Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey - Ep 639 ｜ The Queerification of American Kids

00:00:00.000 Hey guys, welcome to Relatable. Happy Thursday. This episode is brought to you by Good Ranchers.

00:00:05.100 Go to goodranchers.com slash Allie. That's goodranchers.com slash Allie.

00:00:18.620 Okay, I've got a show for you today. I am interviewing my friend James Lindsay. He has

00:00:25.080 been on the show several times. Every time he is, it is always a long interview because I am just,

00:00:32.800 my brain is like firing off all cylinders when I'm talking to him because he has so much insight

00:00:39.160 and so much knowledge. And I always have a million and one questions for him. You know,

00:00:44.580 when you're listening to something or you're talking to someone and your brain is like

00:00:49.480 tingling because it's so just intellectually stimulating for you and it's so fascinating.

00:00:54.340 I mean, that's always how I feel when I am listening to James Lindsay talk. And I know

00:00:58.900 you will feel that way too. You're going to have to like pause this interview several times and just

00:01:03.260 like try to take in what he's saying. It's also going to send you down probably little rabbit holes

00:01:08.680 of your own that you want to study independently and that you want to research more on. I didn't

00:01:15.200 even get to cover everything that I wanted to cover today, but we are talking about the ins and outs,

00:01:19.960 the foundation of queer theory and how it leads to the idea of the abolition of the family and

00:01:26.720 stealing away a child's innocence, how these things are actually inherent in this ideology that is

00:01:33.480 becoming more and more prevalent today. It's really important that we understand the philosophical roots

00:01:39.560 of this, but you'll also hear towards, I think the last half of the interview, me referencing the Bible

00:01:47.700 and how this ideology really contradicts the biblical idea of male and female, of sex and marriage, of just

00:01:56.120 human nature. And so that's obviously a very important aspect to us as well and an important aspect to all

00:02:02.880 of us if we are trying to understand where this is coming from and how we combat it with what God says

00:02:08.520 is good and right and true. Now, James is not coming from a Christian perspective. He's very knowledgeable of

00:02:13.120 the Bible, but he is not a Christian. He is, as far as I understand, an agnostic. But thankfully, he has a

00:02:21.680 good grasp on what the Bible says, and so he kind of helps us grapple with the differences between this

00:02:26.280 ideology that we're talking about and Christian theology. So I'm super, super excited for you to

00:02:32.880 listen to this episode. I know you are going to love it.

00:02:43.120 James, thanks so much for joining us once again. People can go back and listen to our previous

00:02:53.400 interviews. We've talked about critical theory, critical race theory. Today, I want to talk to

00:02:58.220 you about something that I've seen you discuss a lot on Twitter, and that is a subset, I believe,

00:03:02.500 of critical theory, which is queer theory. So big question, lay it out for us. What is queer

00:03:08.420 theory, and why should we care about it? Yeah, I've had really, really great feedback,

00:03:14.680 by the way, about our previous episode. So I'm excited to be here again. Everything's been so

00:03:18.180 positive. But, you know, we're going to the dark side today with queer theory. Queer theory is really,

00:03:23.760 I mean, at a Turning Point event last year, their America Fest or whatever they do in December,

00:03:29.780 I sat on the stage with Charlie Kirk, and I said that queer theory opens the gates to hell.

00:03:33.860 And I kind of mean that as close to literally as I can. Queer theory is, as you said, it is a

00:03:41.440 critical theory. It's derived from this weird fusion of kind of critical Marxism, which is another name

00:03:47.220 for critical theory, and sex positive feminism, as these were stewing around in the 1980s,

00:03:55.120 especially within the subset of sex, this gets all complicated, subset of sex positive feminists who

00:04:01.740 are also butch lesbians. And so they were really concerned with the fact that, you know, they don't

00:04:06.600 want to have to act like a woman just because they happen to have certain parts. And they didn't want

00:04:13.100 to be, you know, discriminated against and so on, if you want to kind of give them a charitable

00:04:18.300 interpretation of what they're about. And so they called in 1984, a woman named Gail Rubin called for

00:04:24.480 a new radical politics of sex and sexuality in a paper called Thinking Sex. And this is really where

00:04:30.120 queer theory was born. And what it is, is it's a way of looking at the idea that society constructs

00:04:37.420 a concept called normalcy or being normal. And certain people assign themselves the status of

00:04:44.540 being normal that gives them privileges in society. They get, you know, they're not considered freaks or

00:04:49.340 perverts. They can have jobs. They can dress the way that they normally dress at their jobs.

00:04:54.280 So what they would call the cis hetero. Yes, the cis hetero whatever. And yes, and you have to say

00:05:04.040 the whatever because they can just keep tacking on more and more prefixes to make more and more

00:05:10.400 designations if they wanted to. And so they oppress people outside of that realm of normalcy by virtue of

00:05:19.840 creating the category of normal versus abnormal. And that category can be normal with it with regard

00:05:26.000 to sex, normal with regard to sexuality, normal with regard to gender identity. And like I said,

00:05:31.920 the mere act of categorization oppresses people. In fact, they call it a violence of categorization.

00:05:38.640 It does violence to people who don't fall within that realm. So in a sense, queer theory is a war on

00:05:45.100 the normal. And who did they say is making these categories? Society. Society at large. And so

00:05:52.680 this is really complicated. This is their idea. This is Judith Butler's idea of, let's say,

00:05:57.360 gender performativity coming into play. So for Judith Butler, who is kind of the fairy godmother of

00:06:03.560 queer theory, even though I just mentioned Gail Rubin as the person who wrote the first paper,

00:06:08.220 Judith Butler really advanced the ideas at the beginning really the most. And her, um,

00:06:15.100 two big books were in 1990 and 1993. The first one was called Gender Trouble. And the second one is

00:06:21.160 called Bodies That Matter. And in these books, she lays out this whole idea of gender performativity.

00:06:27.160 And the idea is that gender only becomes real because we put it on like a play or not quite like

00:06:35.240 a play. There's this older idea in philosophy. This takes a lot of unpacking because it's really weird.

00:06:39.400 So I'm sorry, we have to do this for a minute. No, it's good. This is what people like. I like the

00:06:42.780 unpacking of it. So go for it. Yeah, we have to go backwards. There's a guy, J.L. Austin,

00:06:49.500 before Judith Butler, who was investigating this idea of performance of roles in society and came up

00:06:55.980 with this concept of performativity. So you could take the idea of a judge or a police officer or

00:07:01.460 something like this and in his professional capacity. So, you know, maybe you know this guy,

00:07:06.360 maybe he's your next door neighbor, maybe he's just Joe, right? Or whatever, Joe, the judge.

00:07:10.580 And you know him, but he's Joe and he's just cooking burgers and, you know, hanging out with

00:07:14.760 his kids or whatever he does as Joe working on his car. But then he puts on the black robe and he goes

00:07:22.200 and he sits at the bench and now he's your honor, right? And he speaks a certain way and he sits a

00:07:29.700 certain way and he dresses a certain way and he acts a certain way. Same thing with your buddy,

00:07:34.140 you know, Billy, who happens to be a doctor, you know, he's Billy at home and then he puts on the

00:07:39.640 white coat. And the next thing you know, he's a doctor, right? And so you become the professional

00:07:45.660 role. The professional role, Austin was saying, doesn't really exist. It's not a real thing.

00:07:51.060 It's a performance that people do when they adopt that role and they teach that performance to other

00:07:55.560 people. So judges kind of groom future judges into being judgely and doctors groom future doctors

00:08:02.480 into acting like doctors would. And there's this performativity that brings out the existence of

00:08:07.760 that role. And Judith Butler saw this like, that's what gender is, which is absolutely crazy. She said

00:08:13.820 that people are born into the world. Some of them have male genitalia. Some of them are female

00:08:18.280 genitalia or chromosomes or gametes or whatever level of sex identification you want to go with.

00:08:25.480 And then society is like, well, this is what little boys do. And this is what little girls do.

00:08:30.560 And then the people that are saying that though, just like the judge is performing, the judge role

00:08:35.140 is performing the role of man or woman and teaching the child to perform the role of man or woman.

00:08:40.120 And this whole elaborate scheme of performing the roles of man and woman is what shapes the little

00:08:45.860 girl to grow up as a girl and into a woman and the boy to grow up as a boy and into a man.

00:08:51.560 And it kind of creates a reified, a fake thing made real out of gender and gender identity.

00:09:00.740 And we're all actually just performing it. So if you performed it differently, you could disrupt

00:09:05.240 that system. And now you start to see where queer theory has these ideas about drag queens and

00:09:11.820 trans, not just transvestite in a dressing across, but also, you know, transgender, non-binary,

00:09:20.640 gender fluid, gender non-conforming. We'll skip some of the other terms they use because they

00:09:25.540 like to throw the F word into a lot of their theory quite literally. It's even weird using

00:09:30.640 the word queer the way that they do after so many years of it being just a slur, but they

00:09:36.780 throw the F bomb into things. Gender effing, for example, is a deliberate activity that they

00:09:41.780 undertake to make gender more complicated and more weird.

00:09:44.360 And so this is sort of where these ideas come from. But what it is, is it's a Marxist theory of

00:09:51.360 sex, gender and sexuality or a Marxist theory of normalcy is what it boils down to. The normal is a

00:09:56.440 special privilege status that some people give themselves to exclude other people. Those people

00:10:01.080 are called queer. They can seize that name for themselves, use it as a positive discourse of

00:10:06.380 resistance. They can take up queer activism to disrupt the normal through various performative

00:10:11.360 and other means. Judith Butler recommended politics of parody. So you mock what gender

00:10:17.780 roles are by exaggerating them and being sarcastic and making-

00:10:21.360 Like a drag queen, kind of.

00:10:22.580 Like a drag queen. Yes, exactly. And the goal is to disrupt the categories themselves so that

00:10:28.940 normal loses its meaning. Where Karl Marx said that the point of communism can be summarized in a

00:10:35.200 single sentence, which is to abolish private property, Judith Butler didn't say but could have said that

00:10:40.740 the point of queer theory could be summarized in a single sentence, which is to abolish the concept

00:10:45.520 of normalcy at all. So there's nothing normal. Anything goes.

00:10:49.580 Right. So in the same way that Marxism in its original form was kind of class warfare between

00:10:54.880 the categories of the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, this being a subset of Marxism is trying to

00:11:04.020 subvert or I guess get rid of the categories of male and female. And so just as Marxism saw the

00:11:11.760 class hierarchy as a form of oppression, then queer theorists would see the gender categories as a form

00:11:19.520 of oppression. Because Marxists in general really see hierarchy as the enemy. So critical race theorists,

00:11:26.040 they categorize primarily white and black. And so we have to kind of obliterate. I don't I don't know.

00:11:33.140 I don't know exactly how to describe it. But that's, I guess, how it seems like they're all connected.

00:11:38.380 They are. They're literally it's really just the same. The best way to think of it is to think of

00:11:44.100 Marxism like a computer program. I mean, this is a dorky thing, but it's an operating system on your

00:11:48.600 computer. Like if you have an Apple, it's running, you know, iOS and iOS does what iOS does. And it

00:11:55.500 doesn't matter what program iOS is running. It doesn't matter if you've opened Safari. It doesn't

00:11:59.020 matter if you've opened Skype. It doesn't matter which one you've opened. And so with Marxism,

00:12:03.440 what Marx did before he wrote Capital, before he even wrote the Communist Manifesto, which was in

00:12:09.320 1848, is he wrote these other treatises like in 1844. He wrote a lot and they're extremely religious.

00:12:15.460 And what he did was he laid out the architecture that is what, in my opinion, is the real essence of

00:12:20.280 what Marxism is about. And that's the operating system, which is what you're saying. There's the

00:12:24.140 stratification of society. There's this idea that anywhere you find hierarchy, hierarchy is creating

00:12:29.380 benefit for the people on top and oppression for the people below. The people on top rigged the

00:12:34.680 system to keep their benefit, even if they don't know it. The people on bottom are taught through

00:12:39.880 ideological means to believe that they're stuck where they are or they're supposed to be where

00:12:44.060 they are or they should accept where it is. That's Marx's famous line about religion being the

00:12:50.220 opiate of the masses. It numbs you to your suffering so that you won't rise up and end

00:12:54.520 the causes of your suffering. That's actually the argument he's making. He made that in January of

00:13:00.440 1844 in a critique of Hegel. Later in 1844, he writes in the Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts

00:13:07.020 that the idea is to transcend private property entirely to get to a true communism where man realizes

00:13:14.280 his true essential nature as a social being, which as a social being, there's no longer any

00:13:19.000 hierarchy. So it's a man without hierarchy that you're actually trying to get to. And he saw

00:13:23.440 private property by that point as the thing that's causing the issue. But this software,

00:13:29.100 this operating system can run any software. So if you take and plug in the economic software,

00:13:36.920 you get what people call classical Marxism. Oh, it's about economics. It's about capital. It's

00:13:41.840 about capitalism, blah, blah, blah. But you can unplug that and you could plug in race. And then you have

00:13:45.920 whiteness as a special kind of property and you have white people assigned, created the categories

00:13:51.420 of race the way they are to give themselves this advantage and preserve it for themselves. People

00:13:55.900 of color are excluded. They need a racial consciousness awakened so that, you know, the whole

00:14:00.560 thing, right? And so you can plug in race. Well, you can plug in normal as well, being considered

00:14:07.200 normal. And that kind of starts with Michel Foucault, who's talking about madness and homosexuality.

00:14:11.700 And that's who these, the postmodern philosopher, and that's who these so-called post-structuralist

00:14:17.480 feminists who gave birth to queer theory had really turned to predominantly was the postmodernist

00:14:25.540 Michel Foucault, who was trying to say that no matter how we've categorized homosexuality in the

00:14:30.080 past, it's always been a disaster and it's always going to be a disaster. And their main mechanism of

00:14:35.440 abolition then is for queer theory is to queer things, which is to make them complicated,

00:14:40.800 to make them so complicated that people throw up their hands and say, I can't answer what a

00:14:45.400 woman is. That's not possible.

00:14:47.580 Yeah. Let's hear a little bit more about Foucault because it does go back. You talked about the

00:14:52.300 80s and the early 90s, those queer feminists trying to queer up, as they would say, what gender is,

00:14:59.940 and they see it as a form of liberation for them. You mentioned that they were seen as not normal if

00:15:05.280 these people were butch lesbians. And so they felt like, okay, well, let us just kind of redefine

00:15:11.520 what gender is. And so we will no longer be a part of this oppressed, marginalized class from their

00:15:17.100 perspective. But it really does go back further than that. I mean, you mentioned Foucault, but

00:15:22.480 we can also look at a lot of the sexologists from the 60s and 70s, like Dr. John Money, like Dr.

00:15:29.780 Alfred Kinsey. And so can you take us back even further? And then I think you could definitely

00:15:34.940 argue that it goes back even further than that to the philosophers of hundreds of years ago who

00:15:42.880 kind of questioned what even is the body? What is material reality? Can't you just declare what you

00:15:49.680 are? So take us back first to maybe like the 60s and 70s, how that helped lead us where we are. And

00:15:55.560 maybe then we can go back even further. Yeah. So everywhere man is born free, but sorry, man is

00:16:01.440 born free, but everywhere he's in chains. So that's the 60s, right? So that's Rousseau though. That's

00:16:05.560 the 1760s. But by the 1960s, you had Michel Foucault explaining that the social milieu that people find

00:16:13.400 themselves in, especially if they're considered crazy or mad, as he referred to the social construction

00:16:19.200 of insanity, or if they're considered homosexual or in other ways, sexually deviant, one mode or

00:16:26.580 another, that then they're having a limitation placed on their potentialities of being. So they

00:16:33.100 were born free, but everywhere they remain in chains. And those chains are socially constructed by the way

00:16:37.320 that things like madness and homosexuality are regarded. So in this sense, Michel Foucault really

00:16:42.300 kind of becomes the first genuine queer theorist because he's the first one really trying to take the

00:16:47.580 issue specifically of sexuality and normalcy and pull it into question, kind of in a profoundly

00:16:53.760 deconstructive and critical way. And we all kind of know why, right? I mean, Foucault, on the one hand,

00:17:02.860 if we want to say philosophical, believed himself to be a profound Nietzschean. I think it's probably the

00:17:09.040 case that he believed he was becoming Nietzsche's Zarathustra, the Superman, the Ubermunch that has

00:17:16.040 achieved that status by transcending all morals, has thrown off all morals and therefore has become

00:17:21.460 unconstrained and therefore Superman. I think he thought he became that by throwing off all morals

00:17:27.340 entirely. But the reasons are a little baser than that. The man was a homosexual that had a proclivity

00:17:35.140 for kinky sex and including with children. And society wasn't exactly facilitating any of that.

00:17:40.360 And that was one thing that he really argued for when he was kind of at the peak of his career in

00:17:46.980 the 60s, is that we should normalize, he was saying, underage sex, that there was really no-

00:17:52.860 Yeah. In fact, in 1977, he signed the French petition to get rid of the age of consent completely,

00:17:58.980 which, by the way, at the time was 15 years old. So he was like having to wait till they're 15,

00:18:04.720 way too long, way too late. It's not like he's talking about 18, 19, or whatever, like we have

00:18:10.440 in the United States or in certain states. He's looking at-

00:18:13.780 Children.

00:18:15.440 15.

00:18:16.040 Right.

00:18:16.360 And, you know, saying, well, that's, we got to get rid of it completely. And, you know,

00:18:21.360 not to put all the blame on him, all the French postmodern philosophers signed the same petition

00:18:26.100 to do away with it. And like I said, that was in 77. So all through the 60s and 70s,

00:18:31.820 he's grappling with his own demons, if you will, about his sexuality, about his proclivities

00:18:36.340 toward children, about his literally kink, like bondage, S&M type, brutal sex that he

00:18:42.480 was into. And the fact that society wasn't exactly accommodating him. And so he viewed

00:18:47.080 the entirety of society as being in a prison, very much like Rousseau's, man is born free,

00:18:51.920 but everywhere he's in chains. And it's a prison that's constructed by the way that people regard

00:18:56.000 these attitudes. So let's complicate these attitudes. Let's break these attitudes down.

00:18:59.780 Now you have kind of two other veins. One is the sexologist you mentioned, John Money,

00:19:05.800 total freak. He's the guy who invented gender identity in the first place.

00:19:11.520 He is a sordid character. I don't know enough about him to talk about his history

00:19:15.800 in tremendous depth, but I do understand that the story involves that there was a

00:19:20.220 pair of twins that was born.

00:19:23.780 And he categorized this as intersex, but I think it was actually a botched circumcision.

00:19:29.320 It was.

00:19:30.280 Yeah. And so there was a botched circumcision of one of the twins. And so they just, John

00:19:35.560 Money decides to step in and say, well, let's just cut it off and raise him as a girl.

00:19:40.400 Call it Barbara.

00:19:42.440 Yeah. This doesn't work. It didn't work at all. It was an absolute catastrophe. And so they

00:19:48.380 lied to the twin. Ends up to both of the, these people grow up and end up committing suicide,

00:19:52.700 just total catastrophe and gender identity was believed by this guy for whatever sadistic

00:19:57.500 purposes he had to be something you could kind of just foist on people in a sort of very

00:20:01.560 gross blank slate kind of way, which was sort of the same questions that Foucault was arguing

00:20:06.640 around and in, but I don't know how much crossover the two of those guys had.

00:20:10.820 And let me, let me just pause just so people, and I know people who listen to this podcast

00:20:13.860 a lot have probably heard the story of Dr. John Money and the Reimer twins, but it wasn't

00:20:17.840 only that, that he tried to make this little boy, David Reimer into a girl named Barbara,

00:20:22.820 the parents went along with it, but he also forced these twin boys when they were little

00:20:27.280 to commit sex acts on each other while other doctors watched. And he said, of course, it

00:20:32.380 was for sex research. And then not only did both men grow up and commit suicide, but the

00:20:38.620 little boy whose parents tried to raise him as a girl realized when he was an adolescent,

00:20:43.840 I'm, I'm not a girl. This doesn't feel right. I'm a boy. And so his parents let him so-called

00:20:49.380 transition back into, um, you know, a boy, a man, but yeah, then we also have this, you

00:20:56.880 know, as you said with Foucault, we also have this, um, this strand of pedophilia that we

00:21:03.220 see in Dr. John Money, that he was a pedophile apologist that a lot of the work and research

00:21:09.620 that we have on minor attracted people, which is kind of what they're referred to as today

00:21:16.280 really comes from the apologist work of Dr. John Money, who believed again, that it should

00:21:23.800 be considered normal behavior.

00:21:26.340 Right. Yeah. Actually you find this in, in, in Gail Rubin very clearly as well, that paper

00:21:31.580 overthinking sex, um, being a butch lesbian, I don't know if she actually had anything beyond

00:21:38.020 theoretical interest in children. Maybe she did, maybe she didn't. Um, but she talks extensively

00:21:44.820 in that paper from 1984 about how important it is that we understand that, you know, the

00:21:50.640 criminalization of child porn is a terrible thing. We shouldn't be criminalizing that.

00:21:55.320 This is just a big panic around this. And this is a moral panic that's causing people to make

00:22:00.000 bad laws. And these laws will be used to repress and, and suppress people and to, to, to cause

00:22:05.860 them, you know, all this injustice. She has all of this discussion. She, she, she does say

00:22:11.020 that she thinks the pedophilia is, you know, a special case, but then she talks about cross

00:22:16.140 generational sexual relationships and says that those shouldn't be stigmatized. But we,

00:22:21.540 the way that she describes these cross generational sexual relationships in the paper doesn't give

00:22:28.380 you the vibe that it's like a 25 year old dating a 50 year old. Like people might look, but nobody,

00:22:33.900 the way she describes it is that people have this incredible moral revulsion and dah, dah, dah, dah.

00:22:38.480 But this isn't what we actually see and wouldn't even have seen then about, you know, a 25 year old

00:22:44.000 and a 50 year old, but it is what you would see with a, say a 30 year old and a 10 year old.

00:22:47.880 Right.

00:22:48.080 And so she's, she knows she's not supposed to be talking about pedophilia, but she's still

00:22:52.640 apologizing for and defending pedophilia throughout thinking sex. Um, so this is a thread, a vein

00:22:59.020 that never quite goes away in queer theory, whether it's Foucault, whether it's money,

00:23:05.160 Alfred Kinsey cannot really be resurrected here. I can't speak about the kind of third vein that

00:23:09.680 this all comes from, which is like the weird, you know, the second sex feminists, you know,

00:23:14.320 Simone de Beauvoir being a huge influence on the later queer theorists. Um, but, uh,

00:23:22.200 I don't know if I, I actually don't know if back in 1949 people like Simone de Beauvoir

00:23:28.340 later, uh, in the fifties and sixties, Betty Frieden were, were pedophiles, but where you

00:23:33.700 get to the queer aspect outside of the feminist aspect, you definitely see this thread that

00:23:37.920 never goes away, whether it's the people inventing gender identity, whether it's the

00:23:41.620 people blowing open the idea that homosexuality is normal, whether it's Foucault or Kinsey in

00:23:46.640 various ways, and it's endemic kind of in everybody. And we have to complicate what it

00:23:49.980 means by the time you get to Gail Rubin and the other queer theorists, it's just always

00:23:55.160 there. It just keeps coming back up. The, uh, sexualization of children and the destruction

00:24:01.160 of childhood innocence is an explicit goal where queer theory enters into early childhood

00:24:06.240 education in papers over the last five to 10 years, for example.

00:24:09.960 Yeah. And I have my theory as to why that is, but can you explain like why that seems to

00:24:15.620 be a common thread? I have, uh, I, I wish I could say this is really simple and just say,

00:24:22.340 well, they're evil and they want to diddle kids, but it's, I think there are multiple

00:24:25.980 motivations in multiple places and multiple people. I don't think, for example, I would

00:24:31.200 be very surprised if Gail Rubin was interested in diddling kids. I, maybe I would be very surprised.

00:24:38.200 Michel Foucault is not even a question. He very definitely not only wanted to do that,

00:24:42.880 but did do that. Uh, so with people like Foucault, well, actually, I don't know about Alfred

00:24:47.520 Kinsey, but definitely John Money. Yeah. And so with, with people like Foucault and Money,

00:24:52.920 there's just a rationalization of their own pathologies. Like Nietzsche warned about his

00:24:56.960 philosophers tend not to write philosophy, but to rationalize their own proclivities and pathologies.

00:25:02.760 And so there is that there, if I had to make a guess, you know, queer theory is the only

00:25:09.480 academic discipline in the universe that's kind of even dipping into the pedophile waters.

00:25:15.240 So if you're a pedophile that wants to sound smart about your pedophilia, where are you going

00:25:19.240 to go? The selection bias into queer theory is going to be enormous. So the field itself is going

00:25:24.280 to attract pedophiles who are looking for what sounds like intelligent and rational justifications

00:25:29.540 for breaking open the stigma around who they are, whether that's for malicious intent or because

00:25:36.960 they're just kind of pathetic. Um, on the other hand, there are these, there's this big trend

00:25:41.940 within all of this theory to just have the most like crazy avant-garde thing to make everything.

00:25:47.420 And so to make everybody realize that everything's a social construct. So if you obliterate the barrier

00:25:52.480 between male and female or obliterate the barrier between adult and child, well, you've really done

00:25:58.200 something amazing. If you've reconstrued that in terms of social constructivism, that which is so

00:26:03.280 clearly a manifestation of physical reality, then you've really achieved something. So there's this

00:26:08.480 weird academic side to it too. Um, there's also a weird narcissistic side that feeds into it. It's,

00:26:14.920 you know, um, you see this a lot with queer theory, which is that where you're actually heading

00:26:21.300 is toward, I get to choose my own identity and I can kind of groom the people around me into the

00:26:28.140 identities that I want them to have to become my narcissistic supply. And so again, you see kind

00:26:34.000 of another pathology at the heart of this that isn't necessarily about pedophilia at that point.

00:26:40.100 It's about, and I think, I think you're going to see some pedophilia issues around all this drag

00:26:45.400 queen stuff. All of it's going to start coming out eventually. Some of it already has.

00:26:48.780 Yeah. We've already seen several stories recently. There was some drag queen that goes by diamond,

00:26:54.380 something or other who was just charged with several counts of child pornography. And if that

00:26:59.200 were like the only case, okay, but we've seen several of those headlines. There will be a lot.

00:27:05.940 I don't know what the proportion would be, but I would guess it'd be upwards of 30 or 40% at a

00:27:09.820 minimum of the people involved. No adult man who's healthy and normal wants to dress up as a woman

00:27:15.440 in a sexualized manner and perform sexualized sassy things in front of children.

00:27:19.760 And people try to say, Oh, so you're saying that, um, uh, Miss Doubtfire, that that was like

00:27:27.300 unhealthy people. But I mean, that's gaslighting. Like we know it's not the same thing. Dressing up

00:27:32.320 as a joke or a performance is one thing, but the way that drag queens are dressed are not just a

00:27:38.720 caricature of women. It's also a sexualized caricature of women with, you know, giant boobs and

00:27:44.160 fishnet tights and makeup and hair that we would never actually wear.

00:27:47.900 There is a sexual aspect to it. No matter what people say there is by definition. I mean,

00:27:52.800 if you actually figure, I don't know if we could go to like, you know, the dictionary and look up

00:27:56.440 drag queen, but if we actually were to, were to get to the heart of what makes a drag queen,

00:28:01.020 a drag queen, as opposed to a cross dresser, or as opposed to, you know, whatever we would call this

00:28:06.920 character, there's some British term for the Mrs. Doubtfire character that is very, very British,

00:28:12.040 but I forgot what it is. It's a, it's a, it's a rather hilarious term, but the, we can see the

00:28:19.220 clear differences, which is that it's obviously not about sex and drag queen has sex right at the

00:28:24.040 heart of it. And they know it does. They, they say it does. And then they kind of give this wink,

00:28:28.660 wink, it's family friendly attitude. They've written papers about it, explaining it. I would guess

00:28:33.800 just to be fair to this, that the predominant proportion of the drag queen phenomenon is

00:28:43.960 actually raging narcissists who are turning children into their brood of narcissistic supply.

00:28:49.480 Yeah. Some of them are probably going to be pedophiles, but the idea that you can

00:28:53.000 get yourself all this attention and then surround yourself with people that you can mold into being

00:28:59.080 like little copies of you is kind of a narcissist dream. So there's going to be a huge element of

00:29:05.300 narcissism worked in behind all of it as well. So what does queer theory develop then? It develops

00:29:11.960 the rationalizations and justifications in a Marxist way to convince society to not only allow this,

00:29:19.000 but to celebrate it.

00:29:29.080 And I, I'm sure that most parents who take their kids to these things, and even most of the drag

00:29:36.460 queens, they probably couldn't even define queer theory for you in the same way that so many people

00:29:41.400 say, Oh, I'm not a critical race theorist, but white people are oppressors. So they believe and act out

00:29:46.520 the tenets of critical race theory without even really knowing what critical race theory is. And of

00:29:51.520 course, I think it's the same thing here when it comes to bringing kids to drag queen story hour,

00:29:56.900 or pushing gender ideology in the classroom. It really does have philosophical roots in this

00:30:02.340 kind of postmodern idea that we create our own truth that we define existence that social constructs

00:30:09.960 are inherently oppressive. And so you could see that any kind of ideology like Marxism that believes

00:30:15.580 that all categories or all hierarchies, or all structures and systems are inherently oppressive,

00:30:22.080 you can absolutely see why they would want to obliterate the category of adult and child,

00:30:27.760 because what is age according to them? Or what is the like assignment that we place on age,

00:30:35.960 but a social construct? Sure, age might be a biological reality. But maybe according to the

00:30:41.820 Marxist that doesn't believe in these kinds of categories, they might ask why do we assign certain

00:30:47.640 innocence to certain ages and certain maturity to certain ages? I mean, you can kind of see that.

00:30:52.600 And you could also see the argument because these are theories that hate Westernism or what they

00:30:58.180 perceive as Westernism of them arguing that this idea of age of consent, they might say is just a

00:31:04.600 Western constructs, because in a way it is in a lot of the Eastern world today, they do not view

00:31:11.540 what we would call pedophilia as something that is perverted. I mean, child brides are taken regularly

00:31:19.600 in most of the Eastern world today. It is actually because of the Judeo-Christian worldview that we

00:31:25.140 even have the category of children and the category of child innocence. So, I mean, you can see how this

00:31:31.700 battle is playing out and is going to play out, even if the people who are proponents of queer theory

00:31:37.460 don't want to admit that. Right. Yeah. So, you know, and this is the kind of thing they would do is

00:31:43.000 they would point at what you just said and they would say, well, see, it's arbitrary. It's actually

00:31:48.300 completely arbitrary in other countries at different times in history, et cetera, that we've done

00:31:53.460 different things. And they, of course, would argue that, A, that proves that difference is possible,

00:32:00.700 and B, what they would then do is point to cases where there have been problems that have arisen

00:32:06.800 in the Western context as a result of the imperfection of the application of something

00:32:12.120 like age of consent. Oh, well, she's a very mature 17 or whatever, you know, and she was just dating a

00:32:18.180 21-year-old. And so now this person's in jail for statutory rape over this kind of very, you know,

00:32:24.340 you have somebody who's two days from their 18th birthday dating a 21-year-old. They say,

00:32:27.760 this is an obvious, you know, abuse or whatever. This is an obvious, an obvious mistake. And that harm

00:32:34.120 doesn't arise in a context that isn't so rigid about this. And this is the game that they play.

00:32:41.040 And you could stop and say, well, they have a point. And that's the point is to get you to say,

00:32:44.740 well, they have a point. Right. As if there were no other solution to that than to completely

00:32:49.560 obliterate the concept entirely and to do away with. That's, I'm sorry to interrupt. And I know you

00:32:56.480 don't necessarily, we don't have the same views on abortion. This is not an abortion conversation,

00:33:00.960 but it does remind me of what they do in the abortion conversation. It's the same.

00:33:04.860 Yes. They hold up the tiny, tiny radical exception. And the only reason they're doing

00:33:10.480 that is not to say, OK, abortion should be reserved for that radical exception, the 10-year-old who

00:33:14.980 is raped by her uncle. The only reason they hold that up is so you can say, OK, well, maybe you have

00:33:21.260 a point. But really what they're arguing for is abortion subsidized throughout nine months. So

00:33:25.100 similar. Yeah. So, I mean, we'll just make the point in both cases then that it's like they

00:33:29.840 pretend we don't have these people called, what are they called? Judges who are able to judge

00:33:36.100 peculiar cases that come up in certain circumstances that are not the norm caught by the law. It's like

00:33:43.920 they think that this isn't possible. Nobody's quality. This is actually kind of a postmodern

00:33:47.620 view, by the way. Or I don't even see postmodernism as distinct from Marxism any longer. So it's in a

00:33:53.420 sense a deeper Marxist view because it comes out of that market Marxist architecture or operating

00:33:57.740 system that runs beneath it. But because the privileged get to assign themselves the status

00:34:03.960 of being reasonable or capable of adjudicating or whatever it happens to be, there's nobody that

00:34:09.920 really is reasonable. There is no reasonable person that could actually make a decision.

00:34:14.000 Everybody's just contoured by the social construction. It's a social milieu that they're in.

00:34:18.080 For Marx, it was material determinism. It was that the material conditions determine their

00:34:21.920 character, their understanding of the world. Now it's this weird structural determinism that they

00:34:26.000 talk about that has some material elements, but mostly not. And what they think is that there's

00:34:31.540 no way that you could possibly set up, say, a law like an age of consent law or with the abortion

00:34:37.600 situation that we were just talking about, these fringe cases that are not zero. There's no way that

00:34:44.480 you could set up a law and then have a judge who the archetype of a judge is a very wise person who

00:34:52.080 would then be able to sit back and adjudicate and say, wait, this is a special case and this is why

00:34:56.420 it's a special case when those things arise in a court that was literally built for the purpose of

00:35:01.960 dealing with those situations when they arise. So it's like, it's really a frustrating thing or with

00:35:08.120 the age of consent, it's as if we couldn't write legislation that says, you know what, if you're within

00:35:14.660 four years of one another's age, you know, forget about it. That education, that legislation could be

00:35:20.620 written. I don't know that it's a good idea and I'm not saying that it is, but it can, it conceivably

00:35:25.680 could be written. There are other workarounds than obliterate everything and let us have anything

00:35:30.820 goes. Right. And they're not really concerned about those exceptions. As you were saying earlier,

00:35:35.660 it's not like they're actually concerned with those anecdotes that they are giving. They are

00:35:41.100 concerned that the categories exist in general. Like I even there's, I mean, this is real. There is a

00:35:46.700 real, um, there's a real law in California, thanks to a state Senator named, um, named Scott. Is it

00:35:53.940 Scott? His last name is Wiener. And obviously that is memorable for a number of reasons, but

00:35:58.420 he has put forward many pieces of troubling legislation, but one of them is trying to, uh,

00:36:06.520 take, uh, sex offenders off the sex offender list. If their victim was within 10 years and 10 years

00:36:16.320 of their age. And so you're talking about if a 22 year old assaulted a 12 year old, then he would

00:36:24.320 not be on the sex offender list in California. And that is actually law in California now. So,

00:36:29.940 I mean, they're outright about this. This is a justification of pedophilia. He would say though,

00:36:34.940 that the sex offender list disproportionately discriminates against LGBTQ people. I'm not even

00:36:40.820 sure like what the rationalization is for that, but he claims that there was discrimination there

00:36:46.720 and that this kind of age of consent or age gap wiggle room that he has now given, or this new

00:36:53.780 standard that he has now applied is going to help gay people. And this is the same guy who, uh, made it,

00:37:01.200 who it went from a felony to a misdemeanor to knowingly have sex with someone while you're HIV positive,

00:37:08.440 but not tell them that you're HIV positive. That used to be a much harsher penalty in California.

00:37:14.520 Now the penalty is very low because of state Senator Wiener. So, I mean, this is, this is out,

00:37:20.940 like they are actually doing this now. They are trying to obliterate the categories now.

00:37:25.880 Right. And state Senator Wiener is the one that's put forth the bill in California currently

00:37:29.360 to make it a trans sanctuary state as they're trying to call it, where essentially the state will,

00:37:37.580 will, I, I don't know what all the details of this bill are, but it's a catastrophe. I just

00:37:42.280 glanced at it last night and I didn't read it and I should have unfortunately now, but it is the idea

00:37:48.280 that it's going to become a trans and LGBTQ by a plus BS, whatever it is, sanctuary state. And in that

00:37:56.160 sense, you know, whether they're paying for the transitions, whether they're, they're bringing

00:38:00.820 people to California to allow it, people should look at the bill. Uh, but this is another one of

00:38:07.020 his monstrosities. Um, and of course it's not a big surprise that if you go look up Senator Wiener,

00:38:14.240 you will also find that there are pictures of him dressing in kink in public in parades for the pride

00:38:20.600 parades and whatever else. And so you see the same kinds of themes. Like he thinks that there

00:38:26.940 should be no boundaries because he thinks that there shouldn't be these rules placed on him.

00:38:31.180 Uh, but there, there should be actually, you do have to have boundaries and rules to have a society

00:38:36.260 that functions. But if we want to get deep, the Marxists have understood whether the queer theorists

00:38:41.340 derive this intentionally or not, I don't know. And I don't think they did. I think they were much too

00:38:47.240 busy staring at their own navels and their own genitals to, to have thought this up. But for over a

00:38:53.600 hundred years, Marxists have known that if you sexualize children, it's much, much easier to

00:38:58.740 overthrow a society. Yes. And in fact, if you sexualize the society, the sexual liberation movement

00:39:04.900 was actually part of this. Right. So is that like, and I'm sure it's multifaceted, but the intention

00:39:12.600 of a lot of what we're seeing, which is introducing kids to drag and having kids dress up in drag and

00:39:17.900 people who don't follow the lips of TikTok, um, and who aren't on Twitter a lot, you like, you may not

00:39:23.080 have seen some of this footage and we're not exaggerating when we are talking about very

00:39:27.160 sexual footage of grown men dressed as women with fake boobs on sometimes naked, fake boobs,

00:39:33.320 like shimmying, twerking for money with children in attendance. They're knowingly doing this. And

00:39:40.500 when conservative, it's typically conservatives calling this out, Democrats, either they do the

00:39:45.560 whole, you know, song and dance, either this isn't happening or it's really good that it's happening

00:39:50.540 and you're evil if you say that it shouldn't be happening. I mean, people on the left are really

00:39:55.860 defending this stuff. And then you've also got video after video that Libs of TikTok posts of

00:40:01.440 these teachers who are coming out to their students or ensuring that they have, you know, the new

00:40:06.900 inclusive pride flag, or they're talking about transgender ideology, um, to their kids. Like,

00:40:13.760 is the motivation behind all of this, is it what they view as liberation? Is it the narcissism piece?

00:40:20.120 That you mentioned earlier. Is it because these people are actually predatory? Or I mean, do the

00:40:28.300 motives really vary behind all of this? Or does anyone feel like they have a virtuous motivation

00:40:34.220 behind introducing this stuff to kids? Well, I say, I would say that there's some of all of it,

00:40:40.760 to be honest with you. And some of the people who are introducing it, and by some, I mean, probably the

00:40:46.120 ones who are the most normal and thinking maybe it's just a good idea to, to, to mix in, or it's

00:40:51.340 innovative and, and whatever else, they're probably, uh, they probably have these virtuous, if you will,

00:40:59.760 kind of underlying motivations, but I'd say that they're likely to be in the minority.

00:41:04.060 The queer theorists themselves are heavily plagued by what I would describe flatly as pathologies,

00:41:10.320 whether that's narcissism, whether that's, uh, you know, the predatory aspect,

00:41:15.480 it's going to vary from individual to individual, but it's, whether sometimes it's, it's borderline

00:41:20.980 or antisocial personality, the abusive personality disorders. Um, there's a term that I can't use a

00:41:27.080 slang term for this because we'll be in big trouble if we use that term. Uh, there's a term that's

00:41:31.900 actually used for the phenomenon when certain men who are often abusive and abusive to women

00:41:37.760 start getting called out for it in progressive spaces that they suddenly identify as trans

00:41:42.540 because it makes them sort of invincible. And so that's, you know, that's not narcissistic

00:41:47.880 or, uh, pedophilic. That's borderline psychopathy is what that is. Right. Now, as far as the drag

00:41:55.680 queens go, uh, they know there's a paper, there's an academic paper that was written, uh, it was published

00:42:01.060 last year in 2021 at the beginning of the year written by a drag queen and a trans person. And in the

00:42:07.440 paper, which is about a drag pedagogy, that's the title of the paper. I just did a podcast on it.

00:42:12.040 I read through the entire paper for a new discourses podcast on my platform. Uh, they

00:42:17.260 actually explain that, you know, Oh, well we sell it. We know it's a strategic thing. We sell this

00:42:22.900 paper or with this program, drag queen story hour as though it's about raising empathy for LGBTQ

00:42:29.400 people, but that's not what it's really about. It's really about focusing on the drag queen and

00:42:33.760 teaching people to live queerly. We actually have other agendas. They actually say in the paper,

00:42:39.320 we sell the idea that it's about empathy, but it's not really about empathy. It's about other

00:42:46.340 things. So they know other in another place in the paper, they explain that they brand it as family

00:42:51.940 friendly so that it's acceptable, but they kind of with a wink acknowledge that what they mean by

00:42:56.860 family is the queer family. You leave your real family for when you come out on the street. And

00:43:02.900 that's, I mean, I wish I was making this up, but that's what they actually say. So there's an

00:43:07.560 element to where the people doing this know they're doing it. And they have even proudly written that

00:43:13.000 they know they're doing it. Uh, and that they're, that they're, you know, billing it as family friendly

00:43:18.760 and as a generative pedagogy and all of this nonsense specifically because it enables them to sell

00:43:26.380 it. But in the same paper, since we mentioned Foucault, you know, what they're saying is, let me just

00:43:31.660 read this little piece here. Cause I couldn't find the piece that I wanted to very quickly while

00:43:35.320 we're talking, but this part right here ties this really together. It's talking about classroom

00:43:39.560 management and this is classroom management. It's a framework relies on rules and procedures as a

00:43:43.800 sort of factory model for quality control. That's a weird way to think about managing a classroom,

00:43:48.580 but okay. And it says it stifles creativity and aims toward order, marching toward a mirage of

00:43:53.980 identical outcomes and efficient productivity. This reinforces what Michelle Foucault called the

00:43:59.100 carceral continuum, which disproportionately funnels minoritized students toward prisons and other forms

00:44:04.660 of confinement. So they're framing it out in terms of the idea that if we manage the classroom and we

00:44:09.960 don't, the next thing that they talk about is as an art form, drag is all about bending and breaking

00:44:14.880 the rules. And so the, the, what they're trying to get to is that if we don't teach children to break

00:44:19.580 the rules with adults that are in sexualized environments. And in fact, they say that to believe

00:44:23.440 that there are no rules to question every rule in a situation with adults dressed up as sexualized

00:44:29.380 women doing performances with children, I'll just put that point back on it. If we don't do that,

00:44:34.380 then we're actually engaging in what Foucault called the carceral continuum, which isn't just a school

00:44:39.540 to prison pipeline like they allege here. It's the belief that life itself, because of the social

00:44:44.200 constructions, imprisons everybody. Everybody is in a prison created, man is born free, but everywhere he

00:44:50.240 is in chains. It's warmed over Russo for the fifth time until the, you know, you've heated up the

00:44:55.740 spaghetti so much. It's just kind of a bowl of mush. Uh, yeah, but that, that, that you can, you can

00:45:02.100 see that they, they know what they're, there's, there's an element where they know what they're

00:45:06.000 doing. And they say in this paper that the point of it is to induce children to learn. And I quote,

00:45:12.120 they put it even in italics inside of their own paper to live queerly. Right. It's groomers.

00:45:20.780 There's not another word for that. Yeah. And it really doesn't matter whether or not someone who

00:45:26.440 is doing that thinks that they are, I would say, as you said, the majority of them aren't. Some of

00:45:31.180 them truly think that they are being inclusive, that they are creating some kind of liberating and

00:45:36.560 comfortable environment for people. And so we're not indicting the motives of every single person.

00:45:41.400 And we're just talking about where this comes from and what the effect actually is. One thing

00:45:45.540 that we know, um, from psychology and child psychology, especially the, uh, psychology of

00:45:51.880 victims and predators is that one tactic of sexual predators is to get a child comfortable with

00:45:59.300 conversations about sexuality and appropriate conversations about the body, showing children

00:46:04.900 pornography and trying to sexualize them at an early age. I don't even want to talk about

00:46:11.140 some of the research that's been done into this and some of the quotes that are being used by

00:46:16.860 pedophiles and how they prey upon kids and sexualize kids. So whether or not the intention

00:46:22.400 of these drag queen story hours or of every single drag queen in these drag queen story hours and child

00:46:28.640 drag shows is predation is pedophilia, whether or not the motivation of every teacher talking about

00:46:34.860 this stuff, um, to children is pedophilia. That is, I mean, predation is part of the effect of this.

00:46:41.620 If you were talking, especially without the consent and the presence of the parents here,

00:46:46.240 like if you were talking to a child about something that has to do with their genitalia,

00:46:51.700 whether or not you say that is sexual, that is sexual in nature. At the very least,

00:46:57.020 it is sexually confusing for a child, which ironically actually will lead them to the very

00:47:05.280 sort of psychological oppression and chaos that these queer theorists say that they are trying

00:47:12.020 to liberate society from. The sexualization of children, introducing children to these topics

00:47:18.620 actually leads to a lot of psychological distress and suicidal ideation and all of the things that they

00:47:24.360 say that the cis hetero system is placing on children. Yeah. It's funny what happens when

00:47:29.540 you invert reality. Um, yeah, it's a big shock. It's actually true. You know, you talk about the

00:47:35.240 psychology around victims and all of this and that that's all 100% accurate. And then there's another

00:47:41.280 side to this too, though, which is that this is where personality disorders are born. Children of

00:47:46.740 narcissistic parents usually grow up to have a suite of personality disorders because becoming

00:47:53.240 somebody's narcissistic supply and foil undermines your identity formation in yourself. Children

00:47:58.740 who have inappropriate romantic or emotional relationships with adults often grow up to be

00:48:05.940 schizoidal, which is another personality disorder. It's not the same as schizophrenia. Um, so personality

00:48:11.720 disorders are often induced in children by putting them in, uh, inappropriate circumstances that blur the

00:48:19.120 boundaries between adult and child or that, uh, perpetuate cycles of what we, we, we should really

00:48:25.780 just call cluster B personality disorder abuse and cluster Bs give birth to other cluster Bs. If you

00:48:32.660 have a cluster B around, these are going to be your kind of narcissistic borderline antisocial

00:48:37.560 personality disorders. You have those in adults around children, the children are going to develop

00:48:42.580 some or others of the same types, cluster B personality disorders themselves. And these people become

00:48:48.680 destabilized, unstable, very moldable to make into, uh, activist weapons. So that's part of the

00:48:57.140 Marxist scheme a century old. Um, but they also, when you tap into their sexuality, especially with

00:49:04.280 somebody, you know, these kind of groomer situations, um, they come home and they say,

00:49:09.560 they tell their parents what they are and then they, their parents say, no, what are you talking about?

00:49:13.100 And they lash out back against their parents. It's very easy to get a child to cut off from their

00:49:18.680 own family. If you do it through sexualization, it's easy to get them to cut off from their religion

00:49:23.520 to say that Christianity is old fashioned, that it's archaic, that it oppresses, that it hates

00:49:27.980 gays, that it hates women, blah, blah, blah. It's very easy to get them to say these things and throw

00:49:31.900 off these pillars of culture that keep them stable, family, religion, nation, culture, and so on.

00:49:37.840 And again, I'll just read another piece. The very last part, the very last two sentences,

00:49:42.200 as a matter of fact, of this drag queen paper, which is an education paper in an actual education

00:49:46.560 journal, curriculum inquiry is the name of the journal. This is what they see themselves as

00:49:51.000 doing. They say, we're dressing up, we're shaking our hips and we're finding our light,

00:49:54.480 even in the fluorescence. We're reading books while we read each other's looks and we're leaving

00:50:00.200 a trail of glitter that won't ever come out of the carpet. I, what do you do with that?

00:50:08.080 They know what they're doing. And at that point, you know, for me, you know, I can get into that.

00:50:14.920 I can theorize, I can apologize. I can even say, you know, I know a whole bunch of,

00:50:18.960 they're not, they don't talk to me much anymore, but a bunch of progressive people

00:50:21.440 who we talked about the trans, you know, the explosion of trans a year or two ago.

00:50:27.260 And they were like, wow, it's just amazing. It's the most naive thing I've ever heard in my life.

00:50:31.360 I frankly will just rat them out on that one. They're like, it's amazing how many people were

00:50:36.280 trans and we never knew until it became acceptable. And now that's what they think is,

00:50:40.720 they don't think that people are being groomed into confusion. They think, oh, wow, they're just

00:50:44.560 able to finally express who they really were. And they never were able to before.

00:50:47.980 And that's kind of like the la la land that, that, that's supporting this.

00:50:51.820 But you, you think that, and then you read, we're leaving a trail of glitter that won't ever

00:50:55.880 come out of the carpet. And you realize the carpet is your children's psychology,

00:50:59.720 your children's psyche. And you're like, these people need to go to jail. Like there's no,

00:51:05.400 they know what they're doing. It's not acceptable in any regard. And it doesn't matter how many

00:51:10.160 theoretical justifications they give for it. It doesn't matter what, you know, kind of la la

00:51:15.320 land naive, you know, oh, well we have to be inclusive and help these poor kids who otherwise

00:51:21.040 would have had a hard time. It doesn't matter any of that. At this point you can do nothing but say

00:51:26.720 these people know what they're doing and it's, it's child abuse.

00:51:40.740 You mentioned this kind of naive idea that, wow, society has made this more acceptable. And that's

00:51:46.080 why we have so many more people now who are realizing that they've always been the opposite

00:51:50.160 gender. And there is a study that I'm sure that you've seen as well that shows, uh,

00:51:56.600 the percentage of each generation that identifies as LGBT. And, um, of course, if you look at each

00:52:04.600 generation, if you look at 2017, so 10.5% of generation Z, which is born between like, I don't

00:52:13.400 know, 1997 and 2012 or something like that generation after millennials, 10.5% said they identify as

00:52:20.140 LGBTQ. Now in 2021, 20% of all generations E say that they identify as LGBTQ among millennials that

00:52:30.620 went from 7.8 to 10.5. And then among baby boomers, 4.1 to 4.2. And then the, I guess the silent

00:52:40.000 generation only 0.8%. It didn't change at all. 0.8% from 2012, 2017 to 2021 identify as LGBTQ. And people

00:52:49.240 say, Oh, well, this is just because society has become more liberated and more accepting. And they

00:52:54.860 believe that there, I guess, has been no brainwashing, no indoctrination by the media, by our

00:53:02.240 political leaders, by teachers. I mean, the power of suggestion in kids is so strong. Of course,

00:53:08.680 a child in his most formative years, if they hear, Hey, if you want to be special, you can identify as

00:53:13.560 something else. They're going to internalize that and perhaps manifest that. But I don't,

00:53:18.720 it's really actually confusing for me because progressives tend to believe in like the nature

00:53:24.600 versus nurture debate that everything is nurtured. That's where they get this idea that everything

00:53:28.500 is a social construct. And so human beings can be changed by like society's different standards.

00:53:35.100 And we know conservatives realize that there is like an actual fixed nature of people. And yet,

00:53:40.760 when it comes to this, they believe that there is such a fixed nature of so-called queerness that

00:53:45.380 it couldn't possibly, like queerness can't be a social construct, but being straight is. Being

00:53:50.000 transgender can't be a social construct, but being male and female is. It's just very strange and

00:53:55.820 contradictory to me. Yeah. It's self-serving, I think is the term for it.

00:54:01.460 So what do you think about this growth, this trajectory of Generation Z and why there's just

00:54:07.080 been this explosion of so-called queer identification among this generation?

00:54:11.400 I think there's a lot, there's several reasons. One of the reasons is exactly what you said. You

00:54:18.120 know, this environment, first, let's take it off the table before we do that. There is probably a

00:54:24.060 very small percentage of people who would not have otherwise felt comfortable identifying as they

00:54:30.080 actually are, especially with gay and lesbian, who now feel more like the environment is accepting of

00:54:35.540 that. And then, so there's probably some very small percentage, by far the larger percentages

00:54:39.680 of these people though. And we see it not just with the, you know, this generational difference,

00:54:44.740 but there are these weird differences that appear geographically as well. Uh, from, I don't have

00:54:49.900 that study in front of me, but I just saw this a couple of weeks ago that, that, that, that it's

00:54:53.700 regional, which you would not expect if it was, um, socially constructed phenomenon given the kind of

00:55:00.380 national milieu that we're in. And so what you're actually seeing is that people are being induced

00:55:05.440 at a young age into the idea of questioning it. And when they're questioning it and they're being

00:55:10.960 told things in schools, for example, or through the media that, Hey, you know, if you ever feel

00:55:16.460 awkward about how you are, then maybe you're something else. Or, you know, if you're a girl who

00:55:21.780 likes to play sports and thinks that the color blue is great, maybe you're actually a boy.

00:55:25.520 Have you ever considered that that's possible that what you're going to have is within children,

00:55:30.080 you're going to have people who start to explore with that. When you add in the fact that if you

00:55:33.920 call it, Oh, well, did you know that there's this identity you can identify as this, that they're

00:55:38.320 going to have some people who identify as it. And as anybody knows, who's ever taken up a religion

00:55:41.980 or a political position or anything that once you identify as something, you get interested in it

00:55:46.680 and you start looking into it and you're like, well, what am I supposed to be to be a good LGBTQ

00:55:50.600 or a good whatever. And you start, you can actually start digging into it. And these,

00:55:56.180 this stuff's all over the internet. So any kid who's connected to the internet is going to be

00:56:00.000 able to go look at, look this up and find, you know, Oh, well there's this whole constellation

00:56:03.840 of genders that I could explore. Which way do I really feel the most? And they kind of can get

00:56:08.580 pulled into this. Actually the entire system between the grooming and the media, and then the school

00:56:14.320 being set up to be affirmative in whatever the children bring is set up to kind of pull

00:56:20.400 kids into this. Meanwhile, you have, you're beating the kids over the head and we can't

00:56:23.840 lose sight of critical race theory still existing. You're beating the kids over their head with

00:56:27.940 regard to their race. So what you're going to see is, well, you're a terrible person. You're a basic

00:56:33.220 boring white girl, but did you know that if you're bisexual, you're really interesting? And I'm always

00:56:38.500 kind of reminded of this conversation I had with a friend of my daughter's, you know, 10 years ago or

00:56:44.580 whatever. And you know, they, they were all proud something about being pansexual or something. And we were

00:56:49.440 like, what in the world is this? And it was like, well, have you ever kissed a girl? And they're

00:56:52.820 like, ew, why would I do that? Ew, why would I do that? Okay. Right. So you've adopted a label that

00:56:59.060 makes you cool. There's this huge pressure. You get made cool. You're uncool for being who you just

00:57:03.860 happen to be. And you're cool. If you adopt one of these cool, radical identities, there's a huge

00:57:09.360 pressure. That's what I think is causing the vast majority of this. It's not even social contagion.

00:57:13.960 Like, Oh, well, I want to be cool like Becky. So I'm going to become bisexual this week too.

00:57:17.820 There's that. But then there's this pressure that it's like, you're not cool as you are because

00:57:22.520 you're in the oppressor class. If you're a basic straight white girl. So let's be, you know,

00:57:28.320 radically queer because being a racial ally, they've already learned is impossible. No matter what they

00:57:33.420 do, they did it wrong. It's just a bullying circuit. So, well, you can't touch me now. I have some

00:57:40.440 really weird demisexual, whatever. They're being told in their schools. They are being told

00:57:46.340 if you are uncomfortable with what's happening to your body during puberty, that might be a sign

00:57:52.360 that you are in the wrong body, that you're the other gender.

00:57:58.140 Like, I don't, you're not supposed to say, we're supposed to say kids are smart and all this stuff.

00:58:03.120 No, kids are, we'll say impressionable. Cause I was going to call them dumb.

00:58:06.100 Um, they're very impressionable. They're also tend to be very open-minded to kind of explore the,

00:58:13.300 once they get out of like three-year-old concrete thing where, you know, they're like, I'm a boy,

00:58:17.420 you know, once they get past that, that phase where they freak out about it, they're very

00:58:21.920 impressionable. They're very curious. They're very open to explore these ideas. And so like I've told

00:58:26.460 people a lot of times I got published in the Washington post saying this, that when I was five,

00:58:30.440 I wanted to be a fire truck. Like the idea of the possibilities of being,

00:58:34.260 or the potentialities of being were pretty wide open to me when I was, when I was five.

00:58:38.540 Um, the idea that, you know, there are certain limitations on what I can actually grow up to be,

00:58:43.300 as in I cannot become a truck, uh, didn't occur to me. My best friend at the time wanted to be an

00:58:48.540 eagle when he grew up. Um, it turns out that people can't grow up to be eagles and it turns out that

00:58:54.520 boys cannot grow up to be women. It just is how it is. You can't do it, but children can believe

00:59:00.560 these things and they can be kind of sucked into a path to try to affirm that this is how we do

00:59:05.200 that. Did you know that gender is really complicated? Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. And so

00:59:08.840 I think that, I think that, I mean, I'm, I started calling them groomers last year for a reason.

00:59:15.180 I don't think it's all sexual grooming. I think there's a lot of identity grooming or if we need a

00:59:20.200 word for it or cult grooming into this. And I will say this religion of gender and sexual identity

00:59:26.700 that they've constructed where normalcy is kind of the fall of man and that you have to overcome that

00:59:32.840 and get back into the idyllic garden where there was no differentiation of sex, gender and sexuality

00:59:38.100 and everybody could just do what they wanted and everything was great. Uh, before, you know, we ate

00:59:43.300 from the fruit of tree of knowledge and saw that we were naked and were embarrassed, which is,

00:59:48.860 but if you see this from the perspective, nobody understands this. Maybe you'll understand this.

00:59:53.040 They're Gnostics. If you read their other papers, I didn't talk about Eve Sedgwick,

00:59:58.020 another key queer theorist. She has this paper she wrote in 1988 called The Epistemology of the Closet.

01:00:03.620 It's confusing because she turned it into a book by the same title in 1990. And the, the, the,

01:00:09.360 in the, that paper is the first chapter, um, of the book, but that paper is literally the single

01:00:14.960 most Gnostic document I've ever read outside of just straight Gnostic, Gnostic, mystical religion stuff.

01:00:21.240 They believe that we are in a prison, but the depression gives you access, a glimpse of absolute

01:00:28.860 knowledge of what it's like back in the garden. Gnosticism is special knowledge, just so people,

01:00:34.600 that's right. People know, and it's, four of it has always been around. I mean, if you read the book

01:00:39.560 of Colossians, that's what Paul is dealing with. He's like all of these Gnostics that say that you

01:00:44.280 have access to special knowledge through X, Y, Z. So humans have always kind of been fascinated

01:00:48.500 by that. And yes, we've talked about that before with standpoint epistemology and all of that as

01:00:53.420 well. I thought you were actually going to bring up the book of Genesis in the chapter three.

01:00:57.280 Well, that's true. This is the, the perennial, literally the perennial fight with humanity

01:01:02.460 is that there are people who think that they have access to gain special knowledge and it's going to

01:01:07.220 give them special abilities and special access. And it's actually a catastrophe. Yes. Did God really

01:01:13.060 say, that's what Satan first said to Eve? Did God really say that if you eat of this fruit,

01:01:19.320 you will surely die. And basically how Satan tempts Eve is no, no, no, no. He's basically,

01:01:24.460 God is just jealous. He's just scared that you're going to become like him, that you're going to

01:01:28.840 become so powerful. And I do think that that is what people are still believing that lie,

01:01:33.220 that temptation today. You can be like God with access to special knowledge.

01:01:37.460 We can remake our bodies however we want. But what we have here then is the normal or the bourgeois,

01:01:42.260 or the whites basically telling people, no, no, no, no, no. We can't de-stigmatize. We'll stay

01:01:50.160 with, with the, with the normal, the queer thing for the sake of the discussion. But the normal people

01:01:55.480 are telling the freaks, the perverts, as Gail Rubin calls them. No, no, we can't de-stigmatize

01:02:00.920 because then you'll be like us. And so we have to oppress you. We have to keep you in ignorance. We

01:02:07.260 have to keep you excluded. We have to keep you what Paulo Freire calls a culture of silence,

01:02:11.780 where you don't even have a voice to speak up and you're fully oppressed. We have to,

01:02:16.200 otherwise you'll become like us. And you can see, it's literally the same story. This is why I

01:02:20.800 recently made a meme. I took the, one of the, you know, famous classical art of the, of the,

01:02:26.180 the fall of man, one of the paintings that some, you know, Renaissance artists did. And I took it and

01:02:32.420 I put on there kind of like a headline that you would see in the news today. You know, serpent tells

01:02:36.860 Eve, if you eat of the fruit of tree of knowledge, you will not surely die. But if you do, it's a

01:02:40.780 good thing. And here's why. Which is the lie that they always tell. But this is the same thing. It's

01:02:47.980 literally the same thing. And queer theories, I think I can't read it and not see Gnosticism.

01:02:53.240 You're trapped in a body, you're imprisoned in a body, but there's a special knowledge that

01:02:56.460 everything's socially constructed. And if you understand that special knowledge, the social

01:03:00.380 construction of reality, then you can escape the prison and you can escape the prison with everybody

01:03:05.140 else. And that's all it really boils down to. Yeah. And wow, there are so many different

01:03:10.440 connections to kind of just the very, what seems like a very superficial message that primarily women

01:03:15.980 hear, which is this idea that your path to self-discovery and self-fulfillment will also give

01:03:23.280 you a kind of special knowledge that will make your relationships come together, will make you more

01:03:26.980 successful, will make you able to make more money and be more satisfied. And it's connected in this

01:03:32.640 idea that you really are your own God. You are self-discovering, you are self-creating, you are

01:03:36.940 self-declaring, self-identifying, self-satisfying. And who you really are is buried underneath all

01:03:43.620 of these societal expectations and capitalism and the patriarchy. And once you throw all of those

01:03:49.600 things off, you find this inner goddess and you let her out that may or may not match your body,

01:03:55.840 may or may not match your physical reality. But what's important is that you find her,

01:03:59.380 that you manifest her, and then you truly will be successful. It is a form of Gnosticism

01:04:04.020 and it's very superstitious. And there's also a reason why it is so hostile to Christianity,

01:04:09.200 because Christianity says the opposite. Christianity says you are not self-defining or

01:04:14.180 self-creating. There is a God who created you and he has put you in this so-called prison of your body

01:04:20.000 of gender. And the first chapter of Genesis, we see, okay, first of all, God made the heavens and

01:04:24.900 the earth. He's the authority. He says what is and what is it, what's right and what's wrong.

01:04:27.760 He also makes you male and female. So there we get gender. There we get the Christian definition

01:04:33.840 of marriage. But also I'm just realizing is that he makes man and woman. That is the definition of

01:04:40.140 marriage, not man and girl. That would be a different Hebrew word, not girl and boy, but man and woman.

01:04:47.540 He tells them to be fruitful and multiply, which also tells us that there is a physical maturation in

01:04:52.520 the woman that, you know, makes her a woman to be able to have children. So we see like the

01:04:57.260 contradiction of all of this queer theory actually in the first chapter of the Bible.

01:05:01.840 Yeah, it's really all there. When you understand it as a Gnostic thing, it just gets really apparent.

01:05:06.900 And what you just described, by the way, you described it in the feminist terms,

01:05:11.140 in this mystical feminist term. If you read the economic and philosophic manuscript from 1844,

01:05:16.720 written by Karl Marx, that's what he describes Marxism as he's the whole thing is a religion.

01:05:21.840 He's saying, in fact, that the point of what he's laying out is for man to discover his true nature,

01:05:27.300 which has been covered up by the the division of labor coming in and creating social and material

01:05:34.020 conditions and labor relations. And that's kind of what he focuses all of his time and effort on.

01:05:41.780 But what those do is that they they limit your ability to understand your true self and your true

01:05:46.320 self is actually as a creator. You are a creative subject. What he says defines man as apart from

01:05:52.620 animals. Remember, he's thrown down God, so he doesn't believe there's God. What defines man is

01:05:57.460 different from animal is the fact that every time a man does something, he makes something in the world,

01:06:03.080 everything a human does, he envisions it in his mind before he creates it. So he says that it all

01:06:07.580 starts with a subjective impression. And then you unify the subjective and the objective by the by

01:06:12.320 the labor that you do. That's why the hammer and sickle are a religious symbol for him. Labor brings

01:06:16.920 your subjective vision into reality. And so what he says is that when you divide labor, when you have

01:06:22.540 the boss and the in the worker, what the boss is able to do is he holds the vision in his head and

01:06:28.240 make somebody else do the work to produce it. So the person that's doing the work, maybe they get

01:06:33.040 money, which is this abstract thing. And he has lots of stuff he says about money and how much he

01:06:37.280 doesn't like money. But the thing is, is that he's not bringing his own vision into the world. So he

01:06:41.660 doesn't see himself through the dialectic of subject and object. He doesn't see himself as a creative

01:06:46.580 subject, as a creator of the world that he wants to inhabit. And so he has what's truly human to him

01:06:54.480 stolen from him by the fact that he has a boss who's paying him to do work to bring his own vision

01:07:00.300 into the world. That's the estrangement from labor, estrangement from one another, alienation,

01:07:05.120 et cetera, that Marx is talking about incessantly in his work. And the idea is that there's some

01:07:11.660 division in society, upper class and lower class that causes a mechanism of exploitation. And that

01:07:16.940 exploitation steals from you what makes you essentially human. And what makes you essentially

01:07:20.820 human is that you are a creator. You are as God. And in the end, we finally realize that by coming

01:07:29.280 all together in a perfect social union with a perfect social mentality, which is our actual underlying

01:07:34.500 true nature, stripped of the fall, stripped of the sin of capital and labor, then we actually are as

01:07:42.980 gods and we will remake the world. We'll remake society. We'll remake man so that it is what it

01:07:47.860 was always intended to be. Herbert Marcuse in the 50s in his book Eros and Civilization writes that

01:07:54.140 the way that we get back into the garden is by taking a second bite of the fruit of the tree of

01:07:57.760 knowledge. That's actually he says that that's Gnosticism. Wow.

01:08:01.760 It's just what this is. This is a huge Gnostic religion. Everything you just said that came

01:08:06.420 out of feminism that people would have read, you know, and women will have heard a lot in

01:08:10.660 the past 30 years. It's just a again, it's just like, let's take what Marx wrote in 1844,

01:08:16.580 cram it into a new box, put a pretty pink bow on it and sell it to girls so that they can ruin

01:08:21.820 their lives in the same way that Marx ruined, you know, Russia and China and everywhere else in the

01:08:26.040 world. Yeah. Does this go back to like Descartes? I think therefore I am that kind of idea. Is that

01:08:33.160 like a self-creating, self-declaring idea? I mean, do its roots go back that far?

01:08:37.680 I mean, I hear people say that. I very rarely blame Descartes for this one. Maybe I, if you had

01:08:44.660 to say, all right, all right, James, this is an old construction, by the way, of R.C. Sproul that

01:08:50.040 I'm borrowing from. You have a gun and you have two bullets and you can go back in history and

01:08:55.520 take care of whatever you have to take care of. What are you going to do? And R.C. used to say

01:09:00.760 that you go back and you put both bullets in Rousseau's head. So I really blame Rousseau here

01:09:05.520 primarily. I did not know that R.C. Sproul said that. We're big fans of R.C. Sproul on this show.

01:09:11.840 I did not know that he said that. Yeah, I have R.C. Sproul privilege. So as it turns out that

01:09:19.420 Rousseau actually laid down a lot of this architecture, Rousseau obviously had that

01:09:23.180 Gnostic impulse, you know, man is born free, but everywhere he's in chains. He believed that

01:09:27.740 the social structure around him caused the chains. He looked at the savages and the areas

01:09:33.980 that were being colonized by Europe at the time and said, look how free they are back to nature.

01:09:38.140 That whole noble savage kind of mentality, which was a fiction he was writing on top of what

01:09:42.960 he was reading. But he saw that and he said, well, here we are constrained. We have to dress

01:09:48.280 a certain way. We have to talk a certain way. We have laws. We have to be reasonable. We have to

01:09:51.780 he really didn't like having to be reasonable all the time. He complained a lot about it. But on the

01:09:56.020 other hand, we have cities. We have all this kind of good stuff. And so he came up with this idea that

01:09:59.900 you have to put them in a relationship with one another to kind of average them out. He called it

01:10:04.840 savages made to live in cities. We're going to release our true instinctual, emotive, imaginative

01:10:10.120 nature, but unleash it in a way that it harnesses through reason to create, you know, cities and

01:10:15.560 developed society and so on. And then we're going to be able to live in our true nature.

01:10:19.560 And this is ultimately the birth of leftism. It's the birth of being able to transform reality

01:10:23.940 through the social constructs so that we can come up with the ideal circumstance that frees all a

01:10:29.400 man and causes a French Revolution and everybody's heads to come off and then all their heads to come

01:10:33.900 off later, too, because it's really a catastrophic idea.

01:10:38.380 Is this where kind of the romantic idea comes from that seems to be on the left that I haven't heard

01:10:44.540 them articulate explicitly, but it does seem like they romanticize and glorify like pre-civilizational

01:10:51.280 world like the Aztecs, like the Western white man just came along, civilized everyone. And that is

01:10:56.720 when oppression started. And it kind of seems like they think the Native Americans, you know, before

01:11:02.480 America was discovered, were just these like peace loving, gender fluid communists who never warred with

01:11:10.360 one another, never stole each other's land. Is that kind of where that idea comes from?

01:11:15.100 Yes. So is it? Yes. Just unambiguous. Yes. And so, you know, Rousseau is the father of romanticism. So all

01:11:22.880 these kind of romantic notions, but especially the the back to nature, noble savage kind of thing is all Rousseau.

01:11:29.840 But then that thing that I just said about the savages made to live in cities came by way of a German philosopher

01:11:35.380 named Schiller to another German philosopher named Hegel with the term Alfhaben, which means to

01:11:41.340 abolish, but also to keep and thus to lift up onto a higher level of understanding. And that was the

01:11:46.760 basis for Hegel taking Kant's dialectic, which is a philosophical tool for Kant and turning it into a

01:11:53.220 sociopolitical tool in order to try to do what? To awaken the absolute idea or to get the absolute idea

01:11:59.500 to realize itself, which is literally a mystery religion about how you get God to realize that he's God.

01:12:05.160 So God stops being a being that is and becomes a being that becomes through this process for Hegel.

01:12:10.260 And that's the religion, literally the theology that Marx turned upside down by actually incorporating

01:12:15.420 even more of Rousseau's Gnosticism, whereas Hegel was very interested in this kind of

01:12:22.160 alchemy process that he saw in the dialectic. Marx brought a lot more Rousseau back into it with the

01:12:28.680 centrality of the imagination, the emphasis on social construction and the social limitation of man

01:12:33.960 and the whole kind of Gnostic element of that. And so this is what we're talking about. So I don't

01:12:42.780 know if we want to blame Descartes. I would blame Rousseau overwhelmingly. And everywhere you've seen

01:12:47.860 Rousseau's ideas get taken up in one derived form or another, you've seen calamity, French Revolution,

01:12:53.680 Russian Revolution, Chinese Revolution, the collapses of communism everywhere. This is all warmed over

01:13:00.220 Rousseau with Rousseau as the father of leftism and actually the progenitor of the dialectical method

01:13:07.180 that the left uses that Hegel refined and Marx made actionable.

01:13:12.920 And one commonality that we see in these, the different forms of these ideologies or the

01:13:29.740 different manifestations of them throughout history in different countries is the breakdown

01:13:34.980 of the family in order to recruit, you know, child soldiers. And of course, we see that in 1984,

01:13:41.460 the separation of the family, the turning of kids against their parents. And there is a book that

01:13:49.080 was recently published by a feminist. I think she's a self-proclaimed communist. Her name is Sophie

01:13:54.160 Lewis. And she wrote, I don't know if you're familiar, she wrote a few years ago, full surrogacy

01:13:59.300 now. She basically believes that all women should be paid for their labor and that we should not be

01:14:05.060 gestating our biological children, but that everyone should be donating their sperm and their egg. And

01:14:09.920 that that would lead to kind of the breakdown of the family, which she sees as oppressive. And then

01:14:14.480 she recently published a book that is, that calls for the abolition of the family. She thinks that

01:14:20.320 motherhood is toxic, that it's an oppressive force. Same thing with fatherhood. And that, I mean,

01:14:26.760 that is a form of Marxism. And it also just has the effect of making children vulnerable. If they don't

01:14:33.500 have caretakers, if they don't have people that have an investment in their safety and protection,

01:14:38.000 of course, that makes them more vulnerable to not just sexual predation, but ideological

01:14:42.780 predation as well. But even if you don't fully legally abolish the family, which just to be

01:14:48.600 honest, I don't really see that actually happening soon, at least, you do see the kind of wedge that

01:14:55.480 is being driven between children and their parents through this ideology being taught at school.

01:15:00.500 School saying, you don't have to tell your parents, we've got a transition closet.

01:15:04.000 And you will, you know, call you by your new pronouns and your new name. And we're not going

01:15:09.440 to tell your parents. So the abolition of the family is a key part of queer theory, correct?

01:15:14.620 And we're already seeing it. Yeah, yeah. I mean, it was for Marx as well. But we don't have to talk

01:15:18.920 about Marx. It is it is actually a key element. That's what what if I if you were to say, you know,

01:15:25.780 cut the crap, James, what is queer theory for, I would tell you that it is it is literally designed to

01:15:31.880 a destabilize children. That's number one, most important and most valuable. Number two, it's to

01:15:38.260 sever the link to their family. Number three, it's a separate link to their religion. That's what I

01:15:42.760 would tell you that the strategic purposes one, two and three in that order of queer theory is to

01:15:48.360 destabilize children so that they are not going to grow up mentally and emotionally healthy.

01:15:53.320 Since secondly, it is going to sever the link to their family, which is going to be like that.

01:15:58.940 It's in a sense, the first and last anchor that a child has to to to kind of their roots. And then

01:16:06.960 thirdly, is to separate them from their religion. Queer theory throws all of that into extraordinary

01:16:13.060 turmoil. And I would say that that is actually the goal. Again, the Marxists have realized at least

01:16:18.220 for 100 years that one of the things that Western civilization does very effectively, whether we're

01:16:23.300 talking about Antonio Gramsci or George Lukács, who are contemporaries writing in the 1920s about this issue,

01:16:28.320 both extremely influential communists, that what they understood was that what Western societies do

01:16:36.040 very, very successfully following World War One and trying to figure out what happened there.

01:16:40.520 Why didn't the workers come together as workers and form kind of their own thing and overthrow the

01:16:45.740 capitalist system during the war while they had the chance because they all cleaved to their national

01:16:50.420 identities and their family identities, their clan identity. So they said that West, the West

01:16:54.340 transmits culture and values of culture very, very effectively and efficiently.

01:16:58.560 So what's necessary is actually to get into those and to sever them. You have to sever them if you

01:17:03.900 want to have a communist, a new culture, be able to take a root. And so that is, you know,

01:17:10.860 queer theory is this kind of very made stupid and self-indulgent derivation of that. But in some ways,

01:17:18.320 it's also very sophisticated that tries to complicate everything instead of just trying

01:17:23.240 to break it down. For example, they don't sever the link to family. They complicate the link to

01:17:27.400 family. Now, what does a family mean? What does it mean to be gay or straight? There's this whole

01:17:32.680 thing, by the way, a lot of people don't know within queer theory, what does it mean? What am I

01:17:36.020 about complicating things? Well, they're complicating the definition of man and woman, for example,

01:17:39.820 by adding in trans man and trans woman under the umbrella. But they're also complicating,

01:17:44.380 say, heterosexuality by saying that there are all these people. Well, they identify as heterosexual,

01:17:49.140 but sometimes they have homosexual sex, but most of the time, and they have attraction,

01:17:53.960 but they still don't identify as bisexual. They actually identify as straight. And because they

01:17:58.400 identify as straight, what they actually are is that they're still heterosexual, but they're

01:18:04.240 hetero complicated. And the goal is to make it so that just like Kentonji Brown Jackson on the stand

01:18:11.260 in front of the Senate, she couldn't answer what is a woman. The goal is that they don't

01:18:15.340 want people to be able to answer what is straight, what is gay. And when you introduce this into a

01:18:20.900 child, you now have a confused child who can't categorize the world in a structured way.

01:18:25.640 They can't navigate the world. So in all cases, why is it that Kentonji Brown Jackson can't answer

01:18:31.080 what a woman is? The answer isn't just to make it complicated. It's because there are the enlightened

01:18:35.700 Gnostics who get to tell you what a woman is. They get to tell you whether you, Ali, qualify as a

01:18:41.820 woman. Or if I said, well, I'm a woman now, they get to say, no, James, you're faking it because

01:18:47.020 they're the ones who know what really makes a woman and no one else does. They're giving themselves

01:18:51.400 the power to dictate that. Same with straight and gay, et cetera. Now, it's one thing when you try to

01:18:56.220 assert that power on an adult, but you can see it's a completely different game when you're asserting

01:18:59.660 that power over a child who hasn't formed a fully functioning and stable understanding of the

01:19:05.600 world. And so I would say that the goal is to disrupt the family and to disrupt the child's

01:19:11.060 understanding of the world. So that's goals number two and one in reverse order right there. And then

01:19:16.460 of course, when they are presented with, you know, this isn't the Christian way because it's something

01:19:21.500 so intrinsic, their identity, their like little budding feelings of sex and sexuality, they're going

01:19:27.680 to say, you don't know who I am. Christianity doesn't understand. That's 5,000 years old or 2,000 years

01:19:33.900 old, depending on which book of the Bible we're talking about. That's out of date. That's old,

01:19:38.080 oppressive, patriarchal nonsense. That's homophobic, yada, yada. And then the Bible's in the trash

01:19:42.760 in the next step. So you're severing their link to themselves, literally. If we go back to Marx,

01:19:48.380 you're estranging them from themselves. They're estranging them from their family and you're

01:19:52.120 estranging them from their religion is the objective of queer theory.

01:19:55.480 Yeah. And it really is cruel. You talked about like how kids are at a young age,

01:20:00.540 they're figuring out categories, not just male and female, although I have two little

01:20:04.860 ones. And so I'm seeing that they're eager to distinguish between male and female because

01:20:09.520 they're trying to make sense of the world. Mom and dad, papa and Grammy, they're trying to make

01:20:14.460 sense of, okay, what does this mean? Why do these people appear different to me? What does it mean

01:20:18.960 to be different? And not just male and female, but they're also, okay, couch versus floor. It's okay

01:20:23.880 for me to stand on the floor. It's not okay for me to stand on the top of the couch. All of these

01:20:27.900 categories and contexts are really important for their sense of safety, as well as for their sense

01:20:33.320 of self. And when you think about the nitty gritty of not being able to even have the language of male

01:20:38.280 and female, when you think about true child predation and child exploitation and sexual assault,

01:20:44.600 if a child is unable to tell you, well, this was a man, they're confused because this man happens to be

01:20:51.940 wearing a skirt and they've been told that it's wrong to assume someone's gender, that it's been,

01:20:55.980 it's wrong to assume someone's pronouns. They might not even have the ability to tell you

01:21:01.680 that they've been abused. They might not even have the ability to articulate that this was wrong

01:21:07.600 because you have so limited their understanding of reality by limiting their language and confusing

01:21:12.780 them. And as we said before, I think that is part of the intention of the confusion and the chaos,

01:21:17.620 but parents who play along with it in the name of empathy and inclusion, you are actually placing

01:21:23.120 your children on the altar of this ideology, whether it's through being unable to report

01:21:27.900 sexual assault, like I said, or leading themselves down this path of gender mutilation and detachment

01:21:34.660 from yourself. It's really scary.

01:21:37.560 Men are sometimes women, straight or sometimes gay, you know, and you know how, of course, you know,

01:21:44.820 Mrs. So-and-so talked to me about my, you know, PP because we do that sometimes. Sometimes it's not

01:21:51.760 appropriate, but sometimes it is. And, you know, Mrs. So-and-so can tell us when it is and when it

01:21:56.520 isn't. And you can see that the exact, again, they always do this. They always project. They say,

01:22:02.200 well, we have to teach these things in order to protect children from predation. So they'll know

01:22:07.160 when something inappropriate is going on. But what they actually do is create the conditions under

01:22:10.680 which the authority figures in their lives, sometimes it's okay and sometimes it's not. And

01:22:16.300 obviously children are not going to have a well-developed and sophisticated understanding

01:22:20.440 because the categories aren't there and they're going to have those dissolved before they take

01:22:24.300 any form. And so you're actually creating the conditions where there are not, like you said,

01:22:28.460 they're not going to be able to report abuse because sometimes men are women. Sometimes,

01:22:33.820 sometimes, sometimes people who call themselves straight are actually, they have a little bit

01:22:37.440 of gay in there. Sometimes, you know, we talk about sex at school and sometimes it's okay. And

01:22:43.320 sometimes they're less likely to report it because, well, sometimes we do this. And when it gets

01:22:49.440 inappropriate, well, maybe this is just the next escalation. And this is exactly what groomers

01:22:54.280 do. They get children comfortable with being around them, with talking about sex, then with

01:22:58.460 touching, then with laying on, then with why don't you, this feels good. Don't you want to help people

01:23:02.720 feel good? This is the grooming process in that regard. So the whole thing is just a fantasy and a

01:23:09.040 catastrophe. I like the way that you phrased it, that the parents who think that they're going along

01:23:12.500 with us for inclusion or so that they can avoid looking like that terrible homophobic nightmare

01:23:18.500 parent that was in the media every other day in the 1990s that we all grew up afraid that we were

01:23:22.640 going to become the hateful parent who throws out their gay child or whatever it is that there was

01:23:27.060 the big meme of the decade. You know, you are laying your child on the altar of a religion that

01:23:32.420 is sacrificing your child to the, as, as Hegel put it, you know, history uses people and then discards

01:23:37.420 them so that it can move toward its ultimate goal. If you don't think history uses people and then

01:23:42.440 discards them as their mentality, by the way, look at feminism. They used feminism. They got all they could

01:23:48.060 get out of feminism and now nobody knows what a woman is because they've used feminism and now

01:23:52.140 they're discarding it. The radical feminists are these kind of weird co-belligerents with even very

01:23:59.140 conservative Christians, et cetera, now who don't agree with them on anything else over this idea of

01:24:04.160 sex and gender because the queer theorists have now cannibalized feminism. History used it and then

01:24:08.780 discarded it. Well, that's going to be your children too. They need activist goals achieved. If they break

01:24:13.540 your children to get them done, well, your children did a great thing for the cause. Thank you.

01:24:19.060 Yeah, right. There's this post. I don't know if you follow Colin Wright. He's an evolutionary biologist

01:24:23.820 who talks about gender and a woman named Christina Buttons. She describes herself as an ex-SJW and they

01:24:31.920 wrote this article about this mom who is a part of a group, trans people and the allies who support

01:24:40.040 them. And she posted on December 30th of 2021, my daughter, seven years old, was extremely excited

01:24:47.240 to receive these books for Christmas and I couldn't have been more proud. And they are children's books

01:24:51.300 about a boy becoming a girl and vice versa. And then a month later, this mom posts that her daughter,

01:24:58.100 who is seven years old, just came to me and said that she thinks she wants to be a boy. Now we are

01:25:02.480 strong allies and I've always taught her that there's nothing wrong with this, but I don't think that

01:25:06.200 she's a boy inside. She's always been a girly girl, but she is like friends with this boy and

01:25:12.360 she's been made to believe that maybe she is a boy because she likes the same things. And so

01:25:16.500 this mom, in an effort to be inclusive, I don't think this mom is a sexual predator or has, you know,

01:25:21.780 sexual motivations behind this, but in the name of empathy and inclusion, introduced her daughter

01:25:28.400 to this. And as we have said many times in this interview, the power of suggestion with children,

01:25:33.680 because they are naturally malleable because they want the approval of their parents or,

01:25:38.840 you know, people of authority in their life. Of course, they are going to internalize this

01:25:43.960 and they are going to think that they are this, as you said, it is a form of grooming and it's

01:25:49.460 destructive. Yeah. And if you, you know, I saw that Colin and Christina are friends of mine and

01:25:55.380 they're great, but I saw, I saw that. And, um, the, the, the lady actually says, I think when she

01:26:03.200 starts having her panic post a month later, so I think I actually confused my child. Yes. Yes. And

01:26:08.000 then she, I think she says something like my husband said, you know, before we do this inclusion

01:26:11.740 stuff, it's going to cause problems. And so that's what's happened. It, you introduce confusion into a

01:26:17.420 child rather than, I mean, the goal of parenting well is actually to set the right boundary so that your

01:26:23.460 child can grow in a healthy way to navigate child development in an healthy way. And that requires

01:26:28.540 a lot of boundaries because they don't understand the world that they're interacting with. You start

01:26:32.560 breaking down certain among those boundaries, you end up with this kind of confusion. And then this

01:26:37.020 poor parent now is going to get blasted by the other people. Cause she, by asking the question,

01:26:42.140 she's not being trans inclusive enough. She's supposed to take his gospel that her, her child's true

01:26:47.960 identity has been discovered through this one book and a friend who's a boy. And there's no

01:26:53.380 working it out. She's either going to get red pilled or she's going to go down this very

01:26:57.400 destructive path of. That's right. Or you'll see a story like what happened with, with Yalie

01:27:02.980 Galdemis in California, which is a Peruvian woman came to America, immigrated legally, gets

01:27:08.680 her kids in the school next thing, you know, socially transitioned. Yalie gets socially transitioned

01:27:12.920 at the school. Yep. The school teaches her how to get, uh, CPS to get involved, to take

01:27:19.420 her out of the home because her mom isn't inclusive in affirming enough, ends up out of the home

01:27:25.320 going through lots of transition, but then at 19 years old, commit suicide. Uh, and as

01:27:30.260 a tragic end of that story, because this is a, the, for every one person whom this path

01:27:37.360 helps, they're going to be hundreds who it destroys. Um, and this is just kind of the

01:27:43.500 nature. If you, if you want to get kind of coldly clinical again, what I see when I look

01:27:47.220 at leftism is a utter failure to understand a basic statistical reality. If you put it

01:27:52.400 in terms of what they call type one and type two errors, false positive and false negatives,

01:27:55.940 the attempt to completely eliminate one type of error, regardless of how many of the other

01:28:01.880 type of error it creates is kind of a recurring theme through all of this.

01:28:06.080 Yes. That's true. That's true in economics too. That's true in all of their policy. It's what

01:28:11.600 Thomas Sowell calls cosmic justice. They see one inequality. They say, oh, this is because of

01:28:17.500 oppression or discrimination when they don't even know if that's true. And in order to correct that,

01:28:22.020 they cause all these other political, economic, social ills.

01:28:26.120 Right. But if they happen to the privileged, so what?

01:28:28.900 Right.

01:28:29.680 Because they're already privileged. So that's just leveling the playing field.

01:28:33.140 Right.

01:28:33.320 And that's actually the sick, destructive mentality, which is why I've said equity equalizes downward

01:28:38.440 and other little cute aphorisms that I hope people can remember. But it's what it is. And

01:28:43.880 then Karl Marx wrote a destructive theology is what he wrote. And it doesn't matter how you repackage

01:28:51.960 it, race, sex, gender, sexuality, ability, whatever. It doesn't matter. And the thing is with queer

01:28:58.380 theory is it's always a slippery slope and there is no bottom. Whatever you think is the worst thing

01:29:02.920 they could possibly advocate for, I guarantee you they can do worse. Yeah. There's no bottom.

01:29:07.280 Yep. Yep. We're not even to the bottom of the slippery slope yet. And the slippery slope is real.

01:29:11.100 Unfortunately, it's not a fallacy. Now we don't like to say it's kind of gross, but the queer

01:29:15.480 theorists are actually, it's not just a slippery slope. They're actually lubing it.

01:29:18.440 Oh, gross. Yeah. I make it slippery. Yeah. Yeah. And they don't they seem to be more and more

01:29:25.340 brazen about it, too. I originally tweeted, you know, Republicans should criminalize the,

01:29:32.820 you know, drag shows that purposely involve children because it will force Democrats to

01:29:39.260 defend it. And that was naive because Democrats were more than ready to defend it. They weren't

01:29:44.700 even scared to defend it. They didn't hesitate to defend it. There was no one like, oh, this is a

01:29:48.720 little too far. This is, you know, a little stigmatizing. I'm sure there were some, you know,

01:29:53.140 normal Democratic voters who wouldn't come out in favor of that kind of thing. But I mean,

01:29:57.800 the president of the United States, they have no problem defending this kind of thing. We've got

01:30:02.040 this presidential administration who is actually pushing the transition of children. And if you've talked

01:30:08.180 to detransitioners, what they will tell you is exactly what James has said, is that one of the

01:30:13.800 reasons why they transitioned is because someone told them that they should. Someone told them that

01:30:19.140 this is easy. Someone told them that this is good. They were on Tumblr. They were on Reddit.

01:30:23.400 They formed Roblox. They formed communities with these people. And they were convinced that they

01:30:29.020 were. I got this tragic message the other day from this girl who's a detransitioner. And she is

01:30:34.340 married. She was able to get pregnant. Thank God most of them can't, which again, this I feel like this

01:30:38.560 plays in even to the depopulation goal that a lot of people, a lot of elites want. But she said,

01:30:45.800 she asked me so tragically, how do I get over the guilt of not being able to breastfeed my baby

01:30:51.040 because I got a mastectomy when I was young, because I was convinced. I mean, we have not seen

01:30:56.560 all of these chickens come home to roost yet. I mean, we're talking psychological distress and

01:31:02.500 destruction like we have never seen. And at this point, it's inevitable. We can't stop what is

01:31:08.280 going to be reaped from what has already been sown. I agree. I mean, I saw that. It's just

01:31:14.220 horrific. Being coldly male, sometimes I've been telling people for a long time, they're like,

01:31:21.280 should I go to college? You know, everybody has these questions when I go around and talk around

01:31:24.600 the country. Should I go to college? What do I do? And I'm like, well, if you can stomach it,

01:31:28.040 and if I were you, I would kind of veer toward medical malpractice law because there's probably

01:31:33.100 going to be a river of gold like nobody's ever seen in that here in the next decade or so.

01:31:40.440 And you are right. These chickens have not yet come home to roost and they are going to.

01:31:45.140 And we've already seen like the first small echo of it with kind of older millennials who bought into

01:31:51.760 the feminism line who are now reaching their late 30s and had foregone a family and are

01:31:57.060 in incredible distress over it, having chosen career first and then tick tock ran out of time.

01:32:04.540 And that doesn't look like an option for them any longer. And, you know, it's you could pick

01:32:10.380 whichever famous blue checks you want on Twitter that promote these views from like rationalizing

01:32:15.440 that that you want and pretty horrific. But those chickens coming home to roost is already a big

01:32:21.220 mess. And this is going to be like a hundred of that at the same time. It's just going to be a

01:32:26.000 disaster. Yeah. I wish we had more time to talk about this. And I wanted to bring it up a while

01:32:30.580 ago, but then we ended up going down another another path. But just for people who have not

01:32:36.220 listened and James, you should listen to it, too. Last Thursday's episode with a woman named

01:32:40.480 Genevieve Glock, she talks about some of the roots of transgender ideology. And she argues because

01:32:47.520 you mentioned Foucault and how he tried to normalize really BDSM, which was something that he

01:32:53.860 was a part of. And she talks about how a large part of what is now modern transgenderism, not the

01:33:01.280 people, this tiny percentage of people who truly have gender dysphoria, but the men who all of a

01:33:05.520 sudden they say, oh, I'm a woman and I should even, you know, pre-transition. I'm going into women's

01:33:10.920 prisons and I'm going into women's locker rooms. She argues that it's a perversion, that there's a

01:33:16.520 sexual aspect to it, that powerful men are actually getting off on this, that has nothing to do with

01:33:20.860 gender identity. She argues that it actually has to do with certain subsets of pornography and

01:33:27.020 specifically BDSM and this fantasy by a lot of these men of becoming submissive like women and

01:33:35.720 submissive like girls. And she's done a lot of stomach churning research into this, but that's

01:33:40.680 just an interesting connection. What we are seeing today, the normalization of that kind of stuff,

01:33:45.420 what she called sissy porn all the way back to Foucault. And that's exactly what he was also

01:33:51.040 trying to normalize too. So it really is all connected. Yeah, I think that's probably spot on.

01:33:58.040 I mean, I think almost all of this has various attempts to rationalize sexual pathology and

01:34:05.260 psychological pathology that's manifested in a way that's very fruitful to look like it's academic,

01:34:10.920 to look like it's transgressing boundaries in an intelligent way with lots and lots and lots of

01:34:17.200 words. Yeah. But I think that there's a lot of perversion and sexual perversion. Yeah. Fetishes

01:34:25.540 and such really hiding at the bottom of a lot of it. Yep. And unfortunately, we will see the

01:34:31.420 consequences of that in coming years. We already are starting to. But as you said, we haven't even

01:34:37.260 gotten close to the bottom of the slippery slope, unfortunately. All right. That's all we've got

01:34:41.920 time for today. As always, I could talk to you for seven more hours, probably, and still not get

01:34:47.000 through everything that I want to talk about. Tell everyone where they can find you, where they can

01:34:50.860 buy your books, all that good stuff. Yep. So you can find me on social media at the handles

01:34:56.140 at Conceptual James. I'm at most of them, mostly on Twitter actively. My company is New Discourses.

01:35:03.460 It's NewDiscourses.com. I do the New Discourses podcast and a couple other podcasts there. So

01:35:08.620 you can go listen to mostly by reading of Marxist literature and explaining what it actually says and

01:35:14.960 what the actual goals are. I'm working a lot in the critical education theory right now to kind of

01:35:20.600 take that apart. But there's a lot of stuff on this queer theory that I did for to celebrate Pride

01:35:25.180 Month. And I'll be kind of sticking in that as well. So at Conceptual James, at New Discourses,

01:35:31.900 NewDiscourses.com. That's where you can find me and my work. Thanks so much, James. I appreciate

01:35:36.580 you taking the time as always. Yep. Thank you.

Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey - July 07, 2022

Ep 639 ｜ The Queerification of American Kids ｜ Guest： James Lindsay

Episode Stats

Length

Words per Minute

Word Count

Sentence Count

Summary

Transcript