Neil deGrasse Tyson's Thoughts on Transgenderism

Summary

The transcript discusses the intersection of science and gender politics, challenging the notion that gender is separate from sex. It debates the impact of transgender athletes on women's sports and the biological differences between sexes. The speaker emphasizes the importance of scientific truth and societal freedom, questioning the teaching of gender spectrum in schools as unscientific. They propose a future for sports based on hormonal balance rather than gender and argue for scientific inquiry without legislative constraints, advocating for the protection of individual freedoms.

Takeaways

• 🔬 The script discusses the intersection of science and gender, specifically the debate over whether gender is separate from sex.
• 🏋️‍♀️ It raises concerns about the fairness of transgender women competing in women's sports due to potential biological advantages.
• 🧬 The speaker argues for a scientific approach to understanding gender and sex, emphasizing the binary nature of mammalian sex.
• 🤔 The script questions the scientific basis of the 'gender spectrum' and whether it should be taught in science or sociology classes.
• 🏆 The future of sports in a gender spectrum world is considered, with the idea of competing based on hormonal balance rather than gender.
• 🚫 The speaker expresses concern about scientific findings being used to legislate and restrict freedoms.
• 📚 There's a mention of a study on 'rapid-onset gender dysphoria' and the controversy surrounding it, highlighting the tension between scientific inquiry and societal norms.
• 🌈 The script acknowledges that people express themselves on a gender spectrum, which is a social fact, but its scientific classification is debated.
• 🏛️ The importance of a free society and the role of the constitution in protecting rights, even in the face of scientific discovery, is emphasized.
• 🤝 The speaker suggests a need for a balance between scientific discovery and the protection of individual freedoms, advocating for science to inform but not dictate legislation.

Q & A

What is the main concern regarding the scientific discussion of gender and sex?

The main concern is that discussions about gender and sex should be based on scientific data, which suggests that mammals, including humans, are typically binary in terms of sex. However, the argument that gender is entirely separate from sex complicates this, leading to debates about the fairness of transgender women competing in women's sports.

What is the current societal stance on gender expression and biological sex?

Society generally accepts that people express themselves on a gender spectrum, which is a social fact. However, there is a debate about whether this expression should be considered a scientific fact or a sociological one, and how it should be taught to children.

Why is the topic of transgenderism and sports contentious?

The contention arises because there is a lack of consensus on how to fairly integrate transgender athletes into sports that are traditionally segregated by biological sex. The concern is that allowing transgender women to compete with non-transgender women might give an unfair advantage due to physiological differences.

What is the speaker's opinion on the role of science in society?

The speaker believes that science is a potent path to discovering objective truth and that scientific findings should be openly discussed and debated. They argue for transparency and the importance of scientific inquiry, even in contentious areas.

What does the speaker suggest as a potential solution for sports segregation in a gender spectrum world?

The speaker suggests that instead of specifying male or female sports, competitions could be based on hormonal balances, which could be a more equitable way to ensure fair competition.

Why is the study of gender dysphoria and its potential rapid onset within peer groups controversial?

The study of rapid onset gender dysphoria is controversial because it challenges current narratives about gender identity and could potentially be used to justify restrictive legislation or policies, which many view as a threat to individual freedoms.

What is the speaker's view on the necessity of studying controversial scientific topics?

The speaker believes that even controversial topics should be studied scientifically. They argue that society should be able to handle the findings without legislating against people's freedoms, suggesting that a free society should be able to manage such information responsibly.

How does the speaker feel about the potential for scientific findings to be misused by politicians?

The speaker expresses concern that scientific findings, especially in sensitive areas like gender and sexuality, could be misused by politicians to restrict freedoms. They advocate for a balance where science can operate freely, but politicians must protect individual rights.

What is the speaker's stance on the biological versus psychological origins of being gay?

The speaker is indifferent to whether being gay is biological or psychological, emphasizing that the answer should not have any legislative or legal consequences. They argue that people's freedoms should not be restricted based on scientific findings about sexual orientation.

Why does the speaker argue for the importance of distinguishing between science and societal norms?

The speaker argues that distinguishing between science and societal norms is crucial for maintaining individual freedoms. They suggest that while science can provide objective truths, societal norms are subjective and should not be constrained by scientific findings.

What is the speaker's view on the role of the constitution in protecting rights?

The speaker views the constitution as a safeguard for individual rights, suggesting that it should protect people from potential restrictions that could arise from scientific discoveries that might be used to justify limiting freedoms.

Outlines

00:00

🏋️‍♀️ The Intersection of Science and Gender Identity

The speaker discusses the debate over the scientific basis of gender versus sex, particularly in the context of transgenderism. They argue that gender theorists often claim gender is separate from biological sex, and this perspective is used to support the idea that transgender women should be able to compete in women's sports without disadvantaging biological women. The speaker disagrees, asserting that there is a scientific basis for sex differences in mammals, and that societal norms around gender expression should not dictate scientific understanding. They also touch on the broader implications for freedom of expression and the role of science in education, suggesting that children are being taught ideas about gender that may not be scientifically grounded.

05:00

🔬 The Role of Science in Understanding Gender Spectrum

The speaker continues the conversation by emphasizing the importance of objective truth and scientific inquiry. They suggest that if people express themselves on a gender spectrum, this is a societal fact that should be studied scientifically. The speaker acknowledges the controversy surrounding studies on gender dysphoria, such as the rapid onset gender dysphoria study from Brown University. They express concern about the potential for scientific findings to be misused to limit freedoms, advocating for a balance where science can inform understanding without leading to harmful legislation.

10:01

🏛️ Science, Politics, and Freedom

In this final paragraph, the speaker reflects on the relationship between scientific discovery and political freedom. They argue that while science should be free to explore all areas, there is a need to protect individual freedoms from potential legislative overreach based on scientific findings. The speaker uses the example of sexual orientation, suggesting that whether it is biological or psychological should not affect legal rights or freedoms. They conclude by advocating for a society that values both scientific inquiry and personal liberty, aligning themselves with libertarian principles.

Keywords

💡Transgenderism

Transgenderism refers to the concept of a person's gender identity differing from the sex they were assigned at birth. In the video, the speaker discusses the debate surrounding transgender athletes and the fairness of their participation in sports, which is a central theme. The speaker questions whether the argument that 'gender is entirely separate from sex' holds scientific validity and how it impacts societal norms and sports regulations.

💡Gender Theorists

Gender theorists are individuals who study and propose theories about gender and its social construction. The script mentions that these theorists argue that 'gender is entirely separate from sex,' challenging traditional views on gender as a binary concept. This idea is central to the discussion about the scientific basis of gender and its implications for society.

💡Biological Sex

Biological sex typically refers to the physical and genetic characteristics that define males and females. The transcript discusses the binary nature of sex in mammals, suggesting that sex is a scientifically defined category. This concept is crucial to the debate over transgender participation in sports, as it contrasts with the social construct of gender.

💡Hormones

Hormones are chemical messengers that regulate various bodily functions. The speaker in the video brings up the role of hormones in sports, comparing them to steroids, which are performance-enhancing substances. The discussion suggests that hormonal differences could potentially give transgender athletes an unfair advantage, thus raising questions about the fairness of sports competitions.

💡Steroids

Steroids are a class of hormones that can be synthetically produced and used to enhance athletic performance. The script mentions the historical opposition to steroids in professional sports, drawing a parallel to the debate about transgender athletes. The speaker implies that just as steroids provide an unfair advantage, so might the natural hormonal differences in transgender athletes.

💡Gender Spectrum

The gender spectrum is a social concept that suggests there is a range of gender identities beyond the traditional binary of male and female. The speaker critiques the teaching of the gender spectrum to children as unscientific, arguing that it should be presented as a social construct rather than a biological fact.

💡Intersex

Intersex individuals are born with sex characteristics that do not fit typical binary notions of male or female bodies. The script briefly mentions intersex conditions as exceptions to the binary nature of sex, which are important for understanding the complexities and variations in human biology.

💡Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria (ROGD)

Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria is a controversial term used to describe a phenomenon where adolescents, particularly in peer groups, begin to experience gender dysphoria seemingly rapidly. The speaker references a study on ROGD that was controversial enough to be retracted and reassigned, illustrating the tension between scientific inquiry and societal implications.

💡Free Expression

Free expression refers to the right to express one's thoughts, feelings, and identity without censorship or restraint. The video discusses how in a free country, individuals should be able to express their gender identity freely. This concept is juxtaposed with the potential societal and legislative constraints that could arise from scientific findings.

💡Scientific Inquiry

Scientific inquiry is the process of asking questions and conducting research to discover new knowledge. The speaker advocates for scientific inquiry into topics like gender dysphoria and the gender spectrum, emphasizing the importance of understanding these phenomena through scientific methods.

💡Libertarianism

Libertarianism is a political philosophy that emphasizes individual liberty, free markets, and limited government intervention. The speaker identifies as a libertarian and discusses the importance of protecting individual freedoms, even in the face of scientific discoveries that might be used to justify restrictive legislation.

Highlights

The left is accused of militating against science in the area of transgenderism.

Gender theorists argue that gender is entirely separate from sex.

The debate over whether transgender women should compete with non-transgender women in sports.

The assertion that mammals are binary in terms of sex, with exceptions for intersex or genetic defects.

The importance of segregating sports by gender and the implications for transgender athletes.

The freedom of individuals to express their gender identity in a free country.

The unresolved issue of how to handle sports in a world recognizing a gender spectrum.

The idea of competing in sports based on hormonal balances rather than gender.

The concern that children are being taught about the gender spectrum without a scientific basis.

The argument that people express themselves on a gender spectrum as a social, not scientific, point.

The question of whether the expression of gender identity should be taught in sociology or science classes.

The acknowledgment that people identify how they want to identify, but the biological aspect remains a scientific question.

The study from Brown University suggesting a phenomenon called rapid-onset gender dysphoria.

The controversy over whether certain scientific topics should not be studied due to potential societal implications.

The fear that scientific discoveries could be used to legislate and constrict people's freedoms.

The argument for bringing out all the science and letting politicians hash it out, versus the risk it poses to freedoms.

The need to shield and protect people's freedoms in the face of scientific discoveries.

The debate over whether being gay is biological or psychological and its potential legislative consequences.

The libertarian perspective on the balance between scientific discovery and individual freedoms.

