Juno News - Trans Politics and Free Speech (feat. Barbara Kay)

00:00:00.000 Welcome to Canada's Most Irreverent Talk Show.

00:00:06.660 This is the Andrew Lawton Show, brought to you by True North.

00:00:12.640 Coming up, Barbara Kay and I talk about transgender research, free speech, and academic inquiry.

00:00:21.480 The Andrew Lawton Show starts right now.

00:00:25.100 Hey, welcome to another edition of the Andrew Lawton Show here on True North.

00:00:32.760 Great to have you tuned into Canada's Most Irreverent Talk Show.

00:00:36.300 Of course, irreverent is very similar to irrelevant.

00:00:39.940 So I had someone on YouTube last week ask me if I was calling myself Canada's Most Irrelevant Talk Show.

00:00:46.100 No, a couple of letters off, but very important letters. That's a different show.

00:00:49.840 I won't give you suggestions, but there are several shows that might fit the bill of being Canada's Most Irrelevant.

00:00:56.040 In any case, it's good to have you tuned into the show today.

00:00:59.100 I want to talk about free speech in the context of a debate that happened, or not even a debate,

00:01:04.500 an event that happened at McGill University a couple of weeks ago.

00:01:09.100 And the debate was really around whether this event should be allowed to happen,

00:01:13.840 as is so often the case when it comes to any sort of remotely contentious subject matter in 2020.

00:01:22.280 I mean, this has been going on since 2019, 2018, 2017, and so on and so forth back.

00:01:28.140 But the dialogue in this case was going to be a talk by Dr. Kenneth Zucker,

00:01:33.620 who's a celebrated and renowned researcher,

00:01:36.800 someone who, despite being accused of conversion therapy,

00:01:39.840 is actually a researcher who advocates a wait-and-see approach

00:01:44.220 before going through irreparable procedures to affirm a transgender person's believed gender.

00:01:52.160 And this is just a very condensed way of describing a backstory

00:01:56.820 that I know we'll talk to Barbara Kay about in just a moment.

00:01:59.980 But Kenneth Zucker was going to be speaking at McGill University.

00:02:02.860 Trans activists were not happy about this talk, but it didn't get shut down.

00:02:09.060 And I think there's a lesson in this that we can learn a bit about.

00:02:12.320 Barbara Kay covered it through the planning process and also throughout the event itself

00:02:17.260 and wrote a piece in the Post Millennial about it.

00:02:19.960 But the hopefulness, I guess, for this year and what it may bring to the cancel culture wars

00:02:25.040 came in a column she wrote that we'll talk about momentarily.

00:02:28.680 That is, Will 2020 Be the Year of Reason in the Cancel Culture Wars?

00:02:33.700 Author and columnist Barbara Kay joins me on the line now.

00:02:37.320 Barbara, good to talk to you. Thanks for coming on today.

00:02:39.880 Hi, Andrew. Good to be here.

00:02:41.600 Now, I thought this was a fantastic piece for a couple of reasons.

00:02:45.340 I think, number one, you went through the subject matter of Ken Zucker and free speech

00:02:50.980 and the importance of having a dialogue on gender.

00:02:54.180 But you also brought the rare dose of good news on these issues that we don't often hear

00:03:00.000 about in this day and age.

00:03:01.980 And I was wondering if you could tell me why this story is one that gave you a little bit

00:03:05.800 of hope and a little bit of optimism.

00:03:08.220 Well, the good news aspect of it was very welcomed.

00:03:12.080 My editor was extremely pleased.

00:03:14.140 He thought at first, oh, no, this is going to be just, you know, another cancel culture piece.

00:03:19.000 And it would be so depressing.

00:03:20.260 The good news was that the people in charge of this event, and this is, this is, we're

00:03:26.680 talking now about Dr. Kenneth Zucker, who is a leading international expert on gender dysphoria.

00:03:33.400 And until a few years ago, he had been a longtime director of the gender identity clinic at

00:03:40.220 CAMH in Toronto.

00:03:42.040 And then his approach to treating children with gender dysphoria has now become a subject

00:03:50.140 of controversy in the trans community because he treats children holistically.

00:03:55.940 He calls his approach developmentally informed therapy or developmentally informed psychotherapy.

00:04:03.820 And that means when a child presents as gender dysphoric, he doesn't just say, okay, you're a boy

00:04:10.820 or you're a girl, he says, well, let's talk about what life is like for you.

00:04:16.640 Otherwise, let's talk about your family dynamic.

00:04:20.760 Let's talk about, you know, have you had previous referrals for anxiety or depression or, you

00:04:27.420 know, he treats the whole child.

00:04:29.280 And very often it turns out that gender dysphoria is not the child's primary problem.

00:04:35.740 Uh, so he, uh, because many of his patients did end up, uh, returning to their natal sex as

00:04:45.460 their preferred identification, um, he became known as somebody who was, uh, uh, treating

00:04:53.360 children with what is falsely called conversion therapy.

00:04:56.860 Uh, so they came after him, he got fired from CAMH and, uh, ever since he's been a sort of focal

00:05:07.160 point for controversy, uh, even though his research is probably the most cited of anywhere, you

00:05:13.940 know, anyone in the world, he's a scientist, a researcher, a clinician.

00:05:16.680 So that's the background on Dr. Zucker and, um, uh, uh, uh, a professor in the psychiatry

00:05:23.560 department wanted to invite him to speak and immediately, and of course knew.

00:05:28.160 And this is at McGill university.

00:05:29.760 Sorry, at McGill university.

00:05:31.600 Um, and there is, um, they have some divisions in the psychiatry department.

00:05:37.920 Uh, this is, uh, one of the subdivisions.

00:05:40.880 The head of the, uh, division is a professor Samuel Visier, and he believes that Dr. Zucker's

00:05:49.280 research is well worth sharing, but he also knew it would be controversial.

00:05:53.620 So the reason it didn't blow up, I think is that Dr.

00:05:57.300 Uh, professor Visier made a concerted effort to reach out to, uh, stakeholder groups in the

00:06:05.180 trans community, like queer McGill and other, uh, other activist groups, uh, who are LGBT

00:06:13.560 allies.

00:06:15.720 And he, uh, he had conversations with them.

00:06:19.860 He posted on their Facebook pages.

00:06:21.560 He said, this is going to be, you know, uh, very, it's about research.

00:06:26.060 We invite everybody to come and participate.

00:06:29.140 It's going to be a very safe and open environment.

00:06:31.680 We're going to have an extended Q and a.

00:06:33.620 I mean, he really reached out and as a result, although there was pushback and there was

00:06:38.640 resistance to it, uh, it took the form of, you know, sending letters to the administration.

00:06:44.220 We're not happy about this.

00:06:45.640 We wish it would be canceled, but you know, nobody took to the streets or, um, nobody threatened

00:06:51.920 to, uh, to ring alarms or to, to, to have a mass protest.

00:06:58.160 So it did go forward.

00:06:59.880 I was there.

00:07:01.240 There were no protesters, uh, people from the LGBT community did come, uh, people, researchers

00:07:08.120 who actually opposed Dr. Zucker's approach did come.

00:07:13.780 Uh, I would say it was an extremely successful evening.

00:07:17.680 Uh, and it did have an extended Q and a, I did actually write, I did a big write up of it

00:07:23.760 for the post-millennial, uh, a 3000 word write up of it, um, following the event.

00:07:30.820 And, uh, all right.

00:07:32.400 So it was hopeful in, in, in the respect that something very controversial did go forward

00:07:37.200 and he was not deplatformed.

00:07:38.920 And the part that I mentioned in the column that I thought was really disheartening and

00:07:45.740 I understood it entirely and would view it the same way is that when you first receive

00:07:49.920 this invitation, you put it in your calendar with a question mark.

00:07:53.300 So right out of the gate, no other information.

00:07:56.220 The expectation is there's a good chance this isn't going to happen.

00:08:00.100 And I don't know when it became that that was the more likely presumption, but, but it has

00:08:06.560 happened within the last decade, certainly.

00:08:09.160 And, you know, I would say on the flip side of that, it used to be that the culture warrior

00:08:14.660 in me would almost welcome things getting shut down years ago because I thought, okay, it's

00:08:20.460 proving the point that's long past.

00:08:22.680 Now I'm at the point and have been for quite a while where I want to have the dialogues.

00:08:26.300 I want to have the debates and it gets very tiring.

00:08:29.440 The fire alarm routine, the let's cancel it, the D platform, it gets very tiring.

00:08:33.840 And this was one where I would have been right in alignment with you that, oh, there's no

00:08:38.940 way this is going to happen.

00:08:40.440 Well, I, I was pleased, very pleased to be proven wrong on this.

00:08:44.460 And I'm, by the way, I, I'm entirely, uh, aligned with you, uh, in that a couple of

00:08:51.560 years ago too, I was much more worried about it and now I'm just plain discouraged and depressed

00:08:58.600 about it, uh, so this really was a bright light, but just as the fact that it went forward

00:09:04.580 was good news, I have to say that there's a little bad news attached to it in one sense.

00:09:10.220 And that is that the stakeholder groups that were most actively, uh, against this going

00:09:17.260 forward.

00:09:18.260 Um, I think they didn't really have time to gather their, um, how shall I say, uh, to mount

00:09:30.260 what would be, uh, a really organized, uh, protest.

00:09:36.360 And I don't mean protest in the sense of, uh, fire alarms.

00:09:39.460 I mean, they, I, I, their immediate, their response was, okay, I guess this is going forward.

00:09:45.980 The administration absolutely didn't have any qualms about it at all.

00:09:50.020 I mean, after all, look, we're talking about, we're talking about a very highly accredited,

00:09:55.340 uh, person in the field who's world famous.

00:09:58.520 You can't, you can't come and say, well, this is some flake or this, this is a guy who's known

00:10:04.360 to hate trans people.

00:10:05.800 You can't do any of that.

00:10:07.340 He's, he's an honest, objective researcher who has had success clinically, uh, in dealing

00:10:14.980 with, with, uh, gender dysphoric children.

00:10:17.100 He has great compassion.

00:10:18.900 He, he does endorse, uh, transitioning, um, if it's clear after going through a period of

00:10:26.880 therapy that this is the right thing for that person.

00:10:30.560 Uh, so it's not like he's, he's, um, some kind of a, a hate figure, not at all.

00:10:36.820 So it did go forward, but, um, I have seen correspondence between the, some of these groups and Professor

00:10:45.680 Vaisier and with the university.

00:10:48.580 And my impression is that they are going to, next time this comes up, that there will be

00:10:56.220 some, some protocol in place that will insist on representation from the trans community.

00:11:05.220 They have a, uh, a kind of mantra, nothing about us without us.

00:11:12.080 In other words, nobody should be allowed to present, um, a lecture or a talk without input

00:11:20.460 or without actual representation, uh, during the program.

00:11:24.860 As if there was always going to be two sides and one is going to be anti-trans and one is

00:11:29.700 going to be pro-trans.

00:11:31.160 As if every single, um, uh, academic presentation was in fact, uh, assumed to be a political statement.

00:11:41.300 Uh, this I find very unfortunate because, um, if, if you must, if, if every single, um, uh, psychological

00:11:51.540 difficulty or, you know, disorder or this form of dysphoria, uh, or anything that is on the

00:12:01.580 spectrum of, of, um, what we would think of as disorders.

00:12:06.180 Uh, but if you prefer a better term than fine, but if every time somebody, an academic in

00:12:13.940 the field is going to make a presentation, um, and is going to need input from that group,

00:12:20.280 that, that gets quite weird.

00:12:22.080 It's not, that's not scientific, um, because that, that is actually, uh, saying, well, science

00:12:29.820 is so politicized and I'm not saying that science never has been politicized.

00:12:34.340 It often, one of the points that one of the, um, people made in the Q and A was science has

00:12:42.600 always been tinged with social values and that is true.

00:12:46.100 Uh, the reason that it took a very long time for homosexuality to be removed from the list 0.99

00:12:52.100 of pathologies is because of a social value, not a medical, not a medical assessment.

00:12:58.100 Yeah, now I would take from that, that it makes it all the more important to hear from

00:13:01.700 different perspectives.

00:13:02.700 And some people would, in response to that instead say, uh, you know what?

00:13:07.580 We shouldn't hear from these different perspectives.

00:13:09.960 Well, no, but they're, I think what they, they would, they would, they're more moderate

00:13:15.900 than that.

00:13:16.900 And I think they would, what, what they would say is, well, yes, have your, invite your scientists,

00:13:23.180 but you're not, that person should not have the whole floor.

00:13:26.280 They shouldn't have the whole evening to themselves.

00:13:28.320 Uh, a question and answer period is not sufficient, um, to, uh, give balance to the evening.

00:13:35.960 So if you're going to plan something in the future, I think we're going to have a protocol

00:13:41.120 in place that, you know, but I had a discussion with Dr. Zucker about this after the presentation

00:13:47.060 and everything was finished.

00:13:48.380 And I, I walked down the hill with him from the neuro, the Montreal Neurological Institute

00:13:54.240 where it had taken place.

00:13:55.600 And we were walking down to Sherbrooke.

00:13:57.520 He had to catch a plane and I was like, well, if that were the case that every single, uh,

00:14:05.760 condition that, that, that was being discussed by a researcher had to have representation from

00:14:12.240 the actual group, then you couldn't get anybody giving a presentation, say on, uh, autism spectrum

00:14:18.680 disorder, unless you had a group of autistic people there or a representation from the autistic

00:14:25.180 community.

00:14:26.180 Although there is no such thing.

00:14:27.180 And I, I don't think there really is such a thing as a trans community.

00:14:30.180 There's a community of trans activists, uh, but normal, ordinary transgender people, they,

00:14:38.180 they live their lives.

00:14:39.680 They don't spend their 90% of their time meeting, you know, in committee meetings and, and, and,

00:14:46.420 uh, hanging out, um, in, in, in, you know, neighborhood meeting places to discuss, you know,

00:14:53.360 trans issues, they just live. 1.00

00:14:55.360 Yeah.

00:14:56.360 I mean, that's the problem with any of these identity politics discussions is that very

00:15:00.280 often you have an entire identity group.

00:15:03.880 That's co-opted by an organization or a network of activists that doesn't necessarily speak

00:15:08.720 for the average person in that group, whether it's a racial group, a religious group, a trans

00:15:15.360 group, sexual orientation, whatever the case may be.

00:15:18.360 Yeah.

00:15:19.360 And you know, the problem, if you're going to demand that representation there is that

00:15:23.680 you can keep drilling down further and further and further.

00:15:26.880 And eventually you have so many different groups and cross groups and concurrent groups. 0.97

00:15:30.720 You know, we need a black person there. 0.54

00:15:32.560 We need an Asian person there. 0.95

00:15:34.060 We need a half black, half Asian person.

00:15:35.980 I mean, no matter how far you go, you're never going to be able to meet that if you decide 0.75

00:15:41.080 to go down that road.

00:15:42.180 And I see that's the logical extension of that way of thinking.

00:15:45.360 And in this particular case, if you're talking about trans activist groups, they themselves

00:15:52.600 are not pleased to give public forum space to detransitioners because that doesn't fit 1.00

00:16:01.040 their narrative.

00:16:02.680 So this idea that when you talk about the human condition, when you talk about varieties

00:16:09.360 of aberrations from the norm, then members of that group must be represented.

00:16:20.360 This sort of turns academic research onto, I mean, academic research is not supposed to

00:16:26.960 be fighting political battles all the time or any of the time.

00:16:31.700 They're supposed to present their research and they should be given space for that.

00:16:36.200 In the in the Q&A, by the way, one of the first speakers was a young woman who had transitioned

00:16:44.240 and who regretted.

00:16:45.940 So she was a detransitioner who had stopped taking testosterone and who made a case for more 1.00

00:16:55.340 therapeutic intervention before allowing transition or at least hormonal transition.

00:17:02.240 And she said and that that is the Zucker approach, is it not?

00:17:06.020 Exactly.

00:17:07.020 So she was actually there to speak up on behalf of a more holistic approach.

00:17:14.340 And immediately, in response to that statement, somebody across the room, it was a horseshoe arrangement,

00:17:24.340 you know, like lecture halls are in institutions like this.

00:17:29.240 And immediately, a trans man, a young trans man across the hall who, you know, was obviously

00:17:35.380 a little bit agitated by the detransitioner speaking their truth. 0.99

00:17:43.200 He said, oh, because the detransitioner had said I was I was getting quite suicidal because

00:17:49.700 of I had other issues.

00:17:51.080 I had depression and anxiety.

00:17:53.640 So this trans man said, well, I was suicidal because I needed to transition. 0.97

00:18:00.020 And it was a good thing I did.

00:18:02.200 So you had the two opposite.

00:18:03.980 But what I liked was the fact both had their say.

00:18:07.580 Everybody listened very respectfully to both of them.

00:18:10.500 And my first response to that mentally was to say, well, people say that they feel unsafe

00:18:19.360 when they hear views that they disagree with or that that that they find offensive.

00:18:26.620 Well, this this trans man, I think, found what the detransitioner young woman said.

00:18:33.200 I don't know about offensive, but he found it agitating.

00:18:35.500 He was flushed.

00:18:36.500 He was he was, you know, wanted to speak his his own truth, which he did.

00:18:41.440 And everybody listened to him very respectfully.

00:18:44.260 There was no feeling that anybody felt unsafe or that, you know, it was it was a very civil

00:18:52.200 and very comfortable evening for anybody who wanted to say anything.

00:18:59.240 And I said to myself, well, look, this whole idea that you can't be safe hearing from somebody

00:19:07.940 whose opinion makes you uncomfortable is ridiculous because I'm looking at people doing exactly

00:19:14.740 that.

00:19:15.740 And they're just going to have had their say at a forum in which this very necessary approach

00:19:23.240 has to be discussed openly and nobody is stopping people who buy into the affirmation, the immediate

00:19:33.180 affirmation approach from holding their seminars and their lectures without input from the Dr.

00:19:40.920 Zuckers and people who agree with him. 1.00

00:19:44.240 So it seems very unfair to me that they should be.

00:19:49.700 And I'm anticipating now, I don't know what's going to happen at McGill.

00:19:52.700 I just have this strong feeling that the next step after this will be to insert protocols

00:20:00.620 that may preclude Dr. Zucker having a repeat performance there or anyone else who does not espouse

00:20:11.240 the correct political view.

00:20:13.740 But I should say also that when we were walking down the hill and I we were talking about his

00:20:20.100 approach and he was telling me about some of his interesting cases, obviously not by name.

00:20:25.900 And I, you know, he treats children age three to 12.

00:20:29.520 And I said, so I'm sure you keep the data on this.

00:20:32.920 I said, I, I'm curious to know, uh, what percentage of your clients or your patients, um, end up

00:20:41.280 after therapy, uh, reverting to or feeling comfortable in their natal sex.

00:20:48.760 And he, without a beat being skipped said 88% and I was like, wow.

00:20:56.360 And that was almost the last exchange we had before he had to grab a cab, you know, to,

00:21:01.740 to get back to Toronto.

00:21:02.940 And I was like, I, I, I, my, my reaction was, I guess it's just as well, this didn't come

00:21:09.360 up in the Q and a, because I think that would have caused a great deal of consternation and

00:21:15.540 we couldn't have left it at that.

00:21:16.800 I think that saying that would have aroused, uh, so much, uh, intense discussion that that

00:21:27.660 should be for another time, uh, because he was there to discuss his research, not to

00:21:32.500 discuss his clinical practice.

00:21:34.560 So it was just as well, it didn't come up, but I did include that in my post-millennial

00:21:38.780 piece and it's, it's getting, you know, it's getting a lot of Twitter play.

00:21:42.940 Yeah.

00:21:43.580 And you know, what's interesting here is there's that age old saying the fact that you can't

00:21:49.160 choose your facts, like you can choose your opinions applies here.

00:21:53.200 He can share that.

00:21:54.480 And ultimately people are going to try to shoehorn it into their political ideology if they don't

00:21:59.040 like it and say, well, this just reinforces that he's doing conversion therapy and all

00:22:02.580 of these other things, which we know is not true.

00:22:05.280 But the fact that this dialogue happened, the fact that people that were very rattled by what

00:22:10.720 the other had to say, were able to come together, both share in an open environment, you still

00:22:16.380 have this concern that McGill would potentially put up roadblocks or activists would put up

00:22:21.620 roadblocks there.

00:22:22.540 Whereas I would try to be an optimist here and say, how could we replicate this?

00:22:27.720 How could we, was there a lesson to take out of this or a roadmap to take out of this,

00:22:32.420 uh, to basically make it so something like this could go on in the future?

00:22:36.880 Do you think it will just be an anomaly when all is said and done?

00:22:39.660 I don't know.

00:22:41.080 And I, the only reason I say I'm, I'm concerned that, that further events of this type might

00:22:46.560 be precluded is because I, I have seen evidence, um, that certain allies of the trans movement,

00:22:56.000 uh, the, you know, uh, have said, uh, quite openly to Professor Vissier, uh, we're not, we're

00:23:05.220 not happy.

00:23:06.220 Um, and we have to, we have to work out, uh, I don't know if they use the word protocols,

00:23:14.420 but we, we have to work out some kind of a, you know, uh, um, a plan d'action or whatever

00:23:21.580 you want, uh, to make sure that, uh, trans, he didn't use the word activist, the one I'm

00:23:29.620 thinking of, uh, that, that people in the trans community, whatever, feel represented,

00:23:34.400 feel adequately represented if this is going to go forward again.

00:23:37.940 So I, I think this, this kind of, um, uh, credo that you can't talk about gender dysphoria

00:23:48.620 without representation from the community who have their own, uh, quite politicized idea

00:24:01.260 because it's not scientifically based the, you know, these are their claims that affirmation

00:24:08.340 is the necessary, um, approach to dealing with gender dysphoric children.

00:24:14.900 And, and I say children advisedly, because if you're dealing with gender dysphoric adults, 0.82

00:24:19.480 I think we're talking about a whole other, you know, uh, ball game here.

00:24:23.600 So we're, we're mainly concerned with children.

00:24:25.660 So this idea that if you don't affirm, and especially adolescents, we talked a lot, uh,

00:24:32.800 one of the hot buttons in this field is what's called rapid onset gender dysphoria, a term that

00:24:39.160 trans activists do not like, uh, I guess they would prefer late onset, uh, you know, Dr.

00:24:44.800 Zucker doesn't care what it's called.

00:24:46.200 He, he's happy to call it late onset, I think.

00:24:49.180 Uh, but this is an area of concern because the numbers are escalating rapidly and there is

00:24:55.300 evidence to suggest that it is something like a social contagion rather than based in, um,

00:25:01.160 I'm in the wrong body kind of thing.

00:25:03.140 Uh, so this instant affirmation, which is what, you know, you can get, you can get hormone

00:25:09.760 blockers prescribed, uh, after a 15 minute interview by some endocrinologists, um, in this country.

00:25:16.200 And Dr. Zucker happened to mention, he's done a lot of collaboration with, uh, scientists

00:25:22.960 in the Netherlands on this issue and they're, they're very deep into this issue.

00:25:27.140 Uh, they've done many studies and, um, in, in the Netherlands, for example, if you're referred

00:25:32.380 to a clinic for gender dysphoria, uh, they take quite a long time before you're actually

00:25:38.760 prescribed.

00:25:39.220 It can be up to 18 months before you actually get prescribed, uh, hormones.

00:25:43.900 And during that time, you have plenty of time to, uh, work through whatever other issues

00:25:52.000 are, are on your mind with a therapist.

00:25:54.320 And, and so it's just not that instant affirmation here.

00:25:57.760 It is pretty instant.

00:26:00.100 Um, and that, that is really what it boils down to the dissension between people like Dr.

00:26:06.300 Zucker and people who are allies of Dr. Zucker's approach like me and you, I guess.

00:26:11.360 Uh, oh, we're asking for, we're not saying there's no such thing as gender dysphoria.

00:26:16.540 We're not saying that, um, people with it should not have the right to have support, um, and

00:26:24.200 treatment.

00:26:24.600 Uh, we're not even saying that they shouldn't have the right to go on hormone blockers.

00:26:28.640 All we're saying is, uh, that children should not be rushed into this.

00:26:33.040 Um, that instant affirmation is not the way to go.

00:26:36.220 It's, it's not, it's not, uh, what I would call a good quality care and, uh, it's not

00:26:42.720 ethical.

00:26:43.840 So that's all he's saying.

00:26:45.560 That's all allies of his approach are saying.

00:26:48.280 Um, and yet we're being told by trans activists that we're the ones that are, um, putting

00:26:54.420 impediments in the way of people that, that, uh, need compassion, need support, uh, and all

00:27:00.760 the rest, but I don't, I don't say, uh, that we are lacking compassion.

00:27:05.860 I, I think that one has to put prudence and, and, and medical caution ahead of, um, uh, what

00:27:14.300 they call compassion, which, which many of us call negligence.

00:27:17.940 It seems as though Barbara, you're relying heavily on the scientific arguments for what

00:27:23.940 Zucker and his peers are putting, putting forward here.

00:27:26.740 But I wonder if that misses the, the point that's more important, rather, if that's more

00:27:33.300 about the free speech side of this and the academic inquiry side of this, because there's

00:27:37.500 a possibility that the activists are wrong.

00:27:39.500 There's a possibility that Zucker is wrong.

00:27:41.760 There's a possibility that anyone positing a scientific theory is wrong.

00:27:45.320 My belief, and I, I know this is yours from other conversation we've, other conversations

00:27:50.320 we've had, is that you have to put all of these ideas forward to decide and to figure

00:27:54.860 out and, and to have those perspectives.

00:27:56.660 And that's why that moment that you shared of the detransitioning woman speaking up and 1.00

00:28:01.900 the person who did transition speaking up is important.

00:28:05.020 I mean, one of them says detransitioning, uh, helped her.

00:28:09.000 The other one says transitioning helped him.

00:28:11.380 These two are compatible with one each, one another, and they're compatible with what

00:28:15.280 Zucker says.

00:28:16.020 So I wonder though, if the scientific argument gets too in the weeds for people, because

00:28:22.960 when Zucker mentions that 88% statistic, for example, instead of the fundamental question

00:28:29.700 of, does he have a right to say that?

00:28:32.260 I fear that that will open the door to people starting to pounce on him even more and say,

00:28:37.800 no, no, no.

00:28:38.220 He's wrong.

00:28:39.140 And that's why we can't have him speak.

00:28:41.120 Well, I think what people who are against his approach would say is, well, he can say

00:28:46.500 what he wants about them ending up being comfortable, but basically he's talked them

00:28:50.680 out of, you know, uh, something that they need.

00:28:54.120 And, uh, they, and they would say, well, uh, either the people coming to him are not really

00:28:59.360 gender dysphoric.

00:29:00.200 That's, that's one of their approaches.

00:29:01.940 Uh, like people that detect transition, they'll often say, oh, but they weren't really gender

00:29:06.600 Yeah, they, they, they weren't trans in the first place, so they don't count. 1.00

00:29:09.680 Yeah.

00:29:09.940 So it's, it's a very circular argument.

00:29:12.340 You know, if someone says they are trans, oh yes, affirm immediately. 0.99

00:29:15.520 But then 10 years later, when they've been on testosterone and everything else for all

00:29:19.260 those years and they say, no, I should not have been affirmed.

00:29:22.000 Uh, they would say, well, you know, that's, that's, uh, then you weren't really trans and

00:29:27.060 nothing to do with, with us.

00:29:29.600 You know, that's, that's not on us, but it is on them because, uh, since you don't know,

00:29:34.800 and we do know study after study after study, I mean, we have to rely on, uh, science at

00:29:40.460 some point and if study after study in, in many different countries, uh, all come to the

00:29:45.320 same conclusion that after puberty, children who are presenting as gender dysphoric, uh, before

00:29:50.740 puberty, end up comfortable being, uh, you know, uh, identifying with their biological

00:29:59.240 sex, uh, we have to pay attention to that and we have to assume these are good faith.

00:30:03.960 Uh, this is good faith research.

00:30:05.840 It's replicated and that's part of the scientific method is replication, replication.

00:30:10.140 Whereas, um, many of the theories, the gender dysfluidity, uh, theories are based entirely

00:30:16.100 in theory.

00:30:16.680 They admit that, um, there's no scientific studies.

00:30:20.180 It's proving that anyone is, you know, this idea that gender fluidity, all, all it is, 0.98

00:30:25.720 is observation and, and surmises and assumptions and.

00:30:30.560 For sure.

00:30:31.420 And, and I, and I, I don't dispute that.

00:30:33.140 I, I guess the point that I am more unsettled by and in what these activists do is that they

00:30:39.640 don't care about the science and they don't care about the free speech side of it.

00:30:44.820 And I guess it's a matter of which way is a more compelling, uh, direction or which way

00:30:49.800 gets you more likely to having that dialogue.

00:30:52.040 And I'm not sure I know the answer to that yet.

00:30:54.200 Well, I mean, I think one of the, uh, I think, I think one protocol or one, uh, guideline for

00:31:01.300 university administrations should be, uh, look, uh, if somebody is accredited in a, in a,

00:31:08.360 uh, in a real discipline, I mean, psychiatry, you can say, oh, all psychiatry is bunk, but

00:31:15.180 the fact is, uh, these are actual departments.

00:31:18.600 There is actual literature, uh, and, and, and the scientific method is used for, for a lot

00:31:25.580 of their work.

00:31:26.600 Um, so if somebody is highly accredited, he is the editor in chief of the, um, archives of

00:31:33.860 sexual behavior, which is the preeminent journal, peer reviewing journal in his field.

00:31:40.960 So if somebody is that accredited, you cannot say that he does not have the right to make

00:31:49.760 a presentation, um, via a department at a regular university like McGill on the grounds

00:31:57.820 that you are not happy with, uh, his approach or his, his, uh, uh, uh, his brand of.

00:32:11.820 And if you're not having a, have your own symposium, have your own voices.

00:32:15.440 I mean, this is the problem is that no one is saying they can't be heard.

00:32:19.840 And this is what makes me want to pull my hair out over this dialogue when it happens, if you

00:32:25.000 can even call it that is that someone else speaking does not threaten your right to speak.

00:32:30.720 Exactly.

00:32:31.720 And, and, and of course there are, there is the argument that, uh, people have a right

00:32:36.900 to hear what he has to say.

00:32:39.800 So, uh, yes, have your own symposium, have your own conference, have your own, whatever

00:32:45.220 you want.

00:32:46.220 Uh, you know, there, nobody is stopping the other side.

00:32:51.680 Nobody is deplatforming anybody on the other side.

00:32:54.760 Nobody is, uh, asking them to do anything except stop, stop cancelling or stop trying

00:33:03.100 to cancel those whose attitude or whose approach or perspective, uh, they don't like it's and,

00:33:10.080 and universities have to back them up.

00:33:13.760 In this case, the administration wasn't even, didn't even consider for one second, uh, cancelling,

00:33:19.360 even though they received numerous, um, demands for it.

00:33:23.740 And I did, I was in touch with the provost and, and asked if it had been a consideration.

00:33:29.700 And she said, absolutely not.

00:33:31.040 Uh, so I think that was one of the reasons why there was no serious protest because the,

00:33:38.040 the administration hadn't even wavered for a second on it.

00:33:42.040 Um, so we'll see.

00:33:44.040 I'd love to see, I'd love to see this be a paradigm for, uh, the next time.

00:33:48.420 Yeah.

00:33:49.420 And you know what, I'm, I'm very grateful that you saw this through, through the planning

00:33:53.520 process and through the, the event itself for two reasons.

