I ask Neil deGrasse Tyson to share his thoughts on the science behind transgenderism. Watch the full interview here: • Neil deGrasse Tyson | ... #BenShapiro #NeildeGrasseTyson #DailyWire #Transgenderism
Funny thing is, in another part of this interview, NDT calls out Ben as the "King of Pissing Off People in the Internet", and Ben ACKNOWLEDGES IT with A LAUGH like "Yeah, that's right heheheeeee"
I don’t know.. I am pretty sure that’s how he talks in most educational videos I’ve seen him in.. he’s being very deliberate with his words. I can only imagine the amount of mindfulness and patience I’d need in order to endure a conversation with a fast talking spitfire like Ben Shapiro
@@mekaibowen8262 quotation marks can be used for fiction and non fictional sentences, the way to tell the difference is the context before or after the said quote so next time just read a bit more and you won’t have an issue🙂
@@ioakimantonis4687 that is exactly because of the structure of society especially in the west, where the people identifying out of their assigned gender, are still more at risk to bully, su1cides, social ostracisation, etc. because because we see this in research that approximately 1 to 2% of population on average identifies as non-binary. For example, in the culture of India, transgender community has been living with their own identity since centuries and hence they have the highest population of trans people, and by that extension LGBTQ community… in the whole world. now this does not mean that the LGBT folks are the happiest there or they don’t face discrimination in terms of laws and the non-LGBT people, THEY STILL DO.. it’s just that at least they have come terms to the fact that so and so phenomenon exists.
@@ioakimantonis4687I’ve met 3 or 4. My cousin is transgender and seeing her obsess on wanting to be male is pretty sad to be honest. She’s had healthy breasts removed by the national healthcare service, