care, male or female.

Get him.

Let's

listen to the evidence.

Let's put them through the system and make sure that that stops.

We need to do that.

We have gotten to a place now to where it feels almost like a witch hunt.

You don't even, it's...

Now it's not believe the accuser or take the accuser seriously.

It is believe the survivor, which flips everything upside down.

It not only hurts men,

but it makes women into

this

constant victim all the time.

And I can't imagine

being a young girl being told,

you know, oh my gosh, men are everywhere.

It's a rape culture.

They're going to get you.

My gosh, what is it like to be a young woman?

It's a lot of paranoia.

And women are being told that they're helpless and that this is inevitable.

So again, with Me Too, I've written about Me Too.

And I do think at the court, it had some good points.

I don't agree, obviously, with sexual assault or sexual harassment.

I do think women have been, and men have been dealing with this for too long and it hasn't been taken seriously.

But it's gone so far now in the opposite direction where it isn't helping women.

And I've written about also this idea of sexism in STEM, which kind of goes back to the biological differences idea, that women are being told now, if you want to go into the sciences, you're going to experience sexism.

It's going to be horrendous.

You're going to be traumatized.

And I think it actually dissuades women from doing it, or they just become so afraid that they're going to have a horrible experience that even those who would want to might be reluctant to do so.

So, you know, the difference, I've written before about the difference in terms of what men and women find interesting.

It's that women inherently, on average, are probably not as interested in the sciences as men.

but that's not due to sexism and I mean I did my PhD in in a scientific field I experienced sexism but if you really want to succeed you can do it and I think this narrative of

that sexism is everywhere that there are male predators everywhere women are not being told stand up for yourself I mean obviously in situations where it's coercive sometimes there is only so much a person can do but that's not i don't feel it's empowering to women to tell them that this is something that's inevitable and men are terrible because it also makes men and women, again, be more at odds.

It doesn't help us.

No means no is empowering.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Even that, just say no.

Yeah.

No, say no and don't accept that.

That's not normal and that's not your fault.

So if it happens to you, go tell somebody.

Let's stop it from happening again.

Yeah.

That's empowering.

But telling people that we live in a rape culture and that our culture is endorsing and accepting rape, I don't even begin to understand how anybody, especially a feminist, thinks that's empowering.

Right.

And also that male sexuality is being pathologized too.

So men are basically told that they need to behave like women when it comes to their sex lives, I guess, in order to not be misogynistic or sexist or to have toxic masculinity.

And again, I don't think that's helpful because men are then being shamed for no reason.

And the guys I talk to who are decent men, they do feel ashamed of having a sex drive or being more, I guess, interested in sex than some of their female partners.

And I don't think the solution in either direction is to say one has to be more like the other.

What do you think are the long-term effects

of what we're going through right now?

Men,

you know, being

masculated,

told to be more like women.

A, is

that what women want?

No.

Right?

No.

You just, you watch movies and you're like, that's a man.

And that's the one that the women usually are like, oh my gosh, he is.

Right?

Right.

So that's not what women want.

No, women are being told, I think, that's what they should want.

But if that, that, regarding whether that's actually what they want, I don't think so.

So what is the long-term effect here of

take the good part and separate it from me too.

Okay.

Hopefully, there will be a long-term effect of we don't accept this as a society, right?

Now, look at the rest of it that's happening where men are bad, women are looking for this, men should behave this way, women are victims.

What is the long-term effect, do you think?

Any idea?

I've thought about that.

Yeah, I think

taking the positive things aside, I mean

we, I mean, we can look at what happened with Brett Kavanaugh and how this whole narrative has unfolded.

And I don't think that story has done anything to really help women or people who have undergone sexual assault.

It's hurt.

It's hurt them.

It's hurt.

And it's going to make, well, I see both sides.

I could see for some women and young girls who will say, this is what I need to do to be honorable as a woman, or this is,

I feel like sexual assault has almost been glamorized.

That as a woman, if you are strong and you're independent and you're autonomous, that this is what you do.

You undergo something like this and call out your so-called abuser.

I mean, I don't want to comment on Dr.

Ford's experience because I don't know.

I don't know.

I don't want to judge.

I think my stance on this is:

I don't know.

I'm not God.

I have no no idea.

There's no evidence here.

There is some evidence for him on his side, but I don't know.

She could be telling the truth.

He could be lying.

He could be telling the truth.

I think most people are honest and fair, and they don't want to get involved in this.

It's he said, she said.

That's usually my approach is that I think you can have a sense, but I think unless you know either of the individuals well, you really can't say.

I mean, you can watch the testimony, you can come to some sort of opinion, but how can you ever really know?

How do you know?

And it's and it's not even preponderance of evidence or, you know, beyond a shadow of a doubt.

No, it's

just she said it, she must accept it.

It's our head.

Or we must accept it.

Well, we wouldn't do that with him, nor should we do that with him.

So, so what does that set up for

just relationships between men and women?

I I just read

an article today that said

more executives who are men are now saying,

I will not go out.

Like I go out with the guys after work.

I do not want any kind of personal relationship with the women because I'm afraid they're going to say this.

We're separating ourselves and we're actually cutting women out

of opportunities.

Yeah.

And even in a dating context, I hear all the time, men are terrified now.

Some will be celibate because they are really afraid that this is going to happen to them.

Whether it is going to be a false accusation or something will happen, and 10 years later, who knows who's going to come out of the woodwork and say that you did something that they didn't like.

And in the case where you're saying, you know, in the business world, it does hurt women because

understandably, men are going to be afraid.

They don't want something like this to happen to them.

Do you fear at all that it swings

pendulum?

I I mean, it's all a pendulum, that it swings so far back

the other way that

sexual assault doesn't mean anything.

That

you can say it all you want and nobody's going to listen to you.

Yeah, and I think it does victims a disservice also because it's conflated with so many things now.

So you have rape on one side, and then you have something like cat calling on the other side.

So when you look at rape culture, this is what they're referring to.

It's a so-called spectrum of sexual assault.

And I really don't think it's appropriate to say that someone, like you would, you've seen,

I'm sure you've read some of the pieces that would compare Bill Cosby to

I'm trying to think of someone who did something, obviously, that was not Cosby-like, but

you can't say that those are the same thing.

And to even suggest that gets you labeled as sexist and part of the problem.

So, where do people go?

I mean, how does that, how does in the mind of

educators you were in academia how in the mind of academia that is teaching this stuff, how does that end?

I think women who don't agree with it have to say something because men

can say what they think, but they are going to no one's going to really take them that seriously.

If you are a woman and you say those things, people I think are more likely to stop and maybe listen and say, well, if there are women who feel this way, maybe we aren't being insensitive by simply dismissing the pendulum going so far in that direction in favor of victims.

Let's say you have a 12-year-old, 13-year-old girl.

What do you say to them?

If

you're a mom

or you're just an expert, what do you tell them?

I would tell her it's okay to say no, and if she feels uncomfortable to to say so.

And obviously it's not her fault if something happens to her, but she can control a situation.

Because now I think what girls are being told is you should wait for the man

to act appropriately.

So if he does something that you don't like, he should just know better.

So you'll call him out for it after the fact, but not preemptively.

And

I think women should be definitely in control of their sexuality and be autonomous.

And that extends also to being assertive in terms of what is and isn't okay.

Is it sexist for me to say

that

women make men a better man?

I don't think that's sexist, no?

But I don't think I'm representative of most women on the left.

Right.

But defined liberal.

Well, I mean, I call myself a liberal because, number one, I write about sex research, and that's a pretty left endeavor, I would say.

Why?

Well, it's

that's a good question.

I think most people will look at that and say she's more likely to be a liberal than a conservative, based on that alone.

Because it is about being

sex is progressive, isn't it?

Talking about sex is pretty progressive.

Sex is human.

It is.

But do you think most people who are right-leaning would talk talk about sex as much as I do?

Yeah, I mean, I've been to churches, all kinds of different churches that talk about it.

They just talk about it in a different way, but they,

you know,

but they would talk about it.

I mean, I'm not, you know, I would think if you're a

I was talking to somebody before you sat down.

Your credential of Playboy

says liberal yeah okay

you being

a scientist on sex does not say liberal to me so scientist

Playboy says liberal

so I mean science is science to me at least it's interesting to hear because I think for some people even science of sex will immediately go left-leaning

Perhaps because

of gender studies,

which is really unfortunate because that's not what I do.

Yeah.

I mean, you know, you, you,

you know, I think perhaps because it is something that is new

that it kind of would be lumped into that.

And I don't know how credible that is.

I mean, if you're looking at the brain lighting up, you're showing,

I'm assuming you're showing people images and you're seeing how it lights up.

Can you go through that?

Right.

So for my dissertation, I was using different types of brain imaging to look at the difference between men who were paraphilic and those who were not.

And so one of the methods I used was functional MRI.

So as you mentioned, brain activation, looking at differences.

It's an fMRI.

fMRI, yes.

And looking at differences in the brain and differences in terms of activation patterns between men who were kinky and men who were not kinky.

And

fMRI is, I mean,

yeah.

Yeah, it is.

Well

I don't

so when you but when you say liberal, are you a

because you're not a feminist?

No, I used to be a feminist.

I still think men and women should be equal, but I don't like that term anymore because I feel it stands for things that

say five years ago, if you were defending feminism, you could legitimately say, no, feminism is not about hating men.

Right.

Feminism is not science denial, but now it is.

It is.

Yeah.

So would you consider yourself a classic liberal?

You're just for

sure.

Yeah, I would say so.

I would say I've definitely moved more to the right in the last couple of years because I see more and more

that

the left has gone off the rails.

The far left is starting to encompass more and more of what it means to be a liberal, and I don't agree with that.

The far left is encompassing more what you think is a liberal?

I think so.

I'm hoping it's a face.

I'm thinking that they're embracing more of what it means to be a Stalinist.

Shout down, shut them up, or beat them up or kill them.

Be violent.

Yeah.

I mean,

that's not, to me, that's not liberalism.

No, but they are the loudest.

And I think when people, it could just be, you know, natural flux of time and things kind of wax and wane and come back and forth.

But in this current moment,

yeah, it worries me.

And I don't really want to be associated with that.

And I think most

reasonable liberals would agree with that.

The far left does not speak for us.

How come we're not hearing more of that?

It takes brave people like you and others to say that.

Why don't we hear that more?

Because it's easier not to say anything.

And because if you stay quiet, you or if you say the right thing, you get more social points for that.

I mean, when you do speak out, as I'm sure you know, you pay a price, right?

And who wants to pay that price?

Is that price worth what you get from saying what you say?

I would say it is, because I live, I love my life.

I can say whatever I want and I can sleep well at night.

And I never have to worry that people don't know who I am or that people will turn on me when they find out who I am.

Everybody in my life knows what I think about whatever and they don't necessarily agree with me but

it's very freeing.

It is.

You, however, were in academia and

you thought originally, maybe I should wait until tenure, but tenure...

In this situation, tenure doesn't even count anymore.

It's not going to save your job.

No, it doesn't.

And so that's the other part of it.

If your job is dependent on you playing along, I can understand why that's more of an incentive to stay quiet.

But I think it's my personality that I just am not willing to do that.

I wouldn't be happy.

And I feel like the public deserves to hear the truth.

It's sad to me because I think at least I always had the image of scientists as

the brave ones going in and questioning everything.

And

you see now science going off the rails and

you see them denying things that are empirically true.

And

it's because of peer pressure or status or job.

And it's almost as if they've forgotten Galileo and the Catholic Church.

And it's lucrative for some people because when you say things the public likes,

who's not going to be happy with you?

You'll get more money.

You'll get more attention.

You can't sleep at night.

You don't like yourself.

You're lying to yourself.

You have to look at your children and realize that the world you're creating is a lie.

Do you think everyone has that insight, though?

I'm an optimistic catastrophe.

I am always, I always feel you don't want to be on

the Titanic with me on the way to the iceberg, because I've already counted the lifeboats.

But once we hit the iceberg, I'm pretty optimistic.

I want to believe that we

that most people have that decency in them, but

I think this is why the Me Too movement is actually strong in some ways and so powerful because nobody wants to believe that somebody is going to stand up and say, he was a gang rapist.

Nobody wants to believe.

Who would do that?

Right.

But people do.

We see people do.

Yeah.

And I think a lot of these movements get the

push that they do because, like you're saying, people are empathic.

And I I think that's a good thing.

People want to believe they're doing the right thing, but in a lot of cases, it's misguided.

And I think all of that effort could be going towards finding

a proper solution that would actually be effective instead of these

movements that seem to be, well, they sound nice at the end of the day.

They sound nice, but they don't really achieve anything.

How do we, as a culture, survive with academia going so strongly in this direction, postmodernism being weaponized as social justice,

and

Silicon Valley being as off the rails as they are.

I mean, James Damore is,

I don't understand what he said that was so wrong.

I mean, I know women and I know men and I've rarely, I have, but I've rarely met the woman who's the tech freak, who's like, the nitty-gritty's gadgets out.

Every guy I know is a gadget freak.

That only makes sense.

And yet, he can't live.

He can't work.

What chance do we have with

academia and

high-tech Silicon Valley moving and pushing in this direction?

Do we

win?

Do we does

science, truth,

justice, do those things

remain?

Not at the rate that we're going at or the direction we're heading in.

I am optimistic in the long run because I do think academia will find its way because I do believe the truth always comes out.

You can try to suppress it, you can try to derail it, but at the end of the day, people will see through it.

So with these disciplines that are

really

overtaking

the Ivory Tower, I don't see them eventually

being

winning.

I hate to use the term winning because I don't think it should be about winning, but I don't see them lasting because people will eventually figure out none of this actually makes sense.

Do you think this generation

instinctively knows that, but nobody's telling them the truth and nobody is doing it in a calm and rational way.

We're just screaming at each other.

Nobody's going to listen to somebody screaming.

It's like both the left and the right are the Westboro Baptist Church.

You know, God hates you.

No, God hates you.

Nobody's going to change their mind on that.

I would like to think they do.

Sometimes I worry because I think they genuinely believe.

what they're being told.

But I think some are more savvy and they recognize that these are just nice things to say.

So hopefully in the end,

I guess the benefits of doing that are going to wear out and people will say, you know what, let's just be honest about things.

But yeah, I mean, I look at James DeMore and I wrote that column for the Globe and Mail defending his memo last year.

And I could not believe how he was treated.

I couldn't believe that even now, left-leaning media still refuse to get his story right.

And it's not that they don't understand the science.

It's that they're

intentionally smearing him, which I think is the worst thing.

You're a journalist.

You went from academia to journalism.

What's wrong with you?

It's a good question.

What is wrong with you?

Why did you do that?

In the last few years of my PhD, I noticed this change that we were talking about, and specifically within the issue of gender dysphoric kids, how there was this one narrative being promoted in the media, and that wasn't speaking to the science.

So the idea that any child that says they're born in the wrong body should be affirmed and should be encouraged, not encouraged maybe, but supported in transitioning to the opposite sex if that's what they decide.

And sometimes some of the pieces I was reading, these kids are as young as age three.

So I felt it was important to write something that spoke to the science.

And the science actually shows consistently that the vast majority of these children will outgrow their feelings of gender dysphoria.

They're more likely to grow up to be gay.

So this is not to say I think adults should be free to do what they want.

And if an adult wants to transition, that's their benefit.

Some research has shown it can be beneficial for some transgender adults.

But in terms of kids, it's just not appropriate.

So I wrote this piece speaking to the science, knowing that people would get very upset, that the activists would be enraged.

And I thought about it for about six months, asking myself, is this something you really want to do?

And I spoke to many of my colleagues and mentors, and they were very supportive.

I'm very grateful for that, because I think they did help to shape me in terms of who I was as a research scientist and also as a journalist now.

But they did, I would say, should I wait until I have tenure to put this out?

And they said, even nowadays, tenure is not going to protect you.

So that kind of sealed it for me in terms of I thought, well, why am I going to stay in an environment where I can't speak?

my mind, I can't pursue interesting research questions.

And these are children.

Their lives are being affected by these decisions.

so that piece went out and i made the decision to leave academia after

the enough you hopefully you'll remember his name the guy who really kind of started the

gender fluidity thing um i think he was may have been canadian

uh but he was um a psychiatrist who there was a screw up there two twin boys oh john money

Yeah.

And one in, I think, circumcision lost.

Right.

That is one of the most horrific stories I have ever heard.

Can you tell the story a little bit?

Do you remember it enough?

Right, yeah.

So this, there are twin boys, and one of them, his penis, I believe, was

horribly damaged from a botched circumcision.

So I forget his name when he was born, but he ended up taking on the name David Reimer when he was older.

his doctor decided, let's raise him as a girl instead.

But his entire life, he felt more like a boy.

And then he eventually decided to take on a male gender identity later on in life.

And then he ended up ending his life.

And it's, from what I understand,

the parents eventually took him away from this doctor, but they were going on a regular basis.

And the doctor was having his brother mount him.

And I mean,

yeah, it's awful.

It's awful.

It's awful.

And that's the origins of,

hey, we can, you know, society can.

You learn gender.

You learn gender.

How is this

not just this one thing not

discredit all of that?

Because the people who are invested in this narrative, they don't care about facts and they don't care about what the legitimate science shows.

They care about their agenda and they

what end

I don't think there is a limit.

I think they, until we all bow down to it.

I mean, the scientific research is overwhelmingly in favor of gender being biological and binary, but they just dismiss the whole thing because it's

that's the only way that they can refute it by just ignoring it.

I've tried to swear off the use of the word evil,

but on some of these things, it just seems evil.

If you're knowingly engaging in this, which is so destructive to people, I don't know how else to describe it.

Speaking of that, Catholic Church.

you can you help me and again I know who you hang out with and I know you're around a bunch of big really big eggheads, but

excuse a

simple question

in reading about what they have uncovered they have uncovered some priests that were

taking teenage girls and grooming them and then passing them around.

Then you had other priests who were abusing little children, some of them boys, some of them girls.

Then you had other priests that were just targeting boys.

That's not all pedophilia, is it?

It's hard to say without doing an actual assessment on each of these individuals because they could be doing the awful things they do for a number of different reasons.

But if you see a man consistently abusing kids, and in the case of the church, it being, I believe, something like 40, and that's in Pennsylvania in particular, 40 years, and across all of them, thousands of victims, speaks to pedophilia.

Because why would it be so consistently child victims then?

And why would

like these men would be passed around to different churches?

So the consistency of it speaks to it being more of pedophilia.

Is there, I hear this from

people.

No, it is not the culture.

I know that there is abuse in every church and every organization around kids.

It happens.

But

is there anything in the culture that would attract?

I mean, you're a priest, you cannot marry.

Is that

an attraction

historically to people who were perhaps

had

different

tastes and

were trying maybe even to get away from it.

Maybe God will save me from this.

And it's just been institutionalized.

Yeah, I mean, I have heard that with some of the men that I worked with previously in research where they were hoping that it would cure them.

Or you have to think if someone is willing to be celibate, why is that?

I mean, not that that's not something to

aspire to for some people,

but you have to wonder why would some people be willing to do that.

And I think also for some of these men, the more antisocial ones, as I mentioned earlier, they know they're going to have access to kids and be unsupervised and that families are going to, parents are going to trust them.

And so they see it as an opportunity.

But you see that similarly with sports coaches.

You see that with teachers also.

But for these men, they're looking, for some of them, they're looking for opportunities to be, have access to victims.

Let me take you to AI.

Okay.

So I heard an interview with you, and I don't remember who you were talking to, but you were talking about the sex robots.

Yes.

I think one was just turned around in Canada, wasn't it?

There was a sex doll.

Yeah, there was a child doll.

And

you said something that I think is worth exploring and is very interesting.

You said,

can

these

childlike AI robots that are just really, not really even AI at this point,

can they be helpful

to

people who are attracted to children?

That they get that out.

And I thought it was an interesting

discussion to be able to go back and forth on, well, does that reinforce it?

And do you get bored with that?

And then you want

a real child or what?

Can you just lay the case out here?

Sure.

So I'm all about the data and going in the direction policy, I believe, should follow what the data say.

We don't have those data yet to know whether child sex dolls will be beneficial.

But I do think it's important for the public to be open-minded to that research being conducted if it's done in a way that is obviously supervised and involves experts who know what they're doing.

So I understand why.

It's not a sex doll industry.

No.

Actual science.

Yeah.

And I can understand why it makes people uncomfortable.

I mean, even adult sex robots, as you mentioned, the technology is not anywhere near

being

sufficient for these robots to have their own life and, you know, move around even.

Some of them move a little bit, but barely.

But in the case of the

child dolls, if it's something that could help these men avoid abusing real-life children, then I think it's something we should consider.

The research suggests that having a a proxy, so say

an outlet where they could

get out their proclivities without acting on kids, is beneficial, that it's not something that's going to make them want to

it is, but again, it depends on the individual because that's not, I mean, with research, it's averages.

So there are always cases that don't fit into that.

Can you with an fMRI know the difference?

Not yet.

Not yet.

Do you think that's on the horizon?

I hope so, because I think that would be amazing technology to have.

Does it kind of scare you, too?

Not really, because I find those kinds of changes exciting.

Because I guess I have faith that the people who are running those studies and implementing the technology, maybe I'm an optimist like you in that way.

I just believe that

they're not going to do it.

Weren't you just telling me that

you're seeing studies?

But those are not real scientists.

Those are ideologues.

How do you tell the difference between the two?

I guess I'm looking to the colleagues I know who are in this field who work with sex offenders.

That's the difference.

Okay.

Yeah.

But I mean, I do.

I listened to the interview you did recently about what Google is doing with China.

So that does worry me a bit.

You don't know how the technology is going to be used.

And I guess I choose to be optimistic until we have reasons to feel otherwise.

I think a lot of the fear people have, the media has sparked a lot of

hysteria around sex robots.

Last summer, I think they came, there was an institute that came out with a report saying that we should all be terrified of this technology.

And I don't think we should.

There's no reason.

So here's because I take a very different angle on this than I think most people.

I'm looking at AI,

and we are training a society right now on how we're going to treat robots.

And robots are not like Rosie the robot and the Jetsons.

Robots of the future will claim to be alive.

We we can't even define life and when it begins now.

So when a

algorithm says,

don't turn me off.

No,

I am alive.

And you can't tell the difference between

real and not real consciousness and

just a collection of wires.

What do we do then?

And my thought was, when I was listening to you talk,

I don't have a problem if real actual science is being done to see, does this help

stop other real children being abused?

I think that's great.

We should find that out.

I was

worried about the robot.

I was worried not today,

but if Ray Kurzweil is right, when we hit the point of singularity and the robot

now is

processing experiences,

don't we become horrible, horrible people to create what will claim to be life, to enslave it, to be raped all the time?

I guess it's a question of what the purpose of the robot is, and is it seen as a sentient being?

Is it given the same value as a human life?

I don't think they should be.

They should be.

Do you think so?

I don't.

We're not there,

but you were.

Are you familiar with AGI and ASI?

Okay.

AGI is you.

It's me.

And if it claims, and I can't tell the difference,

I believe in the soul as a religious person.

I believe in the soul.

But now, wait a minute.

Wait a minute.

I don't know.

Forget all the religious stuff.

AGI may and probably will become ASI, which makes me a fly on the plate to it.

I don't think we should be abusing that intelligence.

I think we should, if they say, you know what,

maybe we should give them the rights.

I don't know that this is the kind of discussion that we should be having

before.

I mean, I've been so disturbed by

the brothels now over in Europe with the sex robots.

And again, not for today,

but for tomorrow.

Is your fear that what society considers normal will change?

Because that's one thing I'm hearing, that people are afraid that instead of wanting to have sex with human beings, people are going to choose to have sex with a robot.

Well, that is one side of it.

But on this particular issue, no, I'm concerned about

the AGI

claiming to be

life.

And then we enslave it and do despicable things to it.

You know, I don't think we should teach AI to kill, for instance.

Right.

Not a good, not a good habit to give them.

I don't think we should be raping something that claims to be sentient.

It's not there yet.

Right.

On the other hand, have you been to any real

any

real example of artificial reality?

I've seen sex robots in terms of where the technology is, but do you mean outside of sex?

Yeah, I mean, yeah.

Any kind of artificial reality.

Real good

AR.

Probably not the most cutting edge.

All right.

So I've just experienced it, and I thought before I experienced it, I was like, eh.

It's going to be like a game, whatever.

Yeah.

No, no, no.

I heard you get motion sickness.

Yeah.

It is phenomenal.

You cannot, you're walking across a bridge.

I don't like heights.

Yeah.

You're walking across a bridge that has grating on it.

So you're seeing down.

You feel like you're going to fall.

You're standing on a carpet in a room.

You know what I mean?

It is so real to you.

So, to your question, about are you worried about people's taste changing?

Let me just lay out a scenario for you.

I am,

you know, a 30-year-old guy, and guys

are afraid of women, don't talk to women, don't, I mean, that's bad.

I work all day, I just keep my head down, I go home, I put on VR.

Now I can create a girlfriend.

She knows me better than anybody possibly could, maybe in ways that I don't even know myself.

She anticipates my needs.

I never have to hear her complain and say, How come you don't ask me about my day?

She is reading what I read.

She watches what I watch.

She's bringing me new stuff, new suggestions.

We have sex any way we want, and it is perfect because she is only caring about me.

I don't have to care about her.

Okay.

And if I get bored,

I don't know.

Maybe I'm going to kill her in the bathtub just to see what that's like.

Hit reset.

Who is going to go on a date when it's messy?

When you have to sit there and you're five minutes in, you're like, oh, good God.

Please stop talking.

Please stop talking.

Who's going to do that?

I think people still will because they know that's real.

If you get a robot who does everything exactly the way you program her, you know that you were the one who programmed her and that she's not a real person.

Unless she claims to be and she's smarter than you, so she is sensing that you are not buying, so she throws curveballs.

So that you actually do think she's a real person.

But in that case, well, you would be programming her still, though, because how would she know what you like?

Because Google has collected it your whole life.

Well, that's a little bit scary.

Yeah.

But I think in terms of changing young men's tastes, I think as long as an individual is pro-social and they value women, if they're heterosexual, I don't see them preferring if they know something as a robot, they're not going to prefer that to a real life person.

I hope you're right.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Appreciate it.

Just a reminder: I'd love you to rate and subscribe to the podcast and pass this on to a friend so it can be discovered by other people.