Douglas Murray on Joe Rogan: “Politicians are using trans rights as a bartering ram for something else”.

Helen's actually done two with BB. The gender matrix one was the second. Go and find her first one; I think it was even better. That's where I found out she was an actual mathematician, not just an economist (plugh) - she gets into that aspect of it a bit. ()

these fields are not immune

It appears no field is immune - the pattern works anywhere. What these folks are doing isn't "SUBJECT" it's "SUBJECT Studies". And SUBJECT Studies is often a lot easier than SUBJECT. Doubly so in concrete subjects.

In any field the failed SUBJECTicians now have an opportunity to lord it over the actual SUBJECTicians with "criticism".

If "STEM" (hate the acronym) has been more resistant, I cynically think that's because people who don't manage to become academics in those fields get a proper job instead, just as much as any anti-bullshit tendency.

The problem now is that the whole thing is so entrenched you can have people with no real expertise in a field at all, and who could never actually do any real work in it, coming in to criticise it, getting paid for it, and being taken seriously and getting papers published in the real journals where people are really performing the field. It's Invasion of the Administrators.

A lot f this is a bit over my head, but I do strongly disagree with this:
Particularly about how feminism would do well to centre and value motherhood and that in order for women to truly liberated we need to rethink how we structure society placing higher priority on motherhood and caring.
I would prefer it it society would value parenthood and caring, and if men were absolutely expected to be carers the same as we are. I know we have a maternal instinct, but personally my maternal instinct doesn't mean that men can't also care for children, the sick and the elderley.
Given the choice I would have had a really good career. If the father of my child had stepped up and taken on half the responsibility I would have had economic freedom and a better future.
I realised at 18 years old that women were supposed to choose between family and work and men didn't have to and it struck me as so unfair and obvious that until we can have both we will never be liberated.
Actually, imo, the higher up the food chain you get, the more pronounced the gender roles I think. I know more plasterers and chefs who care for their kids properly and regularly than middle class men with office based careers.
Most women have two children. Yes, for the first year or maybe two your instinct is different to that of a man's, and that's OK, men and women are different in lots of respects. But after that it's just that no-one else steps up, and because we care about our children's well being we will always put them first.It's economic emotional blackmail. And I do not think it is innate that we prioritise our children when men don't, I think it's because they know someone else will so they can be selfish. I happen to know two dads who have raised children from infancy, with no mother around, and they have done exactly what a woman would do, worked around their kids and sacrificed a lot.
Tbh I am a bit sick of men discussing women's issues and coming to lofty opinions about them. I wish men would talk less and wipe arses more.

Ooh yes, agree with the Weinstein videos. I wish we heard more from Heather though - I love her!

Necessary have you see the interview Helen Joyce did with Benjamin Boyce? Think it was called 'decoding the gender matrix'. It was excellent.

I think you're right that maths/science minded people are often less tolerant of this bullshit. Maybe because their disciplines have been harder to influence with ideology. They often deal in verifiable facts. But then you look at the 2+2=5 thing and realise that these fields are not immune. I do think it's likely that this is where it will fall down, though, having ravaged the humanities which seemingly had virtually zero defences!

I hope it all falls apart. I'm feeling hopeful, especially when I see the viewing figures on some of these podcasts. You can try and dismiss it all as right-wing nonsense but people are watching and listening in ever greater numbers, and that approach just isn't going to work forever.

The Brett Weinstein videos are excellent, because you get to see how the mob behaviour develops, how they threaten and harass university canteen and low level admin staff. It’s really shocking and disturbing to watch.

I love Bret (and Heather!). Seen that Sun interview suggested for me on YouTube, but not got around to it yet. Was going a bit "meh, the Sun", but that's dumb because I know they had a good hour with Andrew Doyle at the start of the year.

Even if you do like Bret like me, to some extent there's a lot of retreading the same ground in most of his videos, so maybe I was also thinking there wouldn't be anything new in that Sun one - bet it's a good intro though. I'll try it now.

If you want something different - check out Bret being interviewed by his brother Eric about certain events in his academic career. An utterly fascinating piece of "TV", for (a) the story itself, which is epic, (b) what it tells you about Bret beyond what you think you already know, and (c) just getting to watch the amazing family dynamics going on between them. 2 hours very well-spent, I promise you.

500,000 viewers agree.

To echo what many posters have said, this thread has been really interesting and produced many great recommendations for podcasts. There is another one I would recommend which is a detailed interview with Brett Weinstein which begins with his account of events at Evergreen and proceeds to an analysis of the 'woke' ideology's core beliefs and its assault on science and reason. It is hosted by The Sun believe it or not, but it is a great overview of all the key issues delivered in an eloquent, erudite manner.

I've read/seen almost nothing from Jonathan Haidt, but I know he's highly regarded by lots of the other names I do follow.

The one thing I have seen is his lecture about the fundamental incompatibility of Truth and Social Justice as value systems for academic institutions. That was very good.

Maybe I'll get into him more later...

Took me a long time to get into to James Lindsay and appreciate what he was doing, beyond just knowing about the Lindsay/Pluckrose/Boghossian Grievance Studies hit. He's a tad abrasive and a bit offputting at first, but by god he's putting the work in.

He's got the typical mathematician's low tolerance for bullshit, logical fallacies and missing definitions. It's notable that many of the key GC names in this fight are either mathematicians or physicists. I can immediately think of Helen Joyce, Magdalen Berns and Debbie Hayton, but I know there are more I've forgotten.

(I'm a mathematician myself, so I always keep an eye out for others, and enjoy recognising the almost physical revulsion to postmodernism we have. Mathematicians construct entire universes and other realities in their heads all the time, in a very concrete fashion. Postmodernism turns our entire multiverse into mush.)

James Lindsay is everywhere too. Must admit I like him a bit more than I like Murray, just on a personal level.

Same here. He comes across as a lot less ‘angry’ than Murray. The podcast he did with Posie Parker was excellent.

I’m just listening to the audiobook of The Coddling of the American Mind and it’s really fascinating. Politically, it seems a bit more ‘balanced’ than Murray’s books. Whilst Murray dismisses the rise of the far right as a bit overblown, this book doesn’t do that. It does, however, cover similar ground in terms of the coverage of events on campus including Yale and Evergreen. The big difference is that it goes into much greater detail about how and why this shift in attitudes and behaviours has come about.

Thanks for starting the thread randomgel! I hadn't heard that about spotify either. I think they'd have to be mad to cancel him given his massive audience but I suppose they might feel able to try and control him... I get the impression Rogan is a straightforward kind of bloke with some integrity and would be surprised if he'd let that happen... I suppose we shall see! YouTube hasn't managed to stop him yet.

Anyway, it's too late. Millions of people have seen his show with Shrier, which was completely brilliant. Rogan is always careful to use the 'right' pronouns and be respectful but he is very clear what the issues are. I wish he would get JK on! That would be EPIC.

As for DM peddling the same ideas, well I mean he is very much trying to get those ideas to a mainstream audience... and it's working! He does hundreds of interviews and yes, it's essentially the same points that he's making but the more he does, the more people get to hear these ideas and maybe start to open their minds.

There are loads of great podcasts from original thinkers but if you are mainly interested in social justice/critical theory then I guess these same people are going to keep cropping up. James Lindsay is everywhere too. Must admit I like him a bit more than I like Murray, just on a personal level. I really like Andrew Doyle too, though i suspect he is a secret Marxist.

Why are they so scared of people simply discussing certain things?

And it is most specifically about Abigail Shrier. That's the thing that has particularly triggered them! It's bizarre.

I have to assume that almost none of them have actually watched the episode, and they're just blindly going along with people's assertion that talking anyone talking about the trans trend's impact on vulnerable girls must be a transphobic bigot.

We have so much access to people that things get stale quickly but generally over the course of a few years, someone like DM isn't going to radically revise his ideas about a given topic.

I read yesterday (see link above) that there is a contingent of Spotify staff who are threatening to walk out unless they are given editorial oversight into Rogan’s work.

I hadn't heard about that. Wow, the entitlement. 'Theres the door' is what Spotify should tell them. Why are they so scared of people simply discussing certain things?

I have read Murray’s book and enjoyed it. One problem I do have with many of these thinkers is that they become quite repetitive. Murray is really just rehashing his latest book in that podcast.

I don’t think that it is his fault. Because there is so little discussion now, people don’t really have the opportunity to debate and generate new ideas and analyses all the time. Imagine if people were openly discussing things all the time how much more developed ideas would become.

Yes, I saw that! That was lovely. I really do appreciate that kind of gentleness and politeness combined with laser-sharp thinking.

I always really appreciate how McWhorter tries to make the argument for the other side, in the most convincing and logical way possible, and I always feel in good faith and in a very kind way. I was taught that it's a fundamental part of learning and considering a problem but I don't see it done much anymore. Even debating teams these days often seem to avoid issues that might really challenge the participants.

The Dark Horse podcast is definitely one of my favourites at the moment. I also enjoy listening to Quillette and the new Culture Wars one with Andrew Doyle.

Yes, I saw that! That was lovely. I really do appreciate that kind of gentleness and politeness combined with laser-sharp thinking. I'm with you, too, on never listening to R4 anymore. I don't really watch TV either. During lockdown I started listening to podcasts and audiobooks and it was a total game-changer. I like that I can potter about, do the housework and whatever mindless things while listening to great thinkers and learning about history and philosophy.

The Black Guys from Blogging heads! John is great too but I love Glenn's passion and how he can talk at such length without hesitating. They both consider each other's position and are so polite. I've stopped listening to Radio 4 (lifelong habit), there's so much online.
Good to see other Glenn fans! Did you see his wife chat to Coleman Hughes on one of the blogs? Adorable.

This thread is a bit like the Joe Rogan podcast... conversation veering from topic to topic around some broad themes. I've really enjoyed it!

I really like Glenn Loury too vaginafetishist He's another really clear thinker. His podcast with John McWhorter is great. They disagree fairly often and it's great to see how they work together to figure out where the truth is between them.

What they mean is that they teach the students to understand everything they learn through a critical theory lens.

Yes. It's why so many absolute idiots think they are great at critical thinking. It's also why they keep telling people they should learn to be better critical thinkers and let it be put on the syllabus of all kinds of courses... which of course just plays right into my hands!

TheRealMcKenna Glenn Loury! !! He's just awesome, I love listening to him working out his thinking.

Oh, I meant to say - the question of efficiency and energy use in child rearing across societies is a really interesting one. I tend to think that if you were to try and do something like that scientifically (which probably isn't possible) what you'd get, to the consternation of many westerners, is something a lot like the traditional family forms you see around the world. There is a reason social forms develop and are stable and it's usually because they work pretty well and are achievable in terms of the energy the society has to spend.

Where centralised parenting schemes have been tried, they aren't all that effective, and people generally don't like them. I tend to take a very communitarian political and social view, but fundamentally I see that rooted in family life. The biological family is the model of all parenting, but it's not some kind of abstraction, it's entirely concrete and instantiated. There are no societies that don't use it in one way or another - there is variation but you don't see truly alien variations often and where you do they are often seriously dysfunctional.

as long as the causes of reproduction

Sorry, I should have said: as long as the causes of reproduction are widely known (i.e. unprotected sex can result in a child).