seriously man you need to look into sumerian texts and watch paul wallis your authiest bias is blinding you on the topics around graham hancock ie the ancient past and people like paul wallis on religous texts like God or religious theology i have to say you are wrong on this matter however you have the right to your opinion even if you have not looked into the topic because it just sounds crazy to you so clearly it is not worth your effort. honestly i am not suprised because far to many claim to know the truth but are ignorant when it comes to these topics as to what the texts and evidence says or shows and the great thing about science is it is open to being proven wrong and changeing to the facts to the current understanding. no one has all the information on any topic and that is why differences of opinion's are debated untill we can agree on the topic and always be open to new evidance that may be of conflict to the current understanding.( also the dibble debunking hancock was proven incorrect dibble what he said was wrong ) < Edit
also the joe rogan interview with dibble and hancock what dibble said was proven incorrect dibble was lieing so again you was wrong and outdated on the so called debunking.
@@cwchadwynn I can see you’re passionate about these topics, but your approach isn’t helping your case. Posting your reply in the wrong context makes it harder for others to take you seriously. On top of that, misusing terms like "authiest" and presenting disorganized arguments undermines your credibility. If you want your views considered, focus on being well-researched, balanced, and context-appropriate-how you communicate matters as much as what you say.
@@AJenbo i apreciate your reply and i will agree that my comment might come across as attacking and i willsay my communicateing can be hard as i do sruggle with trying to comunicate a point clearly however i have repeatadly ask for the youtuber to look at what paul has stated on his videos and he does a much better job at comunicateing his ideas and the topic in general is ignored or rejected simply on the bases that what is being said ie aliens, is seen some what as coo coo all i am trying to say is that i have looked into this and i find it very convincing and its goes against both authiest and monothaistic ideas about God and many do not take it with any seriouseness so why would i waste my time looking into it is the stance many take i just thought that this channel being about religion would have found my findings at least of some intrest please forgive me if i came across as an attack it is not my intension i also have a public playlist of the channels and videos of intrest Non of my work so there is no monitary intrest in it for me and again thank you for your reply
It's shocking how wide spread these miss conceptions have become. At Christmas dinner a family member told me that they where under the impression that it had been proven to be impossible for humans to build the pyramids after he watched the guys "documentary".
I'd say he'd be right. It would be too hard to build it the way they did. Before the invention of the wheel. Stones hand cut. Stones then lifted not via crane and lifting points but not really sure how they did it especially if slings were used because it's another lift to get slings out once positioned. If we could use our technology yeah it would be easier but if you want it exactly the same finished product yeah its tough to not possible. Ive seen many construction projects all sizes. Other experienced builders would say the same. Layman wouldn't see it until we actually try to do it.... Oh I get you now... Etc etc
Thank you for this thoughtful video, my friend. A principle isn't a principle until it costs you, and you've always been among the most principled people I've had the fortune of knowing. It's been surreal to watch not just Richard Dawkins, but so many figures in the sceptical, free-thinking realm so often abandon their own principles of evidence-based reasoning when it comes to especially trans topics. The Imane Khelif case is particularly striking-a simple fact-check would have revealed the truth, yet even scholars like Dawkins failed to perform even this basic level of research. Having once been influenced by anti-trans propaganda myself, I understand the allure of seemingly convincing narratives. However, the true spirit of scepticism demands we remain open to correction and willing to revise our views in light of the evidence. Dawkins' stubborn persistence in the face of contrary evidence isn't just disappointing-it's a betrayal of the scientific method he spent decades defending. Perhaps the most painful irony is that Dawkins, who taught so many of us to question dogma and follow evidence wherever it leads, has become an example of what happens when we let our preconceptions overcome our commitment to truth. For me, at least, his legacy now carries a final, unintended lesson: intellectual humility must be a lifelong practice.
Thanks, Steve. As Hemant said in the full version of our conversation, many of us, including Hemant and I, have not always “been there” when it comes to opposing bigotry and misinformation disguised as warranted skepticism. We’ve bought into it too at times, and we’ve got to be thankful that people took the time to help us do better. With Dawkins, I don’t hold much hope he’ll change his mind or approach. But for those in his audience, and even for those who shared the stage with him on his tour, there’s still time to reflect and change.
@@pietrobassani6956what religion did they turn to exactly. I don't think the pursuit of evidence based truth is religious in any fashion. The topic of trans people doesn't have any worship or tenants
Detransitioned person here. I was on hrt for 3 years and lived as a woman for 7. I don't regret it at all, I'm happy I was able to be myself and discover what I really wanted. Exploring identity shouldn't be a bad thing.
Marginalized people who have been paying attention to Dawkins for years aren't really surprised by this pivot to bigotry. He's always had weird attitudes towards women, for example. Thanks for putting this critique together Drew.
6 дней назад+38
First red flag for me was his response to the elevator unsolicited advances situation to Skepchick many years back.
I first read one if his books when I left the cult grew up in about 15 years ago. I had his hooks hyped up and when I read them I did not get good vibes and didn't see what the fuss was about. I'm not surprised with this transphobia in the least.
Since this all happened after his stroke, I give him a pass. I don't agree with him, but I think simply ignoring him is the best thing to do. Be sad that his brain has changed. Any disability is sad. But don't assume that this is a choice.
I don’t mean to denigrate anyone who is a fan of Dawkins but many of the criticisms he receives today were laid out in the past as well. He has always put a narrative of how he understood the world to be above actual science. Atheism, or more precisely, anti-theocracy, was just his calling card. It also stands out more because he feels so inclined to speak outside of his expertise today.
As one of the trans people in your audience--thank you. Thank you so much for taking this stance. Your willingness to turn down the potential financial and social benefits from talking to Dawkins is not an easy decision, yet you stuck to your principles. That's the sign of a true trans ally--thank you, thank you, thank you! Thank you for fighting with us!
As a Russian, whenever you see/hear "ГазПром" (GazProm or GasProm, and yes, Drew pronounced it correctly), you can be almost sure there's something shady going on.
As an italian, unfortunately, I can attest that russian propaganda has infiltrated Europe succesfully and is really strong in the media. Energy companies like Gazprom or ENI finance political pundits to spread anti west and anti liberal democracy sentiments
The only thing that concerns me is that "Russian" is starting to be seen again as synonymous with shady, manipulative, etc. "It's the Russians" is starting to have a stank on it when what people (I hope) mean is "Russian political operatives." Russian folk be folk. Just like every folk. And Russian government and oligarchs are really only different from government and oligarchs around the world because they have less checks on power.
@@CorwinFound Between the state and Russian scammers and botnets it's probably just sensible to treat ones you're not meeting in person with a great deal of suspicion.
Great to see people sticking to their principles and doing the right thing ❤️ Dawkins is now a classic example of the thing he's spent most of his life opposing
Exactly. I think that’s the danger of the aesthetic of contrarianism and intellectual superiority that’s so popular - it motivates a person not to scrutinize their opinions before shouting them out, and primes them to see criticism as confirmation of their views. Unfortunately, it’s not terribly surprising to see Dawkins turn out this way given his long time embodiment of this aesthetic. Thanks for the work you do, by the way!
"Why does all the bullying go one way?" I don't think Dawkins realises the backlash that trans people face. I lost many subscribers when I came out as trans, I constantly get anti trans comments. I have even been brigaded once by hundreds transphobes on Twitter. To say that only transphobes or the gender critical crowd get bullied is incredibly ignorant.
Sadly, this is the MO of these people. Victimize others and claim victimhood. Its like how slave owners would talk about the 'white mans burden' of having to take care of people of color because they cant do it themselves. These people commit atrocities and try to pursuade themselves and others that they are good.
@@Planarwalk It seriously shows a huge disconnect from reality. The things people say to trans people are insanely cruel, and constant. Sorry you have to experience that.
He was an intellectual hero of mine for decades. We corresponded as friends. I’m mentioned in one of his books. I knew he could be stubborn on some issues, but I have changed his mind at least once. But I just couldn’t get past his attitudes to trans rights. I feel hugely disappointed and I just can’t be associated with him, no matter how indirectly. He’s doing real harm. I’m writing a science book. I could probably have got support for it from him. I don’t want it. You are one of the people I now mention as true promoters of reason. It’s very important to be able to point out public atheists who aren’t promoting bigoted information.
You should show him compassion instead. You just never know how brain damage will effect someone, and you can date these changes to that. Should you support or agree with him? No, but to be "hugely disappointed" is wrong. Would you be hugely disappointed in him if it was his spine, and he couldn't walk? It still amazes me how even intelligent people can't understand that having a stroke and then a personality change are related. It's also ugly.
@@littlebitofhope1489 I don't care why someone has a terrible, demonstrably wrong opinion. It doesn't change how terrible and demonstrably wrong the opinion is, or how it hurts people.
I attended a humanism convention about 10 years ago where Dawkins was the main speaker on a panel. The panel discussion was fantastic with all panelists providing thought-provoking answers, except every time the one female panelist would contribute, Dawkins would cut her off before she could finish and change the topic. By the end of the panel it was pretty clear that Dawkins is just a massive sexist asshole. I was really interested in her answers and felt pretty bad for her. I didn't really have the words to verbalize my frustration with his actions then as I do now, and none of the other panelists said anything, I am assuming because he was the star guest and everybody wanted to hear him talk.
This is it man, Andrew is official one of my fav atheist youtubers ever. Like I did NOT think he could get any better than defending us trans people but now he released this. I mean, Dawkins is highly respected as a defender for evolution and atheism, but barely anybody tries to acknowledge the shitty opinions he has formed over the years. It really hurt me as a trans person. I'm so glaad Drew is saying something about this. Much love to him and this channel and the wonderful people who continue to support and watch him ♡ Edit: typo correction :p
I really appreciate this! 🩷🤍💙 Although, I feel refusing to parrot Russian disinformation or promote grifters is really the bare minimum for a “skeptic” type guy. Fortunately, there are many more atheist creators who also defend trans people and would refuse Dawkins if given the opportunity.
@GeneticallyModifiedSkeptic you're always doing an amazin work and cranking out dope ass videos, both you and Taylor, I love both of you, thank you. And yes it does feel good to know there are trans supportive atheists out there, restores my faith in humanity :3
So, could you provide an example of just what Dawkins has said that requires a defense from it? What are the opinions he has formed, and can you show where he says what his offensive opinions are?
@@_aconite_cj_ Richard Dawkins is not a threat to you. Never was. Maybe you’re a threat to yourself if you don’t constantly have your affirmation, but that’s ultimately nobody’s problem but yours.
Dawkins is the cautionary tale that leads me to be careful that my distaste for religion in general isn't twisted to the benefit of one particular religion.
I used to be a "militant atheist" type and I also see this as a cautionary tale, that not everyone who isn't religious is automatically rational, and that not siding with traditional religion doesn't make you wiser necessarily. It's not "religion poisons everything" but that people are corruptible. By more than just religion. People also need to be resilient against, and aware of, how the media they consume influences them.
Yup. I used to be very anti religion. right up until i saw the use of it in fighting against the empire. Does not magically make god real, but it does serve a purpose.
Don't be too cautionary Dawkins is probably an introvert who painted a huge target on his back and the religious usually only have world class manipulation in their toolbox. Shrinking down is also what they want 100%
I have met some virtuous and wise religious people. Their religion is stupid. They were not. It is always valuable to see others as people, capable of both good and evil, regardless of beliefs or politics.
The only disappointment is in my likely vain hope that Drew debating Dawkins on this issue would maybe reach people on the fence. The people who believe Dawkins because he is/was a respected scientist and assume he must be right, but haven't seen the evidence. But in the end, it likely wouldn't have worked and Drew has the opportunity to _prove_ he isn't a grifter or panderer. He literally gave up a chance of a lifetime because of his principles. Humans don't get a lot better than that.
@@swiitchy511want to hear Dawkins make shit up? Or just ape the evangelical position, because it’s easy to find both at this point. His bigotry has overtaken his skepticism.
"He doesn't get to be done with this conversation" YES, let's hold people responsible for their actions, especially celebs who push dangerous misinformation and hate!
LBGTQ+ is a sham. I love how people can yell "trust the science" on one issue but openly and proudly disregard science on another issue. The gall to think that one of the worlds most prolific educator about genes and sexual reproduction doesn't know how many genders there are! If there actually would be a mechanism in the human biology to transform sex to the opposite, Dawkins would be among the many writing about it. Or maybe there is a conspiracy in the sciences to hide that we are actually hermaphrodites? Lefties... thinking that a desire for social acceptance changes what's going on under the hood... magical thinking... very similar to religious thinking.
Not to mention this is... apocalyptic to people who think we basically worship Dawkins. The idea that we *may* actively dislike someone as massive as him to them is basically a mythical creature to many religious people, not all, but many.
The tone in her voice is so shaky. "how dare you find women attractive and claim to be a woman yourself" she accuses... What... you mean Gay? What YOU are?
Honestly, ever wanna show a friend what cognitive dissonance looks like, or sounds like? That clip is a perfect example. She's shaking from the subconscious shock of basically saying about someone else what people have said about her, her whole life.
I love how TERFs have attached themselves the Blanchard, who has amazing views like "men cant be bisexual" and "women dont have sexuality", and for Dawkins who loves science, to see a guy whose studies have been thoroughly slammed for lack of falsifiability, selector bias and just straight up weird conclusions (3 year old boys can be autogynephiles or homosexual transsexuals for expressing feminine behaviour, but since we cant actually test their arousal patterns, we can just wing it and say the "cute" ones are hsts, literally what Bailey and Blanchard have argued.. phrenology on little boys to see if theyll be dolls(
Trans activists (aka cis and non-binary fake Leftists) are the biggest threat to the LGBT community in the past 50 years, y'all need to stfu before you get more of us ki11ed, you do nothing but create hate for us 💯
As a middle aged gay woman, I have been approached by a trans woman exactly ONCE. And in totally normal non-aggressive way. WHO are these anti-trans lesbians who spread this weird story that trans women are men POSING as women to hit on lesbians??? Like that's a THING? It is SO strange. I never heard ANYONE talk about it until this whole anti-trans movement started spreading their garbage. It's super easy to fact check these claims too and see that this is a non-issue. Move on to actual problems.
"Nothing about us, without us." This is something that has often been said in the trans community. For the last ten years there's been a lot about us without us. And not just without us but without experts on the subject matter, without medical experts, without expert input. The community is silenced and so are researchers who would speak in our defence. Why? Because we are all "biased". I want to thank you Drew and Hemant for being "biased" in our favour. For amplifying our voices and giving our perspectives a platform. Thank you. Thank you for fighting against the rising tide of hatred. Sincerely, An exhausted trans woman.
I think "Nothing about us, without us," originates from the disability community, but it's a good motto for basically any issue related to bodily autonomy and medical freedom.
Assuming your name refers to Vampire: the Masquerade... Transphobes: "you're either a man or a woman!" Tzimisce: "Last week I had boobs, yesterday a flat and hairy chest... Do I want boobs today?" Gangrel: " I'm so angry, I'm becoming interspecies!"
@@mswen1983 I'd extend it to literally any thing. Getting discussed behind your back is disturbing, especially if it's in regards something that can deeply affect you and your future.
@@mswen1983 Yeah exactly. Although this is basically true for every minority. The concept of "stories about black/queer people vs stories BY black/queer people" is the same idea but specifically for media representation.
Well there aren't very many of you, which makes that difficult. Transphobic grifters blew the whole thing way out of proportion and now there are significantly more people talking about trans people than there are trans people to talk about trans people with. And yes, you kind of are biased, because it's very difficult to decouple trans rights from the science of trans. You're inherently going into it knowing that the answer has to be something that proves that being trans has some immutable natural cause because anything else would be used as grounds for transphobia.
Wasn't that book written by a Christian? You know the group that atheists hate and call stupid? The same Christians responsible for the majority of scientific advances in the western world.
It's the cis men just claiming to be women thanks to self ID that you have to worry about. I do wonder if you'd actually report it considering you'd be deemed transphobic if it ever did happen and you accused a trans woman of SA you. The problem isn't trans women, it's the cis men who will abuse the self ID policies.
19:10 wild, where the hell are these parents who hate the idea of a gay child but would love a trans one, like make it make sense... trans does not mean "perfect conforming to the expectations, even ridiculous conservative ones, of the target gender" ffs...
So this maybe does happen... but not in the US, most of Europe or other western/Judeo-Christian areas to my knowledge. In the middle East however, there is less transphobia than homophobia, at least legally. Although being trans is stigmatized, being gay can result in the death penalty. About a decade ago there were a lot of stories about gay people in the middle East being forced to transition. I honestly can't confirm it one way or the other. But certainly the _story_ exists that in some places gay and lesbian people are encouraged/forced to transition. And TERFs and transphobes of all types have latched onto the idea.
@@CorwinFound Literally only from Iran, and life for trans women there still fucking blows. You don't get the benefits of being able to live on the dl, either, and so Irani trans women live most often in abject poverty. Trans men do relatively well and do their part to hate trans women. The rest throw us all in the pit regardless.
Adding to Corwin, in some Asian countries it is easier for families to accept a trans person in their "new societal role" than to accept a homossexual person that won't fit the role of their gender.
Dawkins is proof that Athiesm doesn't magically make one not conservative politically. A politically left leaning Athiest has a lot more in common with liberal/left leaning theologians like John Shelby Spong than they do with Dawkins.
Absolutely. I can disagree with religious people on religion, but am happy to work with them on social issues. The church up the road from me is openly accepting of trans people, and support abortion rights. I have more in common with them than with Dawkins and these right wing atheists. Maybe it's because my identity is not built about atheism.
@@antediluvianatheist5262 of course it is. Believers derive meaning out of it's tenants of equality, inclusion, social justice etc. Believers ostracize detractors, chant whatever the preacher at the front tells them to chant, try to form laws to force others to adapt their beliefs and adhere to their rules. The same old basic theology stuff that's been part of human history since the begging.
I’m a Christian, but I’m honestly not surprised. Dawkins has always been more concerned with being the smartest in the room and feeling like he’s right, than actually searching for reality and learning from it. He’s a low rate rationalist philosopher but he pretends to be empirical. Him being Transphobic because he’s uncomfortable with societal change and pretending it’s out of empirical interests is very on brand.
Yeah, I agree, and I am not even the biggest fan of Rebecca; less of a fan of Dawkins, though, as I think she does fantastic work. I just find her to be too much of a biological essentialist. This is something I can disagree with her on, but unlike Dawkins, I don't think she is outright spreading disinformation.
I don't know why, but I'm always surprised by the undercurrent of frothing transphobia within the online atheist community. Can't we all just make fun of theism and also be compassionate about lgbtq people?
It's not just about dunking on tired superstitions for a lot of these people. It's about being superior. Which is, quite frankly, the exact thing that religions do.
@@claytonreeves150Right? I thought we didn't like theism because it promoted dogmatic thinking? But a lot of the same people who discard religion over misogyny or homophobia seem like they're all in on dehumanizing/attacking trans people.
Could it be because in the same way atheist mock the idea of a grandfather god creating the whole world just to have a relation with you as an illusion and a whishfull way of thinking, they tend to mock the idea that someone is what they think they, whatever it may be? "I think therefor I am" with another meaning. We fought to have the right to mock religious people's beliefs but now we can't mock the belief that somebody that feels they are a woman, are a woman although they are a biological male. I'm not asking you to agree on my stance on the trans debate, but can you agree that there is a problem when making fun of a belief is not allowed anymore?
I'm not aware of an "undercurrent of frothing transphobia within the online atheist community." I know it's out there, but it doesn't seem like a dominant trend to me.
@@GeneticallyModifiedSkepticIt's a testament to you (and team?) choosing sponsors that fit your channel. Like yeah, you could get some of that sweet, sweet Raid money. But imagine the transition!?! And so far, so good, no horrible exposé on how problematic Ground News is.
@@GeneticallyModifiedSkeptic It's like the modern version of the ads hosts used to do on live TV in the 1950s. I'll take Ground News over Lucky Strike cigarettes any time!
Hearing him talk about trans people was a gut punch. I was a big fan of him years ago, and hearing him spreading hateful nonsense about me was surreal.
Honestly, this whole situation really helped me resolve my subconscious antitheism(being actively against the concept of religion). Like, I still don’t believe in religion, and think that any fair analysis of the factual claims made in religion doctrine should make you change your views, but this has helped me realize that religion is not specifically a source of evil. Bigotry and hate comes from all corners, and it needs to be fought from every angle, not just the religious one.
@@chikkipop No, but it doesn't make someone immune to bigotry either. You can embrace empiricism in one arena (say, in regards to religious issues), and still succumb to prejudices and bigotry on others. Rejecting religion is a good start, but the work doesn't stop there.
I always like to cite the tyrannical officially atheist regimes like the USSR to those atheists who say you need religion for atrocities. Religion is one of the excuses for atrocities, maybe one of the most common, but it is not the only one.
@@chikkipop the point is you cant stop there, you must also actively fight bigotry and hate, because those who dont believe in religion can also be influenced by it and you see what we have here, Richard Dawkins agreeing with bigotry. People who should be reasonable and logical using the same bad logic as religious people to justify their own distain for some group of people they simply dont understand.
I'm no longer antitheist, in part because I do have a religion again, Satanism. I am against superstition, because "superstition allows you to not have to think."
Andrew, i have unsubscribed from basically every atheist channel on yt during these last few years. The topic simply lost my interest, despite me remaining a nonbeliever. Your and taylors channels are the only ones that remain. Thank you for continuing to be true to yourself.
@@spiceupyourafterlife May I recommend you check out Paulogia, Viced Rhino, Shannon Q, Gutsick Gibbon, Creaky Blinder, and SciManDan? Okay, the last two are probably atheists (I'm not sure they've ever officially said), but they're more focused on tackling psuedo-science and flat earthers. Gutsick Gibbon has a lot of fun science education videos - she's a primatologist. Well, fun for me - I'm a nerd. lol
Yep! When Not-Sees show up to support you... You might want to rethink your stances. And that isn't hyperbole. Actual Neo-Not-Sees have been invited to, shown up, and spoken at anti-trans events. I've seen video of TERF's literally reading from Mein Kampf, and not to compare supposed radical trans activists to AH. Rather to show that he was correct! A person or group can absolutely be judged by the company they keep.
When all of the people on your side are awful, vile anti-science grifters & bigots with horrible ideas, it might be time to reassess your position on things, don't you think? You'd think someone with the supposed intelligence of Dawkins would figure that out, but grandpa doesn't seem to get how anything works.
Yeah people who are normally wrong can be right on some subjects. It's an odd appeal to authority to say that only your side can come up with the correct answers to things
@@Ashakat42 when most of the people agreeing with you are crackpot conspiracy theorists though I think you may want to reassess some of your preconceived notions about the issue at hand
@@Ashakat42 Sure, they _can_ be right on some subjects. For example, I’m sure we could find a lot of common ground on something like “arson is bad”… although “don’t eat horse de-wormer” would probably be a lot more fraught. … and that’s really the point. The issue is the KINDS of subjects they tend to be wrong about: namely, science and social issues-and especially the intersection of science and social issues, where they have a proven track record of flatly rejecting any science that challenges their ideology. Which, true, isn’t a guarantee that they’ll always be wrong… but it’s a massive red flag which, at a minimum, should be acknowledged.
@@authenticallysuperficial9874 Dude gave an explicit endorsement on Helen Joyce's book 'Trans', which is full of misinformation and transphobia. He's quoted on the book jacket as saying the work is "Timely and necessary". To not be a transphobe he'd either have to have not read the book, or be ignorant enough to give out endorsements to anything and everything. I agree he's not a radical feminist, but that's because no TERF could reasonably be called a feminist.
A prime example of why it is so important to be wary of idolizing people. We're all human, and even the most learned of us can be rendered idiots by our own malignant pride and self-certainty.
I'm a trans person. When I came out to my parents they told me they wished I'd come out as gay instead. That they could understand and accept me being gay but being trans was too much for them. So no parents don't prefer us to be trans than gay.
Exactly. I think the only place on the planet where that happens is in the theocracy of Iran, for obvious reasons such as being homosexual is synonymous with the death penalty.
We atheists/ agnostics should eat our own too. Nobody is special enough to not be questioned or corrected. There are times when religious individuals have done and said bad things but I’ve also seen some anti-theists do and say some pretty cringe and ignorant things. Being religious or not alone is not a measure of character or intelligence.
I'm an old-timey lesbian... and in the last 5 years I've repeatedly experienced more and more disappointment in people who I once respected as valued critical thinkers. Hell, even the US Democratic party appears to have bought into the sanewashing of the woke-wars. This is not my timeline, I need to get back.
Perhaps the most infuriating part has been that while the GOP has been attacking trans ppl left and right for the past... 8 years? The Dems have said absolutely nothing on the subject. And the few that have spoken out? They've done so in _support_ of the GOP's bigotry! It's awfully hard for me to justify supporting their candidates when they're also saying that I shouldn't have the right to be myself. Don't get me wrong, I still voted for Harris and I don't regret that vote. But I also went into election day knowing that everything had to go just right for her to pull off a victory (based entirely on an analysis of the polling in swing states). That said, I'm not too surprised. When Hillary decided to pop up and offer her unsolicited advice prior to the election, it was to suggest that Dems abandon their trans voters and throw us under the bus to appease "moderate Republican voters." And as we in the US are well aware of - the Clintons still have an insane amount of influence on the Dem party. And as we saw in 2016 and again in 2024 (Harris hired Hillary's advisors and strategists), the Clintons don't know how to win elections in the 21st Century. They're still stuck in the 1990s and what won them elections back then.
I teach my children expect nothing from people and you'll never be disappointed 👍 Maybe you will be comforted by the wisdom that unites folks inexplicably somehow Luke 14:26 "If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters-yes, even their own life-such a person cannot be my disciple. Matthew 10:34-35 34. Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35. For I have come to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in- law
That's because too many atheists - even in this comment section - hail him as their prophet. I simply silence such apologists by asking "Why should I defend such a quack philosopher? Do you need your strawmen that badly?"
@@marknieuweboer8099 We shouldn't judge anything he says based on opinions of him as a person. He makes good points on atheism, and they remain good points even if you then dislike him due to his other views.
I agree, though I think we can still call upon & reference Dawkins’ early work & contributions without idolizing him. It’s akin to recognizing there are good ideas in Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence & condemnation of slavery, despite his racist views & owning personal slaves. A person can still be a monster, and yet contribute rational, moral ideas. If we only consider the views of those we see as “perfectly moral & rational,” we won’t have any wisdom to draw upon. 💯 Just as in all things, a binary view of any subject often overlooks the nuance.
This issue will destroy and divide the Democrats. How many scientists, geneticists, evolutionists do you want to alienate? How many elections do you want to lose? This is where far left atheism will eat itself.
I'll be honest, I've avoided your content for a while when I shouldn't have. Turns out you've been taking down transphobia for a while, but all I ever saw was the word Skeptic. Bigotted atheists did that word so dirty back in the 2010s, I figured you'd be in the same camp as people like Dawkins. Couldn't have been more wrong.
I appreciate this comment, and I understand your hesitancy given how loaded “skeptic” is. That fact is, I purposely brand my work that way to attract the people who need to hear it. “Skeptic” is an aesthetic of contrarianism and intellectual superiority, which ironically attracts shockingly credulous men. I get these guys in the door with a sprinkle of their favored aesthetic and then, you know, confront them with actual facts and logic or whatever.
@@GeneticallyModifiedSkeptic I as a Muslim, too avoided have your videos because of your previous stuff, and how those bigoted atheists have both hijacked the word "skeptic" and steered the overall atheist movement towards racism & transphobia. I understand your feelings towards Muslims as whole, but we've been put up with both fundamentalists and bigots since 9/11, perhaps longer. We've experience attacks by either side, most notably the attacks in London by the far right many months, as well as the series of repressions by fundamentalists in my country. We do have progressive, feminist & LGBTQ Muslims on our end, just that there's too much distrust by both your community & LGBTQ people in general, who believe our existence is very antithetical or too contrarian for some weird reason. Really wish you've reach out to us more, instead of those hateful imams or pundits who want to isolate us from the rest of the modern world. We can't prove to you that we're the "good ones" but it would've helped if you get in touch with Muslim groups that do help women & LGBTQ people in general. As of now, seeing your disappointment with Dawkins is quite a hallelujah moment for a lot of us who have known that Dawkins, along with Harris, Coyne, Silverman & others have been a bunch of dicks for a long time, but can't quite say it due to their army of defensive fanboys.
Same. I was initially concerned about the word "skeptic", considering how misused that word often is, but the topic sounded interesting, and his face was friendly (not that that should be a deciding factor), so I clicked, haha. Glad I did.
It's was a humanist organization. Promoting human rights is the whole point. If you threaten human rights, of course, they're going to rescind an award...
I don't know if it is true, but at the time I saw an article on the Olympic boxing issue where the writer claimed that the lab cited by the Russian boxing body does not list chromosomal testing as a service it offers on its website. If true that really does blow the whole issue out of the water.
Who cares, this isn't a standard in any sport to mandate only XY, and it goes against the definitions of gender in countless countries all over the world. Including super conservative ones like Algeria and Iran. You can't have an Olympic body presumably aimed at bringing all people and cultures together proclaim that women as they have been culturally and legally defined all over the world for countless years suddenly stopped being women and became men
Yep! The lab did a very brief press release saying they don't do chromosomal or the type of hormone testing that would indicate if someone is trans. They are a lab specialized in sports doping. So the IBA was flat out lying. And changing from chromosome to hormones as "the test" didn't make them seem more reliable.
There is a full leaked report. The person is male. We'll see how the lawsuit goes, but my guess is it will never happen or will get dropped for obvious reasons.
Thank you for standing up against misinformation. As a member of the LGBTQ+ community, it means a lot when people refuse to boost the voices of those who have chosen to justify bigotry by cloaking it behind an uninformed or misinformed opinion masquerading as "rationality." It means a great deal more when folks speak out against it.
@ahampurushahasmi6040 I'm all too familiar with their arguments. (I'm queer but not trans. I consider trans people part of my community) I've been hearing them for WELL over 20 years. Do you have any idea how many of us have parents and loved ones who hold those positions? Anti LGBT rhetoric isn't benign. It is linked to upticks in unaliving rates and being unalived. I know myriad trans and queer folks (friends, family, peers and clients) who were kicked out of their homes, forced to detransition, had parents refuse to attend their weddings, endure verbal and/or physical abuse, etc. because their loved ones bought into those arguments. So yeah. Tell me again how we don't understand arguments against core elements of our identity.
@@ahampurushahasmi6040 "fairly characterize their opposition" Did you mean to say "oppression" instead of "opposition?" "Do you even know what your opponents think?" I have eyes and ears... homophobic and transphobic people are not quiet about their bigoted opinions.
@@ahampurushahasmi6040 Yes, we do. It's really not that difficult to do so. You have an instincitve "ick" because of your own unresolved issues and because of culture war propaganda, and then you go hunting for pseudoscience to tell you that you're cool and oppressed, and correct to punch down. The script does really not vary that much.
You can identify as female in gender but you’re still male in sex. Gametes define sex. The type of gamete you were born to potentially produce defines your sex.
@@muchanadziko6378He is actively debunking the very misinformation that makes their lives so hard/stops the situation from getting better. That's a pretty good way to help i'd say
I lost all respect for Dawkins when he started thinking religiously and dogmatically. Rejecting modern medical science because you want to cling to traditional IDEAS (not facts) of gender is really cringe.
It is factual to say that (what they perceive to be) teenage boys are statistically likely to be interested in things of that nature, things that could often be labelled as "fetishes". Many people will remember this fact from their teen years and acting all outraged about them bringing up these memories is typical online nonsense that deserves no time or credence. Regardless, this is kind of a motte and bailey by you, most people only accuse adults (and teens who put no effort into passing) of this.
Dawkins was extremely important during my de-conversion 25+ years ago and I owe him quite a bit for that. Nowadays, as an atheist in my early 60’s, he’s teaching me by example to not be complacent about my thinking or skepticism. BTW, even with the DSMIV, you’d have to have clinically significant distress or social/occupational impairment to have a diagnosis for gender dysphoria, even in the 1990’s.
So kinda old trans guy here. Came out at 45, five years ago. Best thing I ever did, even outside of gender issues. Making such a momentous change in my life forced me to relook at everything. My career, my politics, my relationships, my society, everything. Most things, including fundamental beliefs and opinions, didn't change dramatically, but it was all up for internal debate and scrutiny. I think the saddest thing about getting older is a learned inability to relearn. Obviously there are exceptions. Just because you've held an opinion a very long time doesn't make it better or more valid. The opposite. Imagine using that logic for anything else. "No new fangled medicine for me. I'll take the cocaine and cyanide tonic please!" You are 100% correct. Complacency, especially in thought and opinion, can be disastrous.
That part was disingenuous, I was disappointed. He talked about how he fulfilled the two least serious criteria (female playmates/female hobbies), when the highlighted text on screen clearly said you need to fulfill 4 out of 5 and the ones he does not fulfill sound really serious (desire/insistance of being the other sex; cross-dressing; cross-gender roles in make-believe plays).
@@CorwinFound I just hit 50, and “learned inability to relearn” hits so deep. To an extent it almost seems like a societal expectation, which is utter BS.
I am a social anthropologist who has studied the sociology of religion. Dawkins is an evolutionary biologist, and an excellent one I’m sure. However, when he gets into the more sociological realm, he often just doesn’t know what he’s talking about.
@ you see it in old professors. They often get intellectually stale. Especially if they are celebrated. They can fall into the trap of believing their own hype.
Seeing you stand outside that venue makes it clear that this isn't a decision you took lightly. Sincerely, thank you, as an LGBTQ+ person who is a huge fan of your content. Taking a stand on this and refusing to compromise your morals is why I love your channel. Thank you!
I'm not surprised you decided against working with him. It's very clear to me that you are someone who actually holds to their morals, money be damned. Taylor, as well. Keep doing the awesome work you do!
This is kinda why I'm a little skeptical of what Alex O'Connor (formerly Cosmic Skeptic) is up to nowadays. I understand that he's trying to platform and challenge all kinds of ideas, but its worrying when I hear things about "woke nonsense" go unchallenged, even when its to keep the conversation on track, I feel like it continues to fuel these flames.
Exactly my thoughts. He's not challenging ideas in any meaningful way, because you can't challenge the beliefs of bad faith actors who fundamentally don't care if their argument is correct.
This. He has some variety in the views of people he talks to but there is just so much platforming of views that are unambiguously harmful to queer folks like me without any real challenge. Seeing that type of content from him makes me feel less safe, I'm so grateful Drew has been such a vocal and principled advocate.
@@bibaolaitan5189 No one is ostracizing Alex, people just disagree with some of his choices as of late. If listening to people you disagree with is so important, you're doing a bad job actually listening to Drew and commenters here.
Thank you for standing up for human rights. Sad that "wearing what you want and controlling your own body" makes others feel angry. Equal rights and respect for all 🙏
@@authenticallysuperficial9874that’s not true, it makes people angry Just look at the people using the language “men in dresses” to evoke certain fictional Images of trans people They are big mad
I really admired dawkins for a long time, when my only exposure to him was reading the god delusion. i thought it was an extremely well-reasoned and well-written book. then i heard all his bullshit about being a "cultural christian" and an antisemite
When people have brain damage, I always give them a pass. Even minor damage in the right place can cause pretty big changes. That doesn't mean I give him my money, but it's wrong to bash him for the changes. He should be met with compassion, not hate. I am really disappointed that my community can't see this.
Totally, I think these last years must have been real shitty for him to change so much in that way. The guy was a serious scientist and an example of science divulgation. 😢
I have turned down working with certain people of power through the years because of their personal stances and beliefs. It ALWAYS feels amazing to do the right thing. I don’t work for and promote people that have terrible social paradigms
autogynephilia is such utter pseudoscience nonsense. I have a friend who told me that she delayed her transition by a few years because she got bamboozled by this concept and it took time to realise it didn't solve any of the issues she was facing.
I don't understand. You claiming that he encountered this idea, thought "huh, maybe I am just experiencing a fetish", later changed his mind... and therefore the phenomenon doesn't exist? Not only does the fact that your friend doesn't suffer it offer approximately ZERO evidence that it doesn't exist, your story makes it sound like your friend considered he might have that very condition.
@@authenticallysuperficial9874Most (Cis) Women experience Autogynephilic traits, why is it wrong if a Transgender Woman or a Man is Autogynephilic? Seems like double standards
@@authenticallysuperficial9874nice way to betray your true feelings by misusing the pronouns of someone you don't even know and asserting what you want to believe. How about we stop insisting we know more about someone than they know about themselves? Its called minding your own business
I used to think that Dawkins was just misunderstood because he has a style that comes across as dismissive and arrogant. And I appreciated his advocacy of secularism. But having read several of his books and listened to god knows how many hours of his debates, I just can’t get past a feeling that he’s not a particularly complex thinker. The God Delusion is nicely written but pretty light on insight. And now his just complete disregard of very simple facts to make cheap points has cemented for me that he is not a particularly deep thinker. Or maybe more specifically he could think deeply about one question but he doesn’t critique his own views and therefore is t a broad thinker.
He was right. There is no question that once young SJ warriors became attracted to the atheist movement it became entangled in all sorts of nonsense, just as we see on so many college campuses. Remember "Atheism+"?
@@chikkipop I watched the video too early after it came out I guess, so I had the braindead takes before the regular stuff rises to the top. Sorry to be unclear.
@@antediluvianatheist5262Seriously, this guy is literally in every single comment. It's amazing. But hey. He's boosting the video for the algorithm gods, so all good.
As an asexual trans woman I've tried in vain to get the "trans women are autogynephiles" crowd to explain how I'm only trans to indulge a sexual fetish - when I'm sexually aroused by pretty much nothing. I'm still waiting for an answer from them.
Sure... You might not fit into that "trans is fetish" role... But many do! Indeed... Many straight guys dabble with this! And I know someone... Who knows someone who's into this! When outsiders, like myself, take the odd pop shot at your community, it's not personal to YOU directly. And just like every other community on Earth, the trans community has it's fair share of BAD players! Again... NOT you!
Yep! Not so long ago trans folk had to pretend to be gay (pre-transition) in order to access gender affirming care. I have a trans masc friend who transitioned about twenty years ago. He had to state that he was into women and identified as a "lesbian." He even had a friend pretend to be his girlfriend. The dude is _super_ gay. Like zero interest on women. But back then gender and orientation were wrongly linked.
25:34 This is such a completey insane comment. The way all these _gender critical_ people insist that everything has been _"ideologically captured"_ while they write articles for large publications is so blatantly ironic I don't know how they fool anyone. _"All the abuse goes one way"_ too, just outright saying he doesn't believe that trans people experience any kind of abuse for their identity. He has an impressively warped view of the world.
I'm sorry you have to suffer through all these horrible comments. There are really a lot of anti-queer, anti-trans, misogynistic people in the athiest community. This saddens me greatly, as these are prime reasons to abandon religion. Thank you for all you and Taylor do! ❤ Keep up he real good work!!
*"I'm sorry you have to suffer through all these horrible comments."* I'm sure there must be something awful here, but I haven't waded through all the comments. Can you give any examples?
Atheism and Trans have nothing to do with each other. While they often may intersect across the map of life, the only common factor amongst atheist is they don't believe in god. Trans people can still believe in god.
We can't forget about Tay-tay! They're so cute together, and they seem like they have a really healthy relationship too. They support and love each other to the moon and back. I can see it when they look at each other and blush sometimes. I would love to have a relationship like that.
Totally off topic... How would an interview with Brittney Hartley go? Her perspective on religion decodes the mechanical nature of religion and how it lines up with human psychology, not her language but my sense of it, breaking down us as humans yearning for the need for ritual, story, community and purpose. It's very rational, flexible, without all the woohoo spirituality of crystals or blood rituals. Has anyone else heard about her?
@@GeneticallyModifiedSkepticHave you considered another set of religion-specific interviews with Alessa Grenfell (Mormonism) or EXJW PandaTower (Jehovah’s Witnesses)? I’ve been watching their videos for a while, and their recent collab with eachother made me want to see something like that on this channel!
That reminds me of my stay in Denmark as a teenager. The family that hosted me were Christian, and when they asked me if I was religious I replied "No, I don't believe in God." They were genuinely taken aback by my answer not because they expected me to be religious, but that I equated being religious with believing the religion to be factual. They explained to me that at least in their community, being "Christian" meant believing in the values and practicing the traditions together. They read all of it as metaphorical and to them it was about having something bringing their community together. They were stunned when I told them that Christian Americans genuinely believe all of it to be factual. That really stuck with me and made me rethink all of the traditions that I saw as illogical and even stupid. I've realized since that it doesn't have to be "real" to have value.
Huge fan of Britt Hartley! I’m exmormon, so her recent rise to greater prominence in atheist circles makes my heart happy. She represents us exmos so well. Also a fan of Alyssa Grenfell and ExJW Panda Tower. Collabs with them would also be welcome!
Much respect and kudos to you, GMS, for refusing to celebrity grift with Dawkins. Dawkins has disappointed me tremendously on the trans issue. It's hard to imagine such a noted scientist refusingl to inform himself on this issue. It's morally reprehensible.
This attitude, that being atheist you need to "inform yourself" correctly up to the standards of "the community" is so utter bullshit. The forever need to have everyone you think you have something important in common with, be of exactly the same opinions as yourself. Is it really rational to have men turn into women and vice versa? Is that the order or nature? You are morally corrupt if you think the only rational conclusions are your own. I am getting tired of the woke bs, simple as that, and I never believed in any gods. But I live in Europe. Here atheism is the norm, so naturally there is no "community" pressure on us non-believers. We are just "just people", free to harbour whatever political and moral stance we like, without being deemed reprehensible according to some idiotic standard for what is supposed to follow from "going one god further", as Dawkins said, when refuting belief in the supernatural.
Dawkins is treating trans issues like its a biological matter, when gender is a social construct and he is not an expert on psychology. Which is why he should never talk about it on his platform. He knows jack about psychology.
Gender is not a social construct. ‘Gender roles’, how girls and boys behave, is a social construct; apart from biological/physiological behaviour, of course. Gender is a synonym for sex as a category. Thus there are two genders, and immutable. There are no ‘non-binary’ genders. There are non-binary personalities, always have been. We don’t need to medicalise people because of any particular personality trait that doesn’t fit with gender behaviour stereotypes. There are ‘Trans people’ like there are ‘Anorexic people’. No one ‘affirms’ anorexia by agreeing that the person is fat. That would be insane. Yet for some reason we are to affirm to some poor deluded person that he or she is the opposite sex/gender to that which they are? Total madness. Dawkins doesn’t want to talk about gender madness for the same reason he doesn’t want to talk about fairies at the bottom of the garden. Quite right.
You can approach gender identity from a biological perspective, but not in the way that gender critical people do. For lack of a better term people are trans likely because it's an intersex condition of the brain. Reproductive organs form around 6 weeks, and the brain many months later. This means it's well within the realm of possibility for the body, and brain to develop down different paths. There have been several studies that provide evidence for this like BsTC, INAH3, study of identical twins, etc. We know from things like the John\Joan experiment, and how badly the results of surgically forcing a sex, and gender on intersex infants went that humans are not born blank slates with no gender identity. That is that biology ature plays a larger role than nurture. Gender may be a social construct, but how our brains are wired to see ourselves, and relate to our bodies is not. Even if gender were abolished, and everyone dressed, and acted the same trans people are still going to exist. Plus secondary sex characteristics are still going to exist I'm a trans woman, and I remember at 4, or 5 not feeling good at all about my reproductive parts. I did NOT want to go through a testosterone induced puberty at all. I really really didn't want my voice to change. So much so I tried several times to work up the courage to self-castrate. I also think my brain was not wired to work with adult levels of testosterone either. I remember when puberty started, and it put me In a really really bad depression for an entire year. I honestly didn't feel right again until I started HRT at 24. Psychology is useful in helping a person figure out what their feelings mean to them. I don't think psychology will ever figure out why a person is trans in the same way it couldn't figure out why people are gay either.
@@YoMamaSoLovely yeah it's always problem with biologists who think that they are experts in this field, however sexualities and gender are actually outside their area of expertise since they haven't studied it further.
Thank you for calling out Andrew Gold. When I watched his interview with Dawkins, I was disgusted. Their outright ignorance about trans folks was infuriating 😡 Knowing that he also hosts other types of bigots makes a lot of sense.
As someone recently grappling with their own gender, I can absolutely confirm that the societal pressures I'm feeling are against any form of transition.
@@ahampurushahasmi6040this isnt true, spaces that are supportive of quiet identities and people in those exploring and experimenting with that isn’t pressure, this is fine
@@ahampurushahasmi6040 How is one peer pressured to be trans? Like how does that work? Peer pressure is more than just proximity to someone who is trans, or being in a chat group with trans people. It would need to be people telling someone they are trans over their protest that they aren't. Then they would need to keep doing that. No they aren't being peer pressured into being trans. Someone having a trans friend, and this causes them to examine their own feelings about their gender identity is not peer pressure.
I loved Dawkins' early writings about evolution, but it's always a shame when a skeptic gets so down the rabbit-hole on a particular issue that they lose their ability to remain skeptical.
Dwakins never was a skeptic. Skepticism requires questioning your own views, something Dawkins never did. He was just a very good biologist who incorrectly concluded that he was qualified for non-biological topics too.
@@DamnDealDone I was skeptical of trans people at first too. Then I realised that trans people are people too and everything sorta just clicked. Basically all anti-trans rhetoric is based on dehumanisation and strawmans, similarly to most anti-immigration arguments (and no I'm not just saying that, agenda 47 literally calls immigrants "illegal aliens" to make people forget they're people with hopes and dreams and families)
Hello! I'm trans, with no sort of platform to fight against misinformation. I am honestly proud of you for making the choice to stand up for what you believe in and help us in the process. We appreciate you
as a trans person, thank you for continuously speaking out for us. it can feel very lonely in this wave of anti-trans hate but it's so good to see that there are still people who genuinely care and will put their principles first even when it means they have to let opportunities pass them by
Over the course of the last 12 years i have observed my own perspectives and biases shift from a more religious right wing to an atheist left wing and the major difference in those 12 years was me moving out of my parents house and being independent with my wife. This allowed me to see things more clearly and have conversations i cannot have with my family. Although I am now very accepting and supportive of LGBTQIA+ people and culture there are still some things from my old thinking that are hard for me to detach from but i do recognize the harm such opinions lead to so i just don't voice them. The more videos i watch on the subjects with loads of research and science to back it up, the more those old ideas and positions peal off the wall. It's an ongoing process but i have channels like this one, The Friendly Atheist, and Rationality Rules to thank for helping me evolve my position and opinions.
Not knowing is one thing, but Dawkins' refusal to handle evidence against his beliefs and lack of intellectual curiosity around the issue while doubling down shows him to nowadays just be a bigot and no longer much of a scientist or critical thinker.
Transphobia is as revolting as racism, sexism, and all the other types of bigotry that humanity suffers from. Anyone trying to claim otherwise is simply a disgrace. Thank you for speaking out on this topic!
It’s vanishing hard to find anyone with a platform on the internet with as much integrity and good will as you. Thank you for being so deliberate and persistent in doing right by people
Trans guy here. I 100% agree with your comment. What just blows my mind is that my very _existence_ is a political statement and considered an election changing topic. It can be very surreal. I'll be listening to something like this and engaging in my mind logically and politically. And then suddenly I hear something really vicious and think, "Holy crap. They are talking about _me!?!"_ It can be very weird.
You're about 10 years too late. Schism began long ago. The rightwing atheism quirtly merged with other manosphere/crypto/reich winger spheres. Where we are, more of a progressive, anti-superstitious, but friendly to average people both atheist and believers. People like Kristi Burke, Darante LaMar, Paulogia and on the academic scholarly side, Derek Lambert, etc. And of course a lot of the OG atheist channels and groups still fairly progressive like Dilahunty and friends.
It is fitting that the man, who coined the very word "Meme" in the Selfish Gene, has lived to become one himself. He is now a great counter example for rational thinkers. He should know that applying simple-minded "Litmus Tests" is not a great way to deal with many issues. Ironically, simple-minded thinking is also what allows most people to maintain their superstitious beliefs in the face of contradictions.
This speaks volumes about not only your character as a person, but to your character as voice for the rest of us. It's comforting to know that you're resistant to being bought. Knowing that you would receive a fairly significant gain from siding with and platforming Dawkins, and then turning it down shows us through action just how genuine you are. I'm proud of you, Drew. I say that with all sincerity and honest feeling. Many of us, if put in the same circumstances, wouldn't have been quite so resilient to the temptation. I know if it was me, and had thought that it would provide a substantially better life for my family, I can't for sure say that I would've turned it down. I greatly admire your honesty and your commitment to our cause. You're doing good work here. Thank you.
I never knew his views but somehow I never doubted him. If there's one thing I can be optimistic about, is that atheist community really seems to be healing, at least a part of it. I used to be a ultra logical edgelord myself and it's kinda comforting that I didn't grow into a void, but it seems a lot of us took the same path independently from one another
It explains the really deep trans content Drew has done in the last few months. As a part of the community I loved it and would describe it as some of the best evidence based trans content on RUclips, among both cis AND trans creators. But I'll admit that I wondered what provoked it. Now we know the answer. Drew preemptively created the justification and explanation for this decision, without letting out exactly why. It meant he could address the issues without muddying the water with debate specifically about Dawkins. Goddess I love Drew! Smart, empathetic, principled, and tactful.
@@NJ-wb1czOver the last few months Drew has done some really deep dives into trans content. Coming from a terminally online trans guy, trust me when I tell you it's among the best trans content on RUclips - from either trans or cis creators. I _cannot_ recommend those videos highly enough. He brings receipts.
20:00 Bringing up the DSM4 actually illustrates something very interesting in a non-direct way. Conservatives often bring up a study (I don't remember off the top of my head) that talks about how gender non-conforming children (Interpreted is trans kids) end up aligning with their given sex as they grow older, but now I'm wondering if those kids were studied under what the now very flawed DSM4 considered gender non-conforming, and not what is now considered non-conforming in the DSM5.
As a whole, studies before the DSM-V found that indeed kids with GID did ends up not being trans. Indeed, basically every study they cite use the DSM-IV. That said it's still a really interesting subject and we can learn a lot from that. One study often used is Steenma 2011, DOI: 10.1177/1359104510378303, that looked into factors predicting persistance and desistance. Conservatives generally cite the persistence rate (which is just not what this study was looking at) but it was actually a qualitative study. One really important aspect found is that while non-trans kids wanted to be the other sex, trans kids say they are the other sex. That's a really important distinction. So even before the DSM-V, researchers still found way to go around the shortcomings.
Yes, that's where the 80% to 90% desistence myth comes from. They diagnosed cisgender kids who were gender non-conforming as having gender identity disorder. That's really not helpful if you are wanting to know the desistence rate for transgender kids. The DSM-5 requires a kid to outright say I feel like a different gender than what I was assigned at birth to get a diagnosis of gender dysphoria as gender identity disorder is no longer used. Using the criteria of the DSM-5 Dr. Kristina Olson published a 5 year follow up study in 2022 of trans kids. It had a desistence rate of 2.5%. The Netherlands also released a 5 year follow up study to see how many trans kids had stopped their HRT. They found 2% had stopped, but noted that detransition was not the only possible reason for stopping their HRT.
DSM is worthless anyway, it's just a political tool (as psychological diagnosis always has been) that still hasn't bothered differentiating between the different neurodivergences it just buckets under "autism". Good studies on things like this need to be looked at in terms of specific behaviours and traits, rather than relying on some external definition. "People defined as gender non-conforming according to DSM-n mostly aren't trans" is a title I would trust a lot less than "people who exhibit gender-exploratory or gender-questioning behaviour according to measures we took mostly aren't trans".
Well, AO'C doesn't have a problem with being on a platform with Dawkins, Peterson or other right wingers. But afaict he doesn't buy into their bullshit.
@@andreasvox8068 yeah i don’t think he buys into it either but i’m just saying seems like Drew has a problem with him platforming those people in the first place.
@@andreasvox8068 I don't remember seeing Alex ever actually confront Dawkins on his bigotry. I remember him asking Dawkins about the subject, but not directly calling him out on it, but I could be wrong about that
@@andreasvox8068 What is bullshit, like exactly, about being skeptical of the idea that men can become women, or the redefinition of gender to be completely personal…
Drew, I have gotten so much BS about my 9 year old son, playing with girls, having mainly friends that are girls, having long hair, being sensitive... I know it was a blip in this video but when you said you still have mainly female friends and you played house as a child... I mean I guess when they don't take his ADHD diagnosis in to consideration or see him rage out and throw an Xbox controller... Maybe he seems not as boyish. Idk I think it adds to his insecurities but kids should be allowed to be kids as long as possible. He was waiting for me in the office at school and some kid told him "God doesn't want boys to have long hair". He knows I'm atheist but he really wants to believe in God, so I let him. So I said "then why does he let a boys hair grow so long?" Still gotta have a lil critical thinking.
You're very strong to make these kinds of decisions. I love your content, your public persona, your tone, your honesty, and confident vulnerability. I'm not gonna lie, your content feels much less "engaging" than most skeptics and atheists: I'm never fuming, or panicking, after I watch your videos. I'm just glad I learned something new. But then again, I'm following you for these exact reasons, opposite to those you say you don't like Dawkins: you're not trying to make me angry, scare me, or sell me bullshit you're not qualified to talk about. I hope you keep on spreading these good values.
I gave up on Dawkins decades ago. His ego, along for his disdain for women, was on full display then. Hitchens had a genuine curiosity about him. Thanks Drew, for your stance for integrity. I appreciate it more than I can explain. Also a shout out to Hemant, whose channel I am also pleased to follow.
I have not finished watching the video, but he has also advocated for 'population management' ( worried about phrasing), especially impacting disabled people. 🙄
His comments on such topics are repulsive. Abortion should be a choice left to the person carrying the pregnancy, not used as an effort to control what sort of people join the population. His measures of assigning value to individuals are anti-human.
As a biotechnologist and a trans person, I want to thank you for making content like this and sticking up for our community, despite the backlash you might find.
@@antediluvianatheist5262Flawed logic as not all actions define smth. Nazis invaded other countries, but not everyone who invades countries is a nazi. You need to show that he does things that are unique to far-right christians to call him one.
A lot of the end of this seems somewhat targeted towards Alex O’Connor - a similar RUclips atheist whose career has really taken off and who has participated at Richard Dawkins’ tour. Was that the intention here?
Go to ground.news/skeptic to get all sides of every story. Subscribe through my link to save 50% off unlimited access.
seriously man you need to look into sumerian texts and watch paul wallis your authiest bias is blinding you on the topics around graham hancock ie the ancient past and people like paul wallis on religous texts like God or religious theology i have to say you are wrong on this matter however you have the right to your opinion even if you have not looked into the topic because it just sounds crazy to you so clearly it is not worth your effort. honestly i am not suprised because far to many claim to know the truth but are ignorant when it comes to these topics as to what the texts and evidence says or shows and the great thing about science is it is open to being proven wrong and changeing to the facts to the current understanding. no one has all the information on any topic and that is why differences of opinion's are debated untill we can agree on the topic and always be open to new evidance that may be of conflict to the current understanding.( also the dibble debunking hancock was proven incorrect dibble what he said was wrong ) < Edit
also the joe rogan interview with dibble and hancock what dibble said was proven incorrect dibble was lieing so again you was wrong and outdated on the so called debunking.
@@cwchadwynn might be time to take your meds
@@cwchadwynn I can see you’re passionate about these topics, but your approach isn’t helping your case. Posting your reply in the wrong context makes it harder for others to take you seriously. On top of that, misusing terms like "authiest" and presenting disorganized arguments undermines your credibility. If you want your views considered, focus on being well-researched, balanced, and context-appropriate-how you communicate matters as much as what you say.
@@AJenbo i apreciate your reply and i will agree that my comment might come across as attacking and i willsay my communicateing can be hard as i do sruggle with trying to comunicate a point clearly however i have repeatadly ask for the youtuber to look at what paul has stated on his videos and he does a much better job at comunicateing his ideas and the topic in general is ignored or rejected simply on the bases that what is being said ie aliens, is seen some what as coo coo all i am trying to say is that i have looked into this and i find it very convincing and its goes against both authiest and monothaistic ideas about God and many do not take it with any seriouseness so why would i waste my time looking into it is the stance many take i just thought that this channel being about religion would have found my findings at least of some intrest please forgive me if i came across as an attack it is not my intension i also have a public playlist of the channels and videos of intrest Non of my work so there is no monitary intrest in it for me and again thank you for your reply
As an Egyptian, when yall got to the ancient aliens guy I let out an audible groan that contained all the frustration of my ancestors
I feel you. The whole discourse is unbelievably racist.
It's shocking how wide spread these miss conceptions have become. At Christmas dinner a family member told me that they where under the impression that it had been proven to be impossible for humans to build the pyramids after he watched the guys "documentary".
misses conceptions
ملحدة مصرية ؟ تحياتي من الجزائر
I'd say he'd be right. It would be too hard to build it the way they did. Before the invention of the wheel. Stones hand cut. Stones then lifted not via crane and lifting points but not really sure how they did it especially if slings were used because it's another lift to get slings out once positioned.
If we could use our technology yeah it would be easier but if you want it exactly the same finished product yeah its tough to not possible. Ive seen many construction projects all sizes. Other experienced builders would say the same. Layman wouldn't see it until we actually try to do it.... Oh I get you now... Etc etc
Thank you for this thoughtful video, my friend. A principle isn't a principle until it costs you, and you've always been among the most principled people I've had the fortune of knowing.
It's been surreal to watch not just Richard Dawkins, but so many figures in the sceptical, free-thinking realm so often abandon their own principles of evidence-based reasoning when it comes to especially trans topics. The Imane Khelif case is particularly striking-a simple fact-check would have revealed the truth, yet even scholars like Dawkins failed to perform even this basic level of research.
Having once been influenced by anti-trans propaganda myself, I understand the allure of seemingly convincing narratives. However, the true spirit of scepticism demands we remain open to correction and willing to revise our views in light of the evidence. Dawkins' stubborn persistence in the face of contrary evidence isn't just disappointing-it's a betrayal of the scientific method he spent decades defending.
Perhaps the most painful irony is that Dawkins, who taught so many of us to question dogma and follow evidence wherever it leads, has become an example of what happens when we let our preconceptions overcome our commitment to truth. For me, at least, his legacy now carries a final, unintended lesson: intellectual humility must be a lifelong practice.
The deliberate habit of explicitly asking oneself, "Could I be wrong about this?" must be a lifelong practice for every honest person.
you two just traded a religion for another, sad
@@pietrobassani6956 Define religion. If you were honest about it, you'd find the definition doesn't say what you think it says.
Thanks, Steve. As Hemant said in the full version of our conversation, many of us, including Hemant and I, have not always “been there” when it comes to opposing bigotry and misinformation disguised as warranted skepticism. We’ve bought into it too at times, and we’ve got to be thankful that people took the time to help us do better. With Dawkins, I don’t hold much hope he’ll change his mind or approach. But for those in his audience, and even for those who shared the stage with him on his tour, there’s still time to reflect and change.
@@pietrobassani6956what religion did they turn to exactly. I don't think the pursuit of evidence based truth is religious in any fashion. The topic of trans people doesn't have any worship or tenants
Detransitioned person here. I was on hrt for 3 years and lived as a woman for 7. I don't regret it at all, I'm happy I was able to be myself and discover what I really wanted. Exploring identity shouldn't be a bad thing.
Dawkins would agree with you.
What does "living as a woman" mean?
@@madelinecox4101it just means you present as a woman full time
@Spacewith2224 What is a woman? How do you present as one?
@@madelinecox4101 What is a woman? A miserable pile of secrets! But enough talk--have at you!
Marginalized people who have been paying attention to Dawkins for years aren't really surprised by this pivot to bigotry. He's always had weird attitudes towards women, for example. Thanks for putting this critique together Drew.
First red flag for me was his response to the elevator unsolicited advances situation to Skepchick many years back.
Elevatorgate was the big canary in that coal mine, I'd say.
Marginalized lolll.
I first read one if his books when I left the cult grew up in about 15 years ago. I had his hooks hyped up and when I read them I did not get good vibes and didn't see what the fuss was about. I'm not surprised with this transphobia in the least.
"pivot to bigotry"
When a biologist dares to maintain there's differences between males and females. Unbelievable.
Dawkins let his personal biases take over facts, he figures that he is smart enough and could stop learning 40 years ago, its upsetting to watch.
Human nature.
It is. His book the selfish Gene And the god delusion is what helped me find my way to secularism.
Since this all happened after his stroke, I give him a pass. I don't agree with him, but I think simply ignoring him is the best thing to do. Be sad that his brain has changed. Any disability is sad. But don't assume that this is a choice.
Can you give an example of his bias?
I don’t mean to denigrate anyone who is a fan of Dawkins but many of the criticisms he receives today were laid out in the past as well. He has always put a narrative of how he understood the world to be above actual science. Atheism, or more precisely, anti-theocracy, was just his calling card. It also stands out more because he feels so inclined to speak outside of his expertise today.
As one of the trans people in your audience--thank you. Thank you so much for taking this stance. Your willingness to turn down the potential financial and social benefits from talking to Dawkins is not an easy decision, yet you stuck to your principles. That's the sign of a true trans ally--thank you, thank you, thank you! Thank you for fighting with us!
I too wish to thank you! 😘
You are a true ally with genuine integrity.
Im sorry for asking this but i genuinely want to know what you mean by trans. Is it transexual, transgender or smth else?
Trans is short for transgender. The term transexual is mostly outdated, usually only used by older people. @Anon63436
Dawkins is still correct
@@dodumichalcevski least obvious ragebait:
As a Russian, whenever you see/hear "ГазПром" (GazProm or GasProm, and yes, Drew pronounced it correctly), you can be almost sure there's something shady going on.
As an italian, unfortunately, I can attest that russian propaganda has infiltrated Europe succesfully and is really strong in the media.
Energy companies like Gazprom or ENI finance political pundits to spread anti west and anti liberal democracy sentiments
jup, it definitely starts to stink
The only thing that concerns me is that "Russian" is starting to be seen again as synonymous with shady, manipulative, etc. "It's the Russians" is starting to have a stank on it when what people (I hope) mean is "Russian political operatives." Russian folk be folk. Just like every folk. And Russian government and oligarchs are really only different from government and oligarchs around the world because they have less checks on power.
IIRC Gazprom is a major political player in Russia and apparently has it's own PMC if I'm not mistaken.
@@CorwinFound Between the state and Russian scammers and botnets it's probably just sensible to treat ones you're not meeting in person with a great deal of suspicion.
Great to see people sticking to their principles and doing the right thing ❤️ Dawkins is now a classic example of the thing he's spent most of his life opposing
Exactly. I think that’s the danger of the aesthetic of contrarianism and intellectual superiority that’s so popular - it motivates a person not to scrutinize their opinions before shouting them out, and primes them to see criticism as confirmation of their views. Unfortunately, it’s not terribly surprising to see Dawkins turn out this way given his long time embodiment of this aesthetic.
Thanks for the work you do, by the way!
"Why does all the bullying go one way?"
I don't think Dawkins realises the backlash that trans people face. I lost many subscribers when I came out as trans, I constantly get anti trans comments. I have even been brigaded once by hundreds transphobes on Twitter.
To say that only transphobes or the gender critical crowd get bullied is incredibly ignorant.
You rock. I catch your videos every now & again.
@@Planarwalk yeah, misrepresenting criticism as bullying is a common canard for bigots, transphobes definitely included.
Sadly, this is the MO of these people. Victimize others and claim victimhood.
Its like how slave owners would talk about the 'white mans burden' of having to take care of people of color because they cant do it themselves. These people commit atrocities and try to pursuade themselves and others that they are good.
@@Planarwalk It seriously shows a huge disconnect from reality. The things people say to trans people are insanely cruel, and constant. Sorry you have to experience that.
Planarwalk?
I think he knows who you are. 😏
hey its mr beat
Holy crap, it’s Mr. Breast! If you keep up the compliments then it’s ok if you don’t give me money
@@GeneticallyModifiedSkepticMr Breast 😂
@@GeneticallyModifiedSkepticMr.Breast? lol
Bro called him Mr. Breast
He was an intellectual hero of mine for decades. We corresponded as friends. I’m mentioned in one of his books. I knew he could be stubborn on some issues, but I have changed his mind at least once. But I just couldn’t get past his attitudes to trans rights. I feel hugely disappointed and I just can’t be associated with him, no matter how indirectly. He’s doing real harm. I’m writing a science book. I could probably have got support for it from him. I don’t want it.
You are one of the people I now mention as true promoters of reason. It’s very important to be able to point out public atheists who aren’t promoting bigoted information.
You're a real one for all that and it's hugely appreciated, just wanted you to know.
You should show him compassion instead. You just never know how brain damage will effect someone, and you can date these changes to that. Should you support or agree with him? No, but to be "hugely disappointed" is wrong. Would you be hugely disappointed in him if it was his spine, and he couldn't walk? It still amazes me how even intelligent people can't understand that having a stroke and then a personality change are related. It's also ugly.
There are only two biological sexes, males and females, who make sperm and eggs. There is no such things as bigoted facts.
*"I just couldn’t get past his attitudes to trans rights."* Could you provide an example of his attitude that so troubled you?
@@littlebitofhope1489 I don't care why someone has a terrible, demonstrably wrong opinion. It doesn't change how terrible and demonstrably wrong the opinion is, or how it hurts people.
I attended a humanism convention about 10 years ago where Dawkins was the main speaker on a panel. The panel discussion was fantastic with all panelists providing thought-provoking answers, except every time the one female panelist would contribute, Dawkins would cut her off before she could finish and change the topic. By the end of the panel it was pretty clear that Dawkins is just a massive sexist asshole. I was really interested in her answers and felt pretty bad for her. I didn't really have the words to verbalize my frustration with his actions then as I do now, and none of the other panelists said anything, I am assuming because he was the star guest and everybody wanted to hear him talk.
This is it man, Andrew is official one of my fav atheist youtubers ever. Like I did NOT think he could get any better than defending us trans people but now he released this. I mean, Dawkins is highly respected as a defender for evolution and atheism, but barely anybody tries to acknowledge the shitty opinions he has formed over the years. It really hurt me as a trans person. I'm so glaad Drew is saying something about this.
Much love to him and this channel and the wonderful people who continue to support and watch him ♡
Edit: typo correction :p
I really appreciate this! 🩷🤍💙
Although, I feel refusing to parrot Russian disinformation or promote grifters is really the bare minimum for a “skeptic” type guy. Fortunately, there are many more atheist creators who also defend trans people and would refuse Dawkins if given the opportunity.
@GeneticallyModifiedSkeptic you're always doing an amazin work and cranking out dope ass videos, both you and Taylor, I love both of you, thank you. And yes it does feel good to know there are trans supportive atheists out there, restores my faith in humanity :3
So, could you provide an example of just what Dawkins has said that requires a defense from it? What are the opinions he has formed, and can you show where he says what his offensive opinions are?
@chikkipop they're clearly stated and evidenced in the video. You should watch it.
@@_aconite_cj_ Richard Dawkins is not a threat to you. Never was. Maybe you’re a threat to yourself if you don’t constantly have your affirmation, but that’s ultimately nobody’s problem but yours.
Dawkins is the cautionary tale that leads me to be careful that my distaste for religion in general isn't twisted to the benefit of one particular religion.
I used to be a "militant atheist" type and I also see this as a cautionary tale, that not everyone who isn't religious is automatically rational, and that not siding with traditional religion doesn't make you wiser necessarily. It's not "religion poisons everything" but that people are corruptible. By more than just religion. People also need to be resilient against, and aware of, how the media they consume influences them.
Yup. I used to be very anti religion.
right up until i saw the use of it in fighting against the empire.
Does not magically make god real, but it does serve a purpose.
Don't be too cautionary Dawkins is probably an introvert who painted a huge target on his back and the religious usually only have world class manipulation in their toolbox. Shrinking down is also what they want 100%
I have met some virtuous and wise religious people. Their religion is stupid. They were not. It is always valuable to see others as people, capable of both good and evil, regardless of beliefs or politics.
@@naomistarlight6178 yeah religion is one of many factors that can both negatively or positively influence someone's reasoning
I'm 1000% more excited of you talking to The Friendly Atheist than to Dawkins, hands down.
The only disappointment is in my likely vain hope that Drew debating Dawkins on this issue would maybe reach people on the fence. The people who believe Dawkins because he is/was a respected scientist and assume he must be right, but haven't seen the evidence.
But in the end, it likely wouldn't have worked and Drew has the opportunity to _prove_ he isn't a grifter or panderer. He literally gave up a chance of a lifetime because of his principles. Humans don't get a lot better than that.
F that I wanna hear Dawkins
@@swiitchy511want to hear Dawkins make shit up? Or just ape the evangelical position, because it’s easy to find both at this point. His bigotry has overtaken his skepticism.
@daemonsdiablo tell me one bigoted thing Dr. Dawkins has said?
@ did you not watch the video you’re commenting on? That’s literally what a large chunk of it is about.
Multiple examples are given.
"He doesn't get to be done with this conversation"
YES, let's hold people responsible for their actions, especially celebs who push dangerous misinformation and hate!
Thank you Drew, for sticking with your morals. I also appreciate you standing up for the LBGTQ+ community.
LBGTQ+ is a sham. I love how people can yell "trust the science" on one issue but openly and proudly disregard science on another issue. The gall to think that one of the worlds most prolific educator about genes and sexual reproduction doesn't know how many genders there are! If there actually would be a mechanism in the human biology to transform sex to the opposite, Dawkins would be among the many writing about it. Or maybe there is a conspiracy in the sciences to hide that we are actually hermaphrodites? Lefties... thinking that a desire for social acceptance changes what's going on under the hood... magical thinking... very similar to religious thinking.
Not to mention this is... apocalyptic to people who think we basically worship Dawkins. The idea that we *may* actively dislike someone as massive as him to them is basically a mythical creature to many religious people, not all, but many.
@@amathystunicorn I’m atheist and don’t support Transgenderism
He is part of the community. Duuuuhh
Better to talk to him and say your piece than to create a faction
The tone in her voice is so shaky.
"how dare you find women attractive and claim to be a woman yourself" she accuses...
What... you mean Gay?
What YOU are?
Honestly, ever wanna show a friend what cognitive dissonance looks like, or sounds like? That clip is a perfect example. She's shaking from the subconscious shock of basically saying about someone else what people have said about her, her whole life.
@@CausticMedeimIt'd be funny if it weren't so profoundly sad.
I love how TERFs have attached themselves the Blanchard, who has amazing views like "men cant be bisexual" and "women dont have sexuality", and for Dawkins who loves science, to see a guy whose studies have been thoroughly slammed for lack of falsifiability, selector bias and just straight up weird conclusions (3 year old boys can be autogynephiles or homosexual transsexuals for expressing feminine behaviour, but since we cant actually test their arousal patterns, we can just wing it and say the "cute" ones are hsts, literally what Bailey and Blanchard have argued.. phrenology on little boys to see if theyll be dolls(
Trans activists (aka cis and non-binary fake Leftists) are the biggest threat to the LGBT community in the past 50 years, y'all need to stfu before you get more of us ki11ed, you do nothing but create hate for us 💯
As a middle aged gay woman, I have been approached by a trans woman exactly ONCE. And in totally normal non-aggressive way. WHO are these anti-trans lesbians who spread this weird story that trans women are men POSING as women to hit on lesbians??? Like that's a THING? It is SO strange. I never heard ANYONE talk about it until this whole anti-trans movement started spreading their garbage. It's super easy to fact check these claims too and see that this is a non-issue. Move on to actual problems.
"Nothing about us, without us." This is something that has often been said in the trans community. For the last ten years there's been a lot about us without us. And not just without us but without experts on the subject matter, without medical experts, without expert input. The community is silenced and so are researchers who would speak in our defence. Why? Because we are all "biased".
I want to thank you Drew and Hemant for being "biased" in our favour. For amplifying our voices and giving our perspectives a platform. Thank you. Thank you for fighting against the rising tide of hatred.
Sincerely,
An exhausted trans woman.
I think "Nothing about us, without us," originates from the disability community, but it's a good motto for basically any issue related to bodily autonomy and medical freedom.
Assuming your name refers to Vampire: the Masquerade...
Transphobes: "you're either a man or a woman!"
Tzimisce: "Last week I had boobs, yesterday a flat and hairy chest... Do I want boobs today?"
Gangrel: " I'm so angry, I'm becoming interspecies!"
@@mswen1983 I'd extend it to literally any thing. Getting discussed behind your back is disturbing, especially if it's in regards something that can deeply affect you and your future.
@@mswen1983 Yeah exactly.
Although this is basically true for every minority.
The concept of "stories about black/queer people vs stories BY black/queer people" is the same idea but specifically for media representation.
Well there aren't very many of you, which makes that difficult. Transphobic grifters blew the whole thing way out of proportion and now there are significantly more people talking about trans people than there are trans people to talk about trans people with.
And yes, you kind of are biased, because it's very difficult to decouple trans rights from the science of trans. You're inherently going into it knowing that the answer has to be something that proves that being trans has some immutable natural cause because anything else would be used as grounds for transphobia.
In Gandalf's voice: "Tell me, friend, when did Dawkins The Wise abandon reason for madness?"
Tell me, Richard, where did the evil trans person touch you?
Wasn't that book written by a Christian? You know the group that atheists hate and call stupid? The same Christians responsible for the majority of scientific advances in the western world.
😂 Exactly
Woman here. Not a single trans woman has ever harmed or threatened me, something I can’t say about cis conservative men.
Anecdotal evidence is the worst kind of evidence. Any skeptic worth a damn knows that.
@@Ashakat42well you will be happy to know not just anecdotal evidence supports this :)
It's the cis men just claiming to be women thanks to self ID that you have to worry about. I do wonder if you'd actually report it considering you'd be deemed transphobic if it ever did happen and you accused a trans woman of SA you. The problem isn't trans women, it's the cis men who will abuse the self ID policies.
@@Ashakat42 so... what's your real problem?
@@Ashakat42sharpen up on your word definitions. This person is speaking of personal experience not anecdotally. No claim was made beyond experience.
19:10 wild, where the hell are these parents who hate the idea of a gay child but would love a trans one, like make it make sense... trans does not mean "perfect conforming to the expectations, even ridiculous conservative ones, of the target gender" ffs...
So this maybe does happen... but not in the US, most of Europe or other western/Judeo-Christian areas to my knowledge. In the middle East however, there is less transphobia than homophobia, at least legally. Although being trans is stigmatized, being gay can result in the death penalty. About a decade ago there were a lot of stories about gay people in the middle East being forced to transition.
I honestly can't confirm it one way or the other. But certainly the _story_ exists that in some places gay and lesbian people are encouraged/forced to transition. And TERFs and transphobes of all types have latched onto the idea.
Iran is a regional haven for trans affirming care so it does happen. Iran isn’t a great place to be trans, but it’s far better than being gay in Iran
@@CorwinFound Literally only from Iran, and life for trans women there still fucking blows. You don't get the benefits of being able to live on the dl, either, and so Irani trans women live most often in abject poverty.
Trans men do relatively well and do their part to hate trans women.
The rest throw us all in the pit regardless.
Adding to Corwin, in some Asian countries it is easier for families to accept a trans person in their "new societal role" than to accept a homossexual person that won't fit the role of their gender.
My dad has said he would find it easier to accept me if I was gay, rather than trans.
Jokes on him - transitioning has only made me more gay lol
Dawkins is proof that Athiesm doesn't magically make one not conservative politically. A politically left leaning Athiest has a lot more in common with liberal/left leaning theologians like John Shelby Spong than they do with Dawkins.
Absolutely. I can disagree with religious people on religion, but am happy to work with them on social issues.
The church up the road from me is openly accepting of trans people, and support abortion rights. I have more in common with them than with Dawkins and these right wing atheists.
Maybe it's because my identity is not built about atheism.
I smelled this stench ye olde new atheists days. It's why I've always said I'm progressive 1st, vegan-friendly 2nd and atheist 99th.
No better way to say that leftism is a theology
@@edgarsliepins1866 No, it's not.
@@antediluvianatheist5262 of course it is. Believers derive meaning out of it's tenants of equality, inclusion, social justice etc. Believers ostracize detractors, chant whatever the preacher at the front tells them to chant, try to form laws to force others to adapt their beliefs and adhere to their rules. The same old basic theology stuff that's been part of human history since the begging.
I’m a Christian, but I’m honestly not surprised. Dawkins has always been more concerned with being the smartest in the room and feeling like he’s right, than actually searching for reality and learning from it. He’s a low rate rationalist philosopher but he pretends to be empirical. Him being Transphobic because he’s uncomfortable with societal change and pretending it’s out of empirical interests is very on brand.
Since his attack on Rebecca Watson just casually mentioning an uncomfortable experience at atheist conference, I've never liked Dawkins.
Same. I’ve had the chance to meet him several times over the years and I’ve never wanted to. He’s such a golden calf for the atheist world.
Yeah, "Elevatorgate" definitely caused me to view him in a different light and he's just been kind of disappointing this last decade.
@xaneslater same. And Rebecca’s content continues to be 🧑🍳 😘
And he did this _before_ the medical condition people are using to excuse him.
Yeah, I agree, and I am not even the biggest fan of Rebecca; less of a fan of Dawkins, though, as I think she does fantastic work. I just find her to be too much of a biological essentialist. This is something I can disagree with her on, but unlike Dawkins, I don't think she is outright spreading disinformation.
I don't know why, but I'm always surprised by the undercurrent of frothing transphobia within the online atheist community.
Can't we all just make fun of theism and also be compassionate about lgbtq people?
It's not just about dunking on tired superstitions for a lot of these people. It's about being superior. Which is, quite frankly, the exact thing that religions do.
@@claytonreeves150Right? I thought we didn't like theism because it promoted dogmatic thinking? But a lot of the same people who discard religion over misogyny or homophobia seem like they're all in on dehumanizing/attacking trans people.
Could it be because in the same way atheist mock the idea of a grandfather god creating the whole world just to have a relation with you as an illusion and a whishfull way of thinking, they tend to mock the idea that someone is what they think they, whatever it may be? "I think therefor I am" with another meaning. We fought to have the right to mock religious people's beliefs but now we can't mock the belief that somebody that feels they are a woman, are a woman although they are a biological male. I'm not asking you to agree on my stance on the trans debate, but can you agree that there is a problem when making fun of a belief is not allowed anymore?
I'm not aware of an "undercurrent of frothing transphobia within the online atheist community." I know it's out there, but it doesn't seem like a dominant trend to me.
What does one have to do with the other?
the ground news ad transitions are genuinely hilariously smooth at this point
Hahah thank you. Tbh it’s really easy bc there’s nearly always something in the news that’s relevant to what I’m talking about.
@@GeneticallyModifiedSkepticIt's a testament to you (and team?) choosing sponsors that fit your channel. Like yeah, you could get some of that sweet, sweet Raid money. But imagine the transition!?! And so far, so good, no horrible exposé on how problematic Ground News is.
@@GeneticallyModifiedSkeptic It's like the modern version of the ads hosts used to do on live TV in the 1950s. I'll take Ground News over Lucky Strike cigarettes any time!
@@CorwinFound yeah cause unlike something like Honey it's very clear they make money from the fact that it's a subscription service
Hearing him talk about trans people was a gut punch. I was a big fan of him years ago, and hearing him spreading hateful nonsense about me was surreal.
Honestly, this whole situation really helped me resolve my subconscious antitheism(being actively against the concept of religion). Like, I still don’t believe in religion, and think that any fair analysis of the factual claims made in religion doctrine should make you change your views, but this has helped me realize that religion is not specifically a source of evil. Bigotry and hate comes from all corners, and it needs to be fought from every angle, not just the religious one.
Everyone should be against religion because it teaches people to accept falsehoods. Nothing about being an antitheist is either bigoted or hateful.
@@chikkipop No, but it doesn't make someone immune to bigotry either. You can embrace empiricism in one arena (say, in regards to religious issues), and still succumb to prejudices and bigotry on others. Rejecting religion is a good start, but the work doesn't stop there.
I always like to cite the tyrannical officially atheist regimes like the USSR to those atheists who say you need religion for atrocities.
Religion is one of the excuses for atrocities, maybe one of the most common, but it is not the only one.
@@chikkipop the point is you cant stop there, you must also actively fight bigotry and hate, because those who dont believe in religion can also be influenced by it and you see what we have here, Richard Dawkins agreeing with bigotry. People who should be reasonable and logical using the same bad logic as religious people to justify their own distain for some group of people they simply dont understand.
I'm no longer antitheist, in part because I do have a religion again, Satanism. I am against superstition, because "superstition allows you to not have to think."
Andrew, i have unsubscribed from basically every atheist channel on yt during these last few years. The topic simply lost my interest, despite me remaining a nonbeliever. Your and taylors channels are the only ones that remain. Thank you for continuing to be true to yourself.
same!!
So youve been sucked in by transism? Cool...
Likewise. Andrew and Taylor seem to be the only atheist RUclipsrs that actually seem like decent human beings.
@@spiceupyourafterlife May I recommend you check out Paulogia, Viced Rhino, Shannon Q, Gutsick Gibbon, Creaky Blinder, and SciManDan? Okay, the last two are probably atheists (I'm not sure they've ever officially said), but they're more focused on tackling psuedo-science and flat earthers. Gutsick Gibbon has a lot of fun science education videos - she's a primatologist. Well, fun for me - I'm a nerd. lol
@@SadisticSenpai61 DarkMatter is also a good one. He recently had an epiphany about "wokeness" which was pretty nice to watch.
“People on my side tend to be Brexiters, anti-vaxxers and Evangelical Christians.”
Uh…. Huh.
Yep! When Not-Sees show up to support you... You might want to rethink your stances. And that isn't hyperbole. Actual Neo-Not-Sees have been invited to, shown up, and spoken at anti-trans events. I've seen video of TERF's literally reading from Mein Kampf, and not to compare supposed radical trans activists to AH. Rather to show that he was correct!
A person or group can absolutely be judged by the company they keep.
When all of the people on your side are awful, vile anti-science grifters & bigots with horrible ideas, it might be time to reassess your position on things, don't you think? You'd think someone with the supposed intelligence of Dawkins would figure that out, but grandpa doesn't seem to get how anything works.
Yeah people who are normally wrong can be right on some subjects. It's an odd appeal to authority to say that only your side can come up with the correct answers to things
@@Ashakat42 when most of the people agreeing with you are crackpot conspiracy theorists though I think you may want to reassess some of your preconceived notions about the issue at hand
@@Ashakat42 Sure, they _can_ be right on some subjects. For example, I’m sure we could find a lot of common ground on something like “arson is bad”… although “don’t eat horse de-wormer” would probably be a lot more fraught.
… and that’s really the point. The issue is the KINDS of subjects they tend to be wrong about: namely, science and social issues-and especially the intersection of science and social issues, where they have a proven track record of flatly rejecting any science that challenges their ideology. Which, true, isn’t a guarantee that they’ll always be wrong… but it’s a massive red flag which, at a minimum, should be acknowledged.
Doubt this'll get seen, but just wanted to express my gratitude that you're sticking up for the trans community
Dawkins is hardly a radical feminist 😅
You're mixing up your labels and otherizing insults.
@@authenticallysuperficial9874 Dude gave an explicit endorsement on Helen Joyce's book 'Trans', which is full of misinformation and transphobia. He's quoted on the book jacket as saying the work is "Timely and necessary". To not be a transphobe he'd either have to have not read the book, or be ignorant enough to give out endorsements to anything and everything.
I agree he's not a radical feminist, but that's because no TERF could reasonably be called a feminist.
You are seen! ❤
A prime example of why it is so important to be wary of idolizing people. We're all human, and even the most learned of us can be rendered idiots by our own malignant pride and self-certainty.
He's right and you morons are not
I'm a trans person. When I came out to my parents they told me they wished I'd come out as gay instead. That they could understand and accept me being gay but being trans was too much for them. So no parents don't prefer us to be trans than gay.
Exactly. I think the only place on the planet where that happens is in the theocracy of Iran, for obvious reasons such as being homosexual is synonymous with the death penalty.
You identify as something. That's your choice. Other people adressing you in a way they see as fitting is their choice.
@@karlscher5170 What's the point of this comment?
@@katyafan Stating the obvious hopefully
@@karlscher5170True. But it is impolite to not address people how they wish to be addressed. But being a rude person is a choice I guess.
We atheists/ agnostics should eat our own too. Nobody is special enough to not be questioned or corrected. There are times when religious individuals have done and said bad things but I’ve also seen some anti-theists do and say some pretty cringe and ignorant things. Being religious or not alone is not a measure of character or intelligence.
That's what the video is all about but ok.
@ could’ve just kept scrolling if you didn’t like it.
@@Sweeti924 Not every comment on a video has to be about how horrible the video is.
Oh boy, I sure do love how me existing and being happy as a trans woman is controversial! :D
What is that supposed to mean?
@@edwardburroughs1489 Oh gee whiz, wanna take a guess? :D
Ah yes, I remember when Dawkins proposed annihilating you from existence.
@@HOTD108_ Five gives you ten that was a bot.
yeah 😔
I'm an old-timey lesbian... and in the last 5 years I've repeatedly experienced more and more disappointment in people who I once respected as valued critical thinkers. Hell, even the US Democratic party appears to have bought into the sanewashing of the woke-wars. This is not my timeline, I need to get back.
Um, you have access to a better timeline? One more conducive to civilized and rational people who respect others? Can I come?
Perhaps the most infuriating part has been that while the GOP has been attacking trans ppl left and right for the past... 8 years? The Dems have said absolutely nothing on the subject. And the few that have spoken out? They've done so in _support_ of the GOP's bigotry!
It's awfully hard for me to justify supporting their candidates when they're also saying that I shouldn't have the right to be myself. Don't get me wrong, I still voted for Harris and I don't regret that vote. But I also went into election day knowing that everything had to go just right for her to pull off a victory (based entirely on an analysis of the polling in swing states).
That said, I'm not too surprised. When Hillary decided to pop up and offer her unsolicited advice prior to the election, it was to suggest that Dems abandon their trans voters and throw us under the bus to appease "moderate Republican voters." And as we in the US are well aware of - the Clintons still have an insane amount of influence on the Dem party. And as we saw in 2016 and again in 2024 (Harris hired Hillary's advisors and strategists), the Clintons don't know how to win elections in the 21st Century. They're still stuck in the 1990s and what won them elections back then.
Agreement with your viewpoint is the bar for critical thinking?
The ego is insane.
I teach my children expect nothing from people and you'll never be disappointed 👍
Maybe you will be comforted by the wisdom that unites folks inexplicably somehow
Luke 14:26
"If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters-yes, even their own life-such a person cannot be my disciple.
Matthew 10:34-35
34. Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.
35. For I have come to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in- law
@@GreenCanvasInteriorscape Is the "uniting" that ppl have no idea what you're going on about and think you replied to the wrong comment?
Most annoying to me is how apologists still appeal to Dawkins as some kind of atheist prophet.
That's because too many atheists - even in this comment section - hail him as their prophet. I simply silence such apologists by asking "Why should I defend such a quack philosopher? Do you need your strawmen that badly?"
@@marknieuweboer8099 We shouldn't judge anything he says based on opinions of him as a person. He makes good points on atheism, and they remain good points even if you then dislike him due to his other views.
I agree, though I think we can still call upon & reference Dawkins’ early work & contributions without idolizing him.
It’s akin to recognizing there are good ideas in Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence & condemnation of slavery, despite his racist views & owning personal slaves. A person can still be a monster, and yet contribute rational, moral ideas. If we only consider the views of those we see as “perfectly moral & rational,” we won’t have any wisdom to draw upon. 💯
Just as in all things, a binary view of any subject often overlooks the nuance.
This issue will destroy and divide the Democrats. How many scientists, geneticists, evolutionists do you want to alienate? How many elections do you want to lose? This is where far left atheism will eat itself.
He's right and far more rational than these useless tools.
I'll be honest, I've avoided your content for a while when I shouldn't have. Turns out you've been taking down transphobia for a while, but all I ever saw was the word Skeptic. Bigotted atheists did that word so dirty back in the 2010s, I figured you'd be in the same camp as people like Dawkins. Couldn't have been more wrong.
I appreciate this comment, and I understand your hesitancy given how loaded “skeptic” is. That fact is, I purposely brand my work that way to attract the people who need to hear it. “Skeptic” is an aesthetic of contrarianism and intellectual superiority, which ironically attracts shockingly credulous men. I get these guys in the door with a sprinkle of their favored aesthetic and then, you know, confront them with actual facts and logic or whatever.
@@GeneticallyModifiedSkeptic I as a Muslim, too avoided have your videos because of your previous stuff, and how those bigoted atheists have both hijacked the word "skeptic" and steered the overall atheist movement towards racism & transphobia. I understand your feelings towards Muslims as whole, but we've been put up with both fundamentalists and bigots since 9/11, perhaps longer. We've experience attacks by either side, most notably the attacks in London by the far right many months, as well as the series of repressions by fundamentalists in my country.
We do have progressive, feminist & LGBTQ Muslims on our end, just that there's too much distrust by both your community & LGBTQ people in general, who believe our existence is very antithetical or too contrarian for some weird reason. Really wish you've reach out to us more, instead of those hateful imams or pundits who want to isolate us from the rest of the modern world. We can't prove to you that we're the "good ones" but it would've helped if you get in touch with Muslim groups that do help women & LGBTQ people in general.
As of now, seeing your disappointment with Dawkins is quite a hallelujah moment for a lot of us who have known that Dawkins, along with Harris, Coyne, Silverman & others have been a bunch of dicks for a long time, but can't quite say it due to their army of defensive fanboys.
Transphobia won't ever be 'taken down' any more than Atheism.
Same. I was initially concerned about the word "skeptic", considering how misused that word often is, but the topic sounded interesting, and his face was friendly (not that that should be a deciding factor), so I clicked, haha. Glad I did.
Well, he is *genetically modified* , so a different brand of skeptic 😅
It's was a humanist organization.
Promoting human rights is the whole point.
If you threaten human rights, of course, they're going to rescind an award...
I don't know if it is true, but at the time I saw an article on the Olympic boxing issue where the writer claimed that the lab cited by the Russian boxing body does not list chromosomal testing as a service it offers on its website. If true that really does blow the whole issue out of the water.
Who cares, this isn't a standard in any sport to mandate only XY, and it goes against the definitions of gender in countless countries all over the world. Including super conservative ones like Algeria and Iran.
You can't have an Olympic body presumably aimed at bringing all people and cultures together proclaim that women as they have been culturally and legally defined all over the world for countless years suddenly stopped being women and became men
Yep! The lab did a very brief press release saying they don't do chromosomal or the type of hormone testing that would indicate if someone is trans. They are a lab specialized in sports doping. So the IBA was flat out lying. And changing from chromosome to hormones as "the test" didn't make them seem more reliable.
@@CorwinFoundAlso worth noting that she got expelled after beating a previously undefeated Russian.
There is a full leaked report. The person is male. We'll see how the lawsuit goes, but my guess is it will never happen or will get dropped for obvious reasons.
Correct
Thank you for standing up against misinformation. As a member of the LGBTQ+ community, it means a lot when people refuse to boost the voices of those who have chosen to justify bigotry by cloaking it behind an uninformed or misinformed opinion masquerading as "rationality." It means a great deal more when folks speak out against it.
Cosign this!
This is hilarious as most LGBT activists can’t even fairly characterize their opposition. Do you even know what your opponents think?
@ahampurushahasmi6040 I'm all too familiar with their arguments. (I'm queer but not trans. I consider trans people part of my community) I've been hearing them for WELL over 20 years.
Do you have any idea how many of us have parents and loved ones who hold those positions?
Anti LGBT rhetoric isn't benign. It is linked to upticks in unaliving rates and being unalived.
I know myriad trans and queer folks (friends, family, peers and clients) who were kicked out of their homes, forced to detransition, had parents refuse to attend their weddings, endure verbal and/or physical abuse, etc. because their loved ones bought into those arguments.
So yeah. Tell me again how we don't understand arguments against core elements of our identity.
@@ahampurushahasmi6040
"fairly characterize their opposition"
Did you mean to say "oppression" instead of "opposition?"
"Do you even know what your opponents think?"
I have eyes and ears... homophobic and transphobic people are not quiet about their bigoted opinions.
@@ahampurushahasmi6040 Yes, we do. It's really not that difficult to do so. You have an instincitve "ick" because of your own unresolved issues and because of culture war propaganda, and then you go hunting for pseudoscience to tell you that you're cool and oppressed, and correct to punch down. The script does really not vary that much.
As a trans woman, who is not able to present as myself in my day to day. I thank you for standing by my, and the communities side
You can identify as female in gender but you’re still male in sex. Gametes define sex. The type of gamete you were born to potentially produce defines your sex.
how is he standing by your side by not engaging with people who are opposed to you?
@@karagi101 Sex is occasionally a little more complicated than that. Some women don't produce gametes at all.
@@muchanadziko6378hes not further devolving the discourse
@@muchanadziko6378He is actively debunking the very misinformation that makes their lives so hard/stops the situation from getting better. That's a pretty good way to help i'd say
I lost all respect for Dawkins when he started thinking religiously and dogmatically. Rejecting modern medical science because you want to cling to traditional IDEAS (not facts) of gender is really cringe.
Hawkins basically sold out to the ragebait algorithm. There's no way to engage in good faith with anyone who went down and sticks to that path.
Personally, as a trans teen, i find it very creepy that adults think i have a sexual fetish
When you put it that way… yeah, those adults are even creepier than I’d realized.
You dont and they are.
You do and they aren't.
It is factual to say that (what they perceive to be) teenage boys are statistically likely to be interested in things of that nature, things that could often be labelled as "fetishes".
Many people will remember this fact from their teen years and acting all outraged about them bringing up these memories is typical online nonsense that deserves no time or credence.
Regardless, this is kind of a motte and bailey by you, most people only accuse adults (and teens who put no effort into passing) of this.
@Rodrigo-me6nq weird thing to say to a kid man
Dawkins was extremely important during my de-conversion 25+ years ago and I owe him quite a bit for that. Nowadays, as an atheist in my early 60’s, he’s teaching me by example to not be complacent about my thinking or skepticism.
BTW, even with the DSMIV, you’d have to have clinically significant distress or social/occupational impairment to have a diagnosis for gender dysphoria, even in the 1990’s.
So kinda old trans guy here. Came out at 45, five years ago. Best thing I ever did, even outside of gender issues.
Making such a momentous change in my life forced me to relook at everything. My career, my politics, my relationships, my society, everything. Most things, including fundamental beliefs and opinions, didn't change dramatically, but it was all up for internal debate and scrutiny.
I think the saddest thing about getting older is a learned inability to relearn. Obviously there are exceptions. Just because you've held an opinion a very long time doesn't make it better or more valid. The opposite. Imagine using that logic for anything else. "No new fangled medicine for me. I'll take the cocaine and cyanide tonic please!" You are 100% correct. Complacency, especially in thought and opinion, can be disastrous.
That part was disingenuous, I was disappointed. He talked about how he fulfilled the two least serious criteria (female playmates/female hobbies), when the highlighted text on screen clearly said you need to fulfill 4 out of 5 and the ones he does not fulfill sound really serious (desire/insistance of being the other sex; cross-dressing; cross-gender roles in make-believe plays).
@@patrickb.4749 there’s more to the old criterion than what he hi-lighted is all I’m saying.
@@CorwinFound I just hit 50, and “learned inability to relearn” hits so deep. To an extent it almost seems like a societal expectation, which is utter BS.
As someone who transitioned a long time ago under the DSM-IV. I can confirm this.
I am a social anthropologist who has studied the sociology of religion. Dawkins is an evolutionary biologist, and an excellent one I’m sure. However, when he gets into the more sociological realm, he often just doesn’t know what he’s talking about.
Even worse, he doesn't seem to care, either.
@ you see it in old professors. They often get intellectually stale. Especially if they are celebrated. They can fall into the trap of believing their own hype.
Seeing you stand outside that venue makes it clear that this isn't a decision you took lightly. Sincerely, thank you, as an LGBTQ+ person who is a huge fan of your content. Taking a stand on this and refusing to compromise your morals is why I love your channel. Thank you!
Indeed. It is these kinds of actions that demonstrate they (Drew) is walking the talk!
I'm not surprised you decided against working with him. It's very clear to me that you are someone who actually holds to their morals, money be damned. Taylor, as well. Keep doing the awesome work you do!
This is kinda why I'm a little skeptical of what Alex O'Connor (formerly Cosmic Skeptic) is up to nowadays. I understand that he's trying to platform and challenge all kinds of ideas, but its worrying when I hear things about "woke nonsense" go unchallenged, even when its to keep the conversation on track, I feel like it continues to fuel these flames.
Exactly my thoughts. He's not challenging ideas in any meaningful way, because you can't challenge the beliefs of bad faith actors who fundamentally don't care if their argument is correct.
This. He has some variety in the views of people he talks to but there is just so much platforming of views that are unambiguously harmful to queer folks like me without any real challenge. Seeing that type of content from him makes me feel less safe, I'm so grateful Drew has been such a vocal and principled advocate.
I'm almost certain he will announce his conversion to Christianity in our lifetime.
And yet you guys believe you are not in a cult. You are ostratizing alex now because he platforms ppl with diff opinions. The horror!!..
@@bibaolaitan5189 No one is ostracizing Alex, people just disagree with some of his choices as of late. If listening to people you disagree with is so important, you're doing a bad job actually listening to Drew and commenters here.
Thank you for standing up for human rights.
Sad that "wearing what you want and controlling your own body" makes others feel angry.
Equal rights and respect for all 🙏
That's very obviously not what makes people so angry... it's the totalitarianism, control of speech, banishment of thoughts and dialogue...
@@authenticallysuperficial9874that’s not true, it makes people angry
Just look at the people using the language “men in dresses” to evoke certain fictional Images of trans people
They are big mad
I really admired dawkins for a long time, when my only exposure to him was reading the god delusion. i thought it was an extremely well-reasoned and well-written book. then i heard all his bullshit about being a "cultural christian" and an antisemite
What's wrong with him calling himself a cultural Christian
I'm guessing some people don't know what being a "cultural christian" means.
When people have brain damage, I always give them a pass. Even minor damage in the right place can cause pretty big changes. That doesn't mean I give him my money, but it's wrong to bash him for the changes. He should be met with compassion, not hate. I am really disappointed that my community can't see this.
Totally, I think these last years must have been real shitty for him to change so much in that way.
The guy was a serious scientist and an example of science divulgation. 😢
You should read his science work.
I have turned down working with certain people of power through the years because of their personal stances and beliefs. It ALWAYS feels amazing to do the right thing. I don’t work for and promote people that have terrible social paradigms
How do you know what is the 'right thing'?
@ I’m sorry. It sounds like you may need a diagnosis if you don’t know what it means to do the right thing.
@@sciencesaves You want to send everyone into asylums who doesn't share your intuitive take on right and wrong?
autogynephilia is such utter pseudoscience nonsense. I have a friend who told me that she delayed her transition by a few years because she got bamboozled by this concept and it took time to realise it didn't solve any of the issues she was facing.
I have heard that in Freudian psychology, there is a concept called penis envy. Sounds like the same thing from the opposite starting point.
I don't understand. You claiming that he encountered this idea, thought "huh, maybe I am just experiencing a fetish", later changed his mind... and therefore the phenomenon doesn't exist? Not only does the fact that your friend doesn't suffer it offer approximately ZERO evidence that it doesn't exist, your story makes it sound like your friend considered he might have that very condition.
@@authenticallysuperficial9874Most (Cis) Women experience Autogynephilic traits, why is it wrong if a Transgender Woman or a Man is Autogynephilic? Seems like double standards
Wait until they find out that asexual trans people exist
@@authenticallysuperficial9874nice way to betray your true feelings by misusing the pronouns of someone you don't even know and asserting what you want to believe. How about we stop insisting we know more about someone than they know about themselves? Its called minding your own business
I used to think that Dawkins was just misunderstood because he has a style that comes across as dismissive and arrogant. And I appreciated his advocacy of secularism. But having read several of his books and listened to god knows how many hours of his debates, I just can’t get past a feeling that he’s not a particularly complex thinker. The God Delusion is nicely written but pretty light on insight. And now his just complete disregard of very simple facts to make cheap points has cemented for me that he is not a particularly deep thinker. Or maybe more specifically he could think deeply about one question but he doesn’t critique his own views and therefore is t a broad thinker.
He compared trans people to Rachel dolezol and refused to engage with counter arguments
He is gross
I was kind of over Dawkins after the Rebeccca Watson debacle.
He was right. There is no question that once young SJ warriors became attracted to the atheist movement it became entangled in all sorts of nonsense, just as we see on so many college campuses. Remember "Atheism+"?
@@chikkipopNo, he wasn't right. That's the point lol.
@@chikkipop Still waiting for you to watch the video.
@@chikkipop You do not have the first clue about what happened with Rebecca Watson, do you?
@@meej33I'm guessing this person is a "gamergate" atheist, so they know, but also have all their libertarian bro talking points lined up
As someone who works in live entertainment, I know you might be surprised who has heard of you... That said, you aren't watt malsh.
What the hell are these awful comments? I guess the title brings them out of the woodwork.
What
awful comments do you mean? It seems no one here specifies what they're talking about.
@@chikkipop I watched the video too early after it came out I guess, so I had the braindead takes before the regular stuff rises to the top. Sorry to be unclear.
@@chikkipop You, mainly.
@@antediluvianatheist5262Seriously, this guy is literally in every single comment. It's amazing. But hey. He's boosting the video for the algorithm gods, so all good.
A little reality check can help sometimes.
Thanks for sticking to your principles.
Thanks! Integrity rules
As an asexual trans woman I've tried in vain to get the "trans women are autogynephiles" crowd to explain how I'm only trans to indulge a sexual fetish - when I'm sexually aroused by pretty much nothing.
I'm still waiting for an answer from them.
Sure... You might not fit into that "trans is fetish" role... But many do! Indeed... Many straight guys dabble with this! And I know someone... Who knows someone who's into this! When outsiders, like myself, take the odd pop shot at your community, it's not personal to YOU directly. And just like every other community on Earth, the trans community has it's fair share of BAD players! Again... NOT you!
“They’re forcing gay kids to be trans!” Completely ignoring all of the gay trans people.
Yep! Not so long ago trans folk had to pretend to be gay (pre-transition) in order to access gender affirming care. I have a trans masc friend who transitioned about twenty years ago. He had to state that he was into women and identified as a "lesbian." He even had a friend pretend to be his girlfriend. The dude is _super_ gay. Like zero interest on women. But back then gender and orientation were wrongly linked.
"Yes I like women, but I feel gay anyway."
25:34 This is such a completey insane comment. The way all these _gender critical_ people insist that everything has been _"ideologically captured"_ while they write articles for large publications is so blatantly ironic I don't know how they fool anyone. _"All the abuse goes one way"_ too, just outright saying he doesn't believe that trans people experience any kind of abuse for their identity. He has an impressively warped view of the world.
I'm sorry you have to suffer through all these horrible comments. There are really a lot of anti-queer, anti-trans, misogynistic people in the athiest community. This saddens me greatly, as these are prime reasons to abandon religion. Thank you for all you and Taylor do! ❤ Keep up he real good work!!
*"I'm sorry you have to suffer through all these horrible comments."* I'm sure there must be something awful here, but I haven't waded through all the comments. Can you give any examples?
@@chikkipopCan you not do anything for yourself? What makes you think everyone here needs to think for and explain everything to you?
Atheism and Trans have nothing to do with each other. While they often may intersect across the map of life, the only common factor amongst atheist is they don't believe in god. Trans people can still believe in god.
We can't forget about Tay-tay! They're so cute together, and they seem like they have a really healthy relationship too. They support and love each other to the moon and back. I can see it when they look at each other and blush sometimes. I would love to have a relationship like that.
Same energy as 'Islamophobia' , someone calling you wrong or dumb is not the same thing.
Totally off topic...
How would an interview with Brittney Hartley go? Her perspective on religion decodes the mechanical nature of religion and how it lines up with human psychology, not her language but my sense of it, breaking down us as humans yearning for the need for ritual, story, community and purpose. It's very rational, flexible, without all the woohoo spirituality of crystals or blood rituals. Has anyone else heard about her?
Britt Hartley is great! I’d totally collab with her
@@GeneticallyModifiedSkepticHave you considered another set of religion-specific interviews with Alessa Grenfell (Mormonism) or EXJW PandaTower (Jehovah’s Witnesses)?
I’ve been watching their videos for a while, and their recent collab with eachother made me want to see something like that on this channel!
That reminds me of my stay in Denmark as a teenager. The family that hosted me were Christian, and when they asked me if I was religious I replied "No, I don't believe in God." They were genuinely taken aback by my answer not because they expected me to be religious, but that I equated being religious with believing the religion to be factual. They explained to me that at least in their community, being "Christian" meant believing in the values and practicing the traditions together. They read all of it as metaphorical and to them it was about having something bringing their community together. They were stunned when I told them that Christian Americans genuinely believe all of it to be factual. That really stuck with me and made me rethink all of the traditions that I saw as illogical and even stupid. I've realized since that it doesn't have to be "real" to have value.
Huge fan of Britt Hartley! I’m exmormon, so her recent rise to greater prominence in atheist circles makes my heart happy. She represents us exmos so well.
Also a fan of Alyssa Grenfell and ExJW Panda Tower. Collabs with them would also be welcome!
Much respect and kudos to you, GMS, for refusing to celebrity grift with Dawkins. Dawkins has disappointed me tremendously on the trans issue. It's hard to imagine such a noted scientist refusingl to inform himself on this issue. It's morally reprehensible.
This attitude, that being atheist you need to "inform yourself" correctly up to the standards of "the community" is so utter bullshit. The forever need to have everyone you think you have something important in common with, be of exactly the same opinions as yourself. Is it really rational to have men turn into women and vice versa? Is that the order or nature? You are morally corrupt if you think the only rational conclusions are your own.
I am getting tired of the woke bs, simple as that, and I never believed in any gods. But I live in Europe.
Here atheism is the norm, so naturally there is no "community" pressure on us non-believers. We are just "just people", free to harbour whatever political and moral stance we like, without being deemed reprehensible according to some idiotic standard for what is supposed to follow from "going one god further", as Dawkins said, when refuting belief in the supernatural.
Dawkins is treating trans issues like its a biological matter, when gender is a social construct and he is not an expert on psychology. Which is why he should never talk about it on his platform. He knows jack about psychology.
Gender is not a social construct. ‘Gender roles’, how girls and boys behave, is a social construct; apart from biological/physiological behaviour, of course.
Gender is a synonym for sex as a category. Thus there are two genders, and immutable.
There are no ‘non-binary’ genders. There are non-binary personalities, always have been. We don’t need to medicalise people because of any particular personality trait that doesn’t fit with gender behaviour stereotypes.
There are ‘Trans people’ like there are ‘Anorexic people’. No one ‘affirms’ anorexia by agreeing that the person is fat. That would be insane. Yet for some reason we are to affirm to some poor deluded person that he or she is the opposite sex/gender to that which they are? Total madness.
Dawkins doesn’t want to talk about gender madness for the same reason he doesn’t want to talk about fairies at the bottom of the garden. Quite right.
You can approach gender identity from a biological perspective, but not in the way that gender critical people do. For lack of a better term people are trans likely because it's an intersex condition of the brain. Reproductive organs form around 6 weeks, and the brain many months later. This means it's well within the realm of possibility for the body, and brain to develop down different paths. There have been several studies that provide evidence for this like BsTC, INAH3, study of identical twins, etc. We know from things like the John\Joan experiment, and how badly the results of surgically forcing a sex, and gender on intersex infants went that humans are not born blank slates with no gender identity. That is that biology
ature plays a larger role than nurture.
Gender may be a social construct, but how our brains are wired to see ourselves, and relate to our bodies is not. Even if gender were abolished, and everyone dressed, and acted the same trans people are still going to exist. Plus secondary sex characteristics are still going to exist I'm a trans woman, and I remember at 4, or 5 not feeling good at all about my reproductive parts. I did NOT want to go through a testosterone induced puberty at all. I really really didn't want my voice to change. So much so I tried several times to work up the courage to self-castrate. I also think my brain was not wired to work with adult levels of testosterone either. I remember when puberty started, and it put me In a really really bad depression for an entire year. I honestly didn't feel right again until I started HRT at 24. Psychology is useful in helping a person figure out what their feelings mean to them. I don't think psychology will ever figure out why a person is trans in the same way it couldn't figure out why people are gay either.
@@YoMamaSoLovely yeah it's always problem with biologists who think that they are experts in this field, however sexualities and gender are actually outside their area of expertise since they haven't studied it further.
I can be tired of this topic as a trans person just trying to live my life but Dawkins, spreading misinformation, does not have the right to be tired.
Yes, good callout.
I'm happy for you man. That's a hard decision to make and I'm proud as a subscriber.
Thank you for calling out Andrew Gold. When I watched his interview with Dawkins, I was disgusted. Their outright ignorance about trans folks was infuriating 😡 Knowing that he also hosts other types of bigots makes a lot of sense.
After he came out in support of trump, I just can't take him seriously anymore when it comes to politics.
Thinking that there's some sort of societal pressure to be trans is absolutely insane 😂
As someone recently grappling with their own gender, I can absolutely confirm that the societal pressures I'm feeling are against any form of transition.
In certain circles, it’s so obviously there you need to be blind in some way, shape, or form to ignore it.
@@ahampurushahasmi6040this isnt true, spaces that are supportive of quiet identities and people in those exploring and experimenting with that isn’t pressure, this is fine
@
Oh, so I guess peer pressure just disappears for this specific case?
@@ahampurushahasmi6040 How is one peer pressured to be trans? Like how does that work? Peer pressure is more than just proximity to someone who is trans, or being in a chat group with trans people. It would need to be people telling someone they are trans over their protest that they aren't. Then they would need to keep doing that. No they aren't being peer pressured into being trans. Someone having a trans friend, and this causes them to examine their own feelings about their gender identity is not peer pressure.
I loved Dawkins' early writings about evolution, but it's always a shame when a skeptic gets so down the rabbit-hole on a particular issue that they lose their ability to remain skeptical.
Dwakins never was a skeptic. Skepticism requires questioning your own views, something Dawkins never did.
He was just a very good biologist who incorrectly concluded that he was qualified for non-biological topics too.
Like drew and most yt atheists with trans.... such a shame 😢
Skeptical of trans. You should try it.
@@DamnDealDone I was skeptical of trans people at first too. Then I realised that trans people are people too and everything sorta just clicked. Basically all anti-trans rhetoric is based on dehumanisation and strawmans, similarly to most anti-immigration arguments (and no I'm not just saying that, agenda 47 literally calls immigrants "illegal aliens" to make people forget they're people with hopes and dreams and families)
@@DamnDealDone I have. But when that skepticism become denialism it's no longer rational and straight into phobia.
Hello! I'm trans, with no sort of platform to fight against misinformation. I am honestly proud of you for making the choice to stand up for what you believe in and help us in the process. We appreciate you
Sceptics blinding themselves to objective truth and then being cowardly when they have a chance to confront the subject is wild to me.
as a trans person, thank you for continuously speaking out for us. it can feel very lonely in this wave of anti-trans hate but it's so good to see that there are still people who genuinely care and will put their principles first even when it means they have to let opportunities pass them by
Over the course of the last 12 years i have observed my own perspectives and biases shift from a more religious right wing to an atheist left wing and the major difference in those 12 years was me moving out of my parents house and being independent with my wife. This allowed me to see things more clearly and have conversations i cannot have with my family. Although I am now very accepting and supportive of LGBTQIA+ people and culture there are still some things from my old thinking that are hard for me to detach from but i do recognize the harm such opinions lead to so i just don't voice them. The more videos i watch on the subjects with loads of research and science to back it up, the more those old ideas and positions peal off the wall. It's an ongoing process but i have channels like this one, The Friendly Atheist, and Rationality Rules to thank for helping me evolve my position and opinions.
If you haven't seen a ghost or Donna Douglas..... You have a long ways to go.
Not knowing is one thing, but Dawkins' refusal to handle evidence against his beliefs and lack of intellectual curiosity around the issue while doubling down shows him to nowadays just be a bigot and no longer much of a scientist or critical thinker.
Transphobia is as revolting as racism, sexism, and all the other types of bigotry that humanity suffers from. Anyone trying to claim otherwise is simply a disgrace.
Thank you for speaking out on this topic!
It’s vanishing hard to find anyone with a platform on the internet with as much integrity and good will as you. Thank you for being so deliberate and persistent in doing right by people
Indeed. Another good one is Steve Shives, who also has a good video on the topic of atheism and transphobia.
This video is full of thoughtfulness and kindness regarding a very polarizing subject. A breath of fresh air.
Trans guy here. I 100% agree with your comment. What just blows my mind is that my very _existence_ is a political statement and considered an election changing topic. It can be very surreal. I'll be listening to something like this and engaging in my mind logically and politically. And then suddenly I hear something really vicious and think, "Holy crap. They are talking about _me!?!"_ It can be very weird.
Feels like an attack on Alex O'Connor lol
New atheism being anti-“woke” is a hell of a turn. It goes to show you that you need to be on your toes for all aspects and your bias.
It's been split. Not all of it has gone down the anti trans pseudoscience rabbit hole.
You're about 10 years too late. Schism began long ago. The rightwing atheism quirtly merged with other manosphere/crypto/reich winger spheres. Where we are, more of a progressive, anti-superstitious, but friendly to average people both atheist and believers. People like Kristi Burke, Darante LaMar, Paulogia and on the academic scholarly side, Derek Lambert, etc. And of course a lot of the OG atheist channels and groups still fairly progressive like Dilahunty and friends.
That's what scepticism means. Dawkins never was a sceptic.
@@tschorsch
Anti-trans ≠ pseudo science
It’s sickening how egotistical this comment section is.
@@marknieuweboer8099
You can easily be a right wing skeptic.
As indigenous I have always been skeptical of Dawkins.
54:03 Just to be clear, we are talking about Alex O’Connor, right?
It is fitting that the man, who coined the very word "Meme" in the Selfish Gene, has lived to become one himself.
He is now a great counter example for rational thinkers. He should know that applying simple-minded "Litmus Tests" is not a great way to deal with many issues.
Ironically, simple-minded thinking is also what allows most people to maintain their superstitious beliefs in the face of contradictions.
This speaks volumes about not only your character as a person, but to your character as voice for the rest of us. It's comforting to know that you're resistant to being bought. Knowing that you would receive a fairly significant gain from siding with and platforming Dawkins, and then turning it down shows us through action just how genuine you are. I'm proud of you, Drew. I say that with all sincerity and honest feeling. Many of us, if put in the same circumstances, wouldn't have been quite so resilient to the temptation. I know if it was me, and had thought that it would provide a substantially better life for my family, I can't for sure say that I would've turned it down. I greatly admire your honesty and your commitment to our cause. You're doing good work here. Thank you.
I never knew his views but somehow I never doubted him.
If there's one thing I can be optimistic about, is that atheist community really seems to be healing, at least a part of it. I used to be a ultra logical edgelord myself and it's kinda comforting that I didn't grow into a void, but it seems a lot of us took the same path independently from one another
It explains the really deep trans content Drew has done in the last few months. As a part of the community I loved it and would describe it as some of the best evidence based trans content on RUclips, among both cis AND trans creators.
But I'll admit that I wondered what provoked it. Now we know the answer. Drew preemptively created the justification and explanation for this decision, without letting out exactly why. It meant he could address the issues without muddying the water with debate specifically about Dawkins.
Goddess I love Drew! Smart, empathetic, principled, and tactful.
@@NJ-wb1czOver the last few months Drew has done some really deep dives into trans content. Coming from a terminally online trans guy, trust me when I tell you it's among the best trans content on RUclips - from either trans or cis creators.
I _cannot_ recommend those videos highly enough. He brings receipts.
This kind of reminds me of how Arthur Conan Doyle started to believe in fairies towards the end of his life.
20:00 Bringing up the DSM4 actually illustrates something very interesting in a non-direct way. Conservatives often bring up a study (I don't remember off the top of my head) that talks about how gender non-conforming children (Interpreted is trans kids) end up aligning with their given sex as they grow older, but now I'm wondering if those kids were studied under what the now very flawed DSM4 considered gender non-conforming, and not what is now considered non-conforming in the DSM5.
As a whole, studies before the DSM-V found that indeed kids with GID did ends up not being trans. Indeed, basically every study they cite use the DSM-IV.
That said it's still a really interesting subject and we can learn a lot from that. One study often used is Steenma 2011, DOI: 10.1177/1359104510378303, that looked into factors predicting persistance and desistance. Conservatives generally cite the persistence rate (which is just not what this study was looking at) but it was actually a qualitative study. One really important aspect found is that while non-trans kids wanted to be the other sex, trans kids say they are the other sex. That's a really important distinction. So even before the DSM-V, researchers still found way to go around the shortcomings.
Yes, that's where the 80% to 90% desistence myth comes from. They diagnosed cisgender kids who were gender non-conforming as having gender identity disorder. That's really not helpful if you are wanting to know the desistence rate for transgender kids. The DSM-5 requires a kid to outright say I feel like a different gender than what I was assigned at birth to get a diagnosis of gender dysphoria as gender identity disorder is no longer used.
Using the criteria of the DSM-5 Dr. Kristina Olson published a 5 year follow up study in 2022 of trans kids. It had a desistence rate of 2.5%. The Netherlands also released a 5 year follow up study to see how many trans kids had stopped their HRT. They found 2% had stopped, but noted that detransition was not the only possible reason for stopping their HRT.
DSM is worthless anyway, it's just a political tool (as psychological diagnosis always has been) that still hasn't bothered differentiating between the different neurodivergences it just buckets under "autism". Good studies on things like this need to be looked at in terms of specific behaviours and traits, rather than relying on some external definition. "People defined as gender non-conforming according to DSM-n mostly aren't trans" is a title I would trust a lot less than "people who exhibit gender-exploratory or gender-questioning behaviour according to measures we took mostly aren't trans".
Well done. I’m thankful to see you turn down any seeming endorsement of Dawkins’ harmful disinformation. Cheers!
It sounds like Dawkins & Co. have never heard of gay trans people. Or they pretend they haven't.
idk if it was just me but it seemed there were a few jabs at alex o’connor in this? i might just be tripping though.
Well, AO'C doesn't have a problem with being on a platform with Dawkins, Peterson or other right wingers. But afaict he doesn't buy into their bullshit.
@@andreasvox8068 Time will tell.
@@andreasvox8068 yeah i don’t think he buys into it either but i’m just saying seems like Drew has a problem with him platforming those people in the first place.
@@andreasvox8068 I don't remember seeing Alex ever actually confront Dawkins on his bigotry. I remember him asking Dawkins about the subject, but not directly calling him out on it, but I could be wrong about that
@@andreasvox8068
What is bullshit, like exactly, about being skeptical of the idea that men can become women, or the redefinition of gender to be completely personal…
Drew, I have gotten so much BS about my 9 year old son, playing with girls, having mainly friends that are girls, having long hair, being sensitive... I know it was a blip in this video but when you said you still have mainly female friends and you played house as a child... I mean I guess when they don't take his ADHD diagnosis in to consideration or see him rage out and throw an Xbox controller... Maybe he seems not as boyish. Idk I think it adds to his insecurities but kids should be allowed to be kids as long as possible. He was waiting for me in the office at school and some kid told him "God doesn't want boys to have long hair". He knows I'm atheist but he really wants to believe in God, so I let him. So I said "then why does he let a boys hair grow so long?" Still gotta have a lil critical thinking.
What’s even funnier is that in almost every depiction of Jesus he has long hair
You're very strong to make these kinds of decisions.
I love your content, your public persona, your tone, your honesty, and confident vulnerability.
I'm not gonna lie, your content feels much less "engaging" than most skeptics and atheists: I'm never fuming, or panicking, after I watch your videos. I'm just glad I learned something new.
But then again, I'm following you for these exact reasons, opposite to those you say you don't like Dawkins: you're not trying to make me angry, scare me, or sell me bullshit you're not qualified to talk about.
I hope you keep on spreading these good values.
I gave up on Dawkins decades ago. His ego, along for his disdain for women, was on full display then. Hitchens had a genuine curiosity about him.
Thanks Drew, for your stance for integrity. I appreciate it more than I can explain. Also a shout out to Hemant, whose channel I am also pleased to follow.
I have not finished watching the video, but he has also advocated for 'population management' ( worried about phrasing), especially impacting disabled people. 🙄
A lot of leftists/environmentalists like Rebecca Watson, PZ Myers, and Hemant Mehta want less people on the planet.
His comments on such topics are repulsive. Abortion should be a choice left to the person carrying the pregnancy, not used as an effort to control what sort of people join the population. His measures of assigning value to individuals are anti-human.
As a biotechnologist and a trans person, I want to thank you for making content like this and sticking up for our community, despite the backlash you might find.
I love Richard Dawkins' ideam on athiesm.
I abhor everything else about his. He is a bigoted far-right christian athiest at the core of his heart.
No he’s not. That’s why his position on trans issues is so upsetting.
@@sjzara Sorry, but you are what you do, and if he's doing things that far-right christain types are doing, then functionally, he's one of them.
@@antediluvianatheist5262Flawed logic as not all actions define smth. Nazis invaded other countries, but not everyone who invades countries is a nazi.
You need to show that he does things that are unique to far-right christians to call him one.
The God Delusion falsely pretends that all proper christianity is far-right fundagelicalism. So his bigotry is unsurprising.
@@antediluvianatheist5262This is a extremely narrow view on things and domewhat bigoted.
A lot of the end of this seems somewhat targeted towards Alex O’Connor - a similar RUclips atheist whose career has really taken off and who has participated at Richard Dawkins’ tour. Was that the intention here?