Transcripts

it seems like the left is militating

against

the the advent of science one of those

areas is is the area of transgenderism

uh the the argument that is typically

made

by gender theorists is that gender is

entirely separate from sex uh you've

seen the argument made that it makes

no difference on average if men are

stronger than

women are and that if we were to allow

transgender women to compete with

non-transgender women then this would

somehow not disadvantage biological

women and this seems to me absolutely a

scientific that if we're actually going

to have a discussion about

gender and sex that that 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

i'm happy to opine on this um

this only matters

because today we

segregate most

nearly all sports by gender

otherwise why do you even give a

what's what someone identifies with so

this is we live in a free country

and with consenting adults and people

free expression of who and what they are

man adult level i agree with you i think

it doesn't matter what you teach and so

there's the

there's the the matrix of of

you know 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

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

um we know that hormones manifest

differently in different people and have

just the whole thing with steroids

steroids are hormones

right and we rallied against steroids in

professional sports because it gives you

an undue advantage

so i i've tried 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 mother

this is thought i had i don't know

i don't know where it's going to land

the wnba won't be in business for very

long

if that's the case it would just be uh

you'd have to

you'd have to find some way to compete

people against each other

if you still care that sports is an

interesting activity i guess the area

where it does come up

in a non-sports area i don't know so it

would be

you talk in your book about the

education of children and teaching

children about science and right now

children are being taught about the

quote unquote gender spectrum which is

not

scientifically based that is a that is a

theory based

idea no wait wait wait wait wait hold on

people express themselves on a spectrum

so you learn that that's right that's

that that's that's a social that's a

social point not a scientific point it's

it's meaning we express ourselves in

based in different languages that's

something you teach in science class or

is that something that you teach when

you're teaching language

um 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 of course

nobody's denying that people

identify how they want to identify so so

so the question is what is the

relationship of that to

biology meaning right the argument is

made that trans women are women for

example

and what that seems to mean is that

trans women are

identical to women now people want to

say trans women are not biological women

obviously that is the case but people

don't seem to want to say that

although that is obviously

scientifically true trans women are not

biological women biological women are

biological women but where are you going

with this what

what is your what is your what are you

trying to accomplish

by asking yourself is it science or is

it not science it's how

it's people in society but this is this

is a perfect example of an area where

suddenly it doesn't matter to say things

that are just true like why is it why is

it

bad or wrong i have another way to

to approach this um i care what is

objectively true in the world as a

scientist

um but let me not say even as a

scientist i just simply care what is

objectively true

and science happens to be a pretty

potent

path to invoke

to find out what is true and

so if people express themselves

on a gender spectrum and that is an

actual thing in an actual society

if we have not fully explained that

scientifically that's an interesting

frontier to study

if you want to say it's only

sociological

then it's the purview of the social

sciences

i don't care who studies it it's an

interesting fact about society

that's worth learning about if to make

it to fight someone and say it's not

biological it's just your this is

it's real and it's there well because

it's real because it manifests but

it it is real because it manifests but

the question of

the of how to classify manifestation is

a scientific question

meaning that for example there's a

there's a woman over brown university

she came out with a study that suggested

that there was a phenomenon called rapid

onset gender dysphoria in which

a member of a particular group would

suffer from gender dysphoria

and this person's immediate peer group

would suddenly have an

onset of gender dysphoria this paper was

so controversial that brown tried to

pull it

and then was was forced to re reassign

it later

you see this sort of that's a different

question what you're asking now

is are there some topics that should not

be studied

scientifically right and is there some

taboo

and sam harris speaks a lot about this

yes and

um i think the concern is

if you study some topic that's a hot

button topic

and you bring scientific methods and

tools to it there

we don't trust i'm interpreting here i

think

we as a society don't trust

that people in charge in a free country

won't try to legislate something that

will constrict people's freedoms

in the face of that information i think

that's the fear

well isn't that it's a fear i mean and

isn't that you don't trust

our own ability to govern ourselves in

the face

of what could be some information

relative to other right

other kinds of issues isn't that a bit

of a problem yes

yeah it's not it means it's not a free

society it's not a society of free

inquiry which i think you need

ultimately

but um yeah my general take on all of

this stuff from climate change to

gender dysphoria to all these issues is

bring out the science and then let's

hash it out

i think that the problem i'm seeing on a

lot of sciences what is your motivation

why why does that matter it matters

because if you have political power

you could end up creating legislation

that subtracts

freedoms from people who previously were

enjoying the same freedoms as you

the history of that exercise and make a

better argument it doesn't end well

well but the the history of which

exercise bring out all the science and

let's hash it out

i'm saying if you bring out all the

science and the politicians hash it

out the history of that exercise is a

recipe for disaster

if it involves discoveries

that put people's freedom

as defined in our constitution at risk

but now you're arguing for limitations

on areas of particular study

no i'm arguing on we need a way

to shield we need a way to protect

people's freedoms

in the face of whatever gets discovered

scientifically

so i i i'll give you i mean i agree i

think that's what the constitution is

for is to guard rights from

but we're always i mean people who want

rights are always fighting others who

are saying they don't get the rights

from the constitution

this is a daily challenge on the

progressive left

it is a daily challenge right here's an

example i was

i forgot how i ended up getting this

phone call it was some magazine that

serves the

gay community and they want i remember

why because they wanted my opinion

on um

there was some they wanted my opinion

about whether being gay was biological

or matter but there's that new study

that came out this is psychological

right okay right

and i said i

don't care which it is

it find out what it is fine

but the answer to that question

should have no consequence

on legislations or laws because for

example suppose it's suppose it said

it's purely biological okay then you say

oh that explains it let's suppose it

says it's purely psychological

what are you going to do now i say well

now you can you're going to go to the

the

the re-orientation camps or whatever

those are called where they realign you

because they say it's psychological

rather than biological

all of a sudden people start behaving in

ways in society

that want to constrict the freedom of

expression of who and what people are

and that is a danger so maybe there

needs to be a line in the sand let

science do what it does

but politicians keep us free

yet there's so many politicians that are

doing the opposite of that so why aren't

you a libertarian

i'm a libertarian come over here just

okay the line is right here

join me over here