00:33:57.480 Number one, I think there's an important dialogue that has been put forward by Dr. Zucker.

00:34:02.160 But I also think more poignantly, the process is the punishment when it comes to shutting

00:34:08.840 people down in a lot of cases, whether it's security fees that are made just to shut down

00:34:13.920 the event or whether it's all of these groups that have a say in trying to dilute or ultimately

00:34:19.000 get rid of it.

00:34:20.260 And for this one, the process seemed to be the savior of it.

00:34:24.620 It was the process that showed dialogue is important in the process that ultimately was

00:34:28.960 successful getting an event forward.

00:34:31.260 So whether it can be replicated in the same way that the scientific method requires as

00:34:36.560 far as doing this event and in other forms, I think it's important that it happened and

00:34:41.180 important that people saw that it happened and that no one was unsafe, that no one was

00:34:47.380 harmed.

00:34:48.160 No one was irreparably damaged by words in an academic forum.

00:34:53.640 Absolutely.

00:34:54.460 I, I, I, I do agree with you when you say the process is the punishment, I should say that

00:35:00.200 I do think, uh, Professor Vissier who organized this, uh, was pretty courageous because, uh,

00:35:10.120 uh, he was at the center of the controversy.

00:35:14.120 Uh, he was the one that took all the flack.

00:35:17.160 It occupied his time.

00:35:18.840 I would say days and days, uh, were just occupied with responding to, um, you know, hostile, uh,

00:35:28.040 letters and, and emails.

00:35:30.040 And he tried his, his language was so conciliatory.

00:35:34.380 He made such a, a passionate, uh, beautiful introduction to the event, uh, in which he made

00:35:42.200 a plea for reconciliation, uh, between the two sides.

00:35:46.740 And, um, you know, this, this idea of, of goodwill and good faith.

00:35:52.420 It was a very beautiful, I included several paragraphs of his introductory remarks in my

00:35:57.700 post-millennial piece because I thought I've never seen anyone so, um, so, uh, idealistically,

00:36:06.700 uh, and trying so hard to bring two sides of, of, of a, basically a political situation together.

00:36:15.700 Uh, he did not get any credit for it.

00:36:19.500 I don't think from, you know, any official credit for that, but I'm giving him credit.

00:36:24.140 Yeah. Well, he gets it from me as well. So he's getting his due here. It's not a great

00:36:28.060 honor to get your due on the Andrew Lawton show, but we'll, uh, we'll do what we can.

00:36:31.620 Barbara Kaye, National Post columnist, joining me on the line now. Barbara, thank you so much

00:36:35.840 for doing this and also for coming on today. Really appreciate it.

00:36:39.020 My pleasure, Andrew. Thanks for having me.

00:36:41.420 You know, it's interesting. When I invited Barbara, I wanted this event to basically serve

00:36:46.700 as the launching point for a broader discussion about free speech. And it ended up going as live

00:36:52.280 programming does in a bit of a different direction. We were spoke speaking more about the specific

00:36:57.320 event and about gender identity and all of these things, but I still think that's an important

00:37:02.280 dialogue to have. And there are a couple of reasons for that. Number one, it's not a dialogue

00:37:08.120 that people want to entertain and not withstanding this McGill event, which by the way, they did try to

00:37:14.280 shut down. When Zucker was in a documentary, a BBC documentary that looked at the pro and anti-transitioning

00:37:22.680 arguments, and he was not an anti-transitioner, by the way, that documentary has become so controversial

00:37:29.160 that even CBC was subjected to calls for boycotts. I mean, people can boycott CBC, but boycotts for being

00:37:35.960 too transphobic for supposedly airing or was, or planning to air the documentary. And I don't even think

00:37:42.200 it ever happened. So the idea that you can't even have a discussion about research with a researcher

00:37:49.480 without going down this road into identity politics is absolutely insane. So like I said,

00:37:54.440 we didn't speak as much on the broader umbrella of free speech. We focused on this event, but also I

00:38:00.040 think in doing so illuminated perhaps a bit of hopefulness on the horizon, but also what the stakes

00:38:06.200 are when it comes to trying to have discussions in an academic context or any other context. So my thanks

00:38:11.800 to Barbara Kay for coming on. My thanks to all of you for tuning into the show here. We'll be back

00:38:17.000 next week with more of Canada's most irreverent talk show here on True North. This is the Andrew

00:38:21.800 Lawton Show. Thank you, God bless, and good day Canada. Thanks for listening to the Andrew Lawton Show.

00:38:26.840 Support the program by donating to True North at www.tnc.news.

Juno News - February 06, 2020

Trans Politics and Free Speech (feat. Barbara Kay)

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript