28 thoughts on “Bret Weinstein and Heather Heying – Gender Ideology vs Biology

  1. I was born into the wrong body too. I should have been 6'4", with the build of a linebacker and a tenor voice like Earl Wrightson's. I hope you will feel some compassion for me.

  2. Heather equivocates on her own theory of masculinity & femininity. Those categories track gender notions not sexual ergo biology. Pregnancy is biological. Child bearer/rearer are roles which emanate from biology but are not biologic, they are cultural in the sense that those roles were treated as what is normal for females. And so I agree that femininity and masculinity are social constructs which isolate an aspect of biology. Bret’s rejection of patriarchy is truly absurd. His basis for the rejection is that it’s not explained by evolution. So how does he explain that women upon marriage had no legal identity? Women could not refuse sex with their husband- so marital rape is a nullify because as Wigmore stated, a man cannot rape himself-because “she” is subsumed in “he.” Here Bret uses a paradigm that does not fit.

  3. It has not been stated by Bret that radical feminists are promoting the agenda "to do with gaining hard-core solutions into the rules of civilisation …" (Bret). From my experience, radical feminists are AGAINST this ideology that is being promoted. I think it is an even more insidious thing to do with money and power, and this is most likely to reside with a certain category of men. Women do not have the power to bring about changes in society at this level. I would like to hear Bret say more on this as it is not clearly stated in this interview WHO is promoting this ideology and trying to change the laws of logic. Please have him on again with Heather.

  4. At the heart of postmodern ideology lies the idea that reality is entirely subjective. This is actually an Orwellian idea, and it comes as no surprise that postmodernists are promoting authoritarianism disguised as tolerance and political correctness.

  5. Here's my issue with this talk. I agree with what they're both saying for the most part, (although I think a lot more of it is about environment and survival than biological), but their focus is on the wrong group of people. Yes we shouldn't deny biological factors that determine sex, and some of these factors do determine gender expression and yes there are some misled extreme leftists who want to rewrite biology books and I disagree with that, but this is a drop in the bucket compared to groundswell of society that is stuck in this modernist traditionalist view which doesn't even allow a trans person to exist; considers them delusional, harmful mutations of what's good and moral or just plain evil. You basically didn't exist if you were trans person 30 years ago. You were some kind of freak. Many people still do believe this. This is mass bigotry, fueled by the fear of losing traditional values and religious/cultural dogma, that hide under biological rhetoric to justify their prejudice. This is much more of a problem than a few extreme post modernists who need to read a biology book. Yet none of these dark web intellectuals seem to be addressing this. And by not addressing this and disproportionately focusing on the SJW extreme leftists this traditionalist bigotry festers. Both sides need to be called on their bullshit, but especially the traditionalists who don't even consider trans people people. Why are we not addressing this?! It's so frustrating.

  6. Even only on the net. I always find people or friends and I can't hate people , even if they did harm to me , I just care , even for my so called " enemy " I can't hate , I just can't , and by nature I become friends with people who they say I hate. I just can't have enemies , a little too sociable , even with bad people. The baddest ones , being good , most of the time. As if I know I'm a little weak and need strong people around.

  7. I'm a delicate female , I can't do a hard construction workers job or military job or be in woman's prison ever , because most women's prison are for really strong women , can't hurt my mother because she's stronger , need medication even if I'm not crazy because I'm psychologically dependent or induced to depend on medication for psychos , I'm a little too fragile or delicate that I always need people or friends , family around , psychologically used to people and their care or admiration for me.

  8. People who claim the gender fluidity and infinite genders are confusing GENDER with PERSONALITY, and seek to compare similar personality types, slap a label on it so they can maintain the paradigm of COLLECTIVISM vs INDIVIDUALITY

  9. There is only one other gender — an intersex person or a person who shares both male and female biological anatomy. Everything else is sex roles. For example in the lesbian community I have counted eighteen sex role categories (and there might be more). They are: lesbian, butch, femme, dyke, diesel-dyke, teeny-dyke, soft butch, stone butch, lipstick lesbian, pillow lesbian, chapstick lesbian, lezboi, boi, lug, stem, kiki, alpha, hasbian and tourist. They are all roles fitting on a sex role continuum and they are all played by women. They have varying degrees of constancy and changeability. However, there is one certain thing: they cannot be played by men or transexuals.

  10. Im sorry, i cant get over why neither the interviewer nor bret, pet, let alone even ACKNOWLEDGED the adorable doggy that walked into the camera shot with his tail waging…

  11. Oh look a rational, intelligent conversation on gender. I guess that makes them white supremacists, racists, phobics, conservative, right wing, third reich, fans of pol pot, and even….straight!

  12. This talk showcases the intellectual magnitude of these individuals. Both Bret and Heather present their positions in such a clear and rational way that, even though they are as soft spoken as they are, their words carry so much more weight than the loud irrational ramblings of the opposition.

  13. More than "2 or 3 cultures have names for a third gender," as Heather says at 7:50 . I actually took a class with Bret while he was at Evergreen and did a research project precisely on this topic. I don't think in general that research in that field aims to deny the existence of gender or (contradictorily) that there are "84" genders that exist across time, space and culture. Instead the research says that different cultures have different conceptions of gender and it is a mistake for a researcher to import their own conceptions of gender when researching gender in cultures other than their own. To me this seems obvious.

    I think the explanation for the state of rhetoric around transgender issues is not that "the left has gone crazy." Instead traditionalists have largely rejected transgender rights and don't care what evidence for or against is presented. In response some people on "the left" have entered a siege mindset where they are more concerned about preventing false negatives (i.e. inadvertently permitting the denial of transgender rights), then preventing false positives (i.e. falsely accusing someone of denying transgender rights). Battle lines have been drawn and the goal of each side isn't rational debate. Furthermore it is unclear to me what useful debate could be had between such fundamentally opposed value systems.

  14. It is nice to know that the left still has a few white blood cells fighting the cancer. Americans need both parties at their best for America to be the best. As always I have much respect for how the Weinsteins conduct themselves and present their arguments.

  15. I'm guessing these two would view Agender, gender fluid, and non-binary perspectives are less healthy than fully transitioning as one of the two genders.

  16. 18:00 It's not a paradox at all from that perspective. Contrary to popular belief, technology entrepreneurs are inherently risk averse, at least beyond the first risk of having started an entrepreneurial venture in the first place. When you have all your eggs in one basket (future eggs, mainly) it's naturally to become very, very risk averse. You just don't need any extra hassle that can reasonably be avoided, over and above the existential risk of being a small, unproven company surrounded by giant sharks. Social entrepreneurs might feel differently, but they are playing for different stakes.

  17. The scariest part of this is when Brett says that, 'most people will buckle and allow the power grab to take place'. That's how you end up with tyranny.

  18. Gender ideology… the present set of arguments was unthinkable going into 2012. No one saw it coming [at least in the media]. Knowing that Obama informed Putin he would have "more flexibility after the election", should we ask if the warping of title IX to create a new division was not a home grown idea? Just a thought – nobody really campaigned on such to begin with.

  19. Many people DO HAVE AN IDEA OF THE TROUBLE but they have an agenda – and by doing so they trample the rights of "normal-trans-people" who are not 'ideologues' and want to get on with life. The normal trans-people deserve a normal life but the activists 'charge' the atmosphere with aggression e.g. by yelling and screaming; they want to bring the 'system' down – sadly – many of these people are aided by other ideologues who has the activist agenda; they don't care about normal trans.

  20. As a white hetero male in his 50's, leaning somewhat right, and a mgtow , according to the identitarian, sjw, and fem 3 mob you and I should be arch enemies.
    But I (and all guys like me I know) hold no ill will towards you,and hope you have a happy life.
    Although I don't like the whole pronoun thing,(I think it excludes more then includes, and it is almost impossible to get it right the first time and thus creates embarrassing situations for both, and creates dangerous government controlled compelled speech),that doesn't mean I don't respect you fully as a person.
    Like "toxic masculinity", the whole "which toilet" debate is used to divide us, and used to push through marxist indoctrinated policies and laws, and gain more power for them.
    It is time to get rid of this destructive leftist mob, out of our universities, schools, government institutions, media, HR departments, etc.
    They should be blacklisted,preventing them from destroying the next generations with their vile and historically proven desastreus ideas .
    It is the only way to save the best society that ever was, and make it better,
    People like you and me and from all other groups used by them to confuse and polarize society should band together, and then reject and abolish their movement.

  21. Our two biologist seem to remain laboring under the shadow of the 'Evergreen State Utopia Collapse' Syndrome (ESUC-).
    Hence this growing mantra of these claimed-to-be robust statements-of-facts – some sort of effort to 'make sense of it all'…
    Remarkably, no noticing by them of what they don't know yet.Hence Heyer's odd urge to even rush to protect 'victim' J.Q.Peterson.
    In 20 years they'll cringe at what they've calmly uttered here, as they very publicly air their astonishing (scientific) blind-spots.
    By then, the strawfire-phenomenon of J.Q.P. will be forgotten by most, and by some mostly remembered as an odd curiosity of grand personal philosophical confusions lived out on a global stage – for a few moments – just another odd exhibitionism; "not that here is anything wrong with that…."

    Perhaps, their 'lost-in-the-wilderness' status has something to do with their carefully-crafted J.Q.P.-esque favoring of ill-founded orthodoxies.

    Fortunately, both can find work, where these self-imposed challenges will do little damage.
    Odd spectacle all this, however.

  22. Moderate rights call out the extreme or alt-right… the left needs to start calling out the extreme/whacky fringe left. Instead, the fringe on the left has dragged the entire "left" further left and further whacky

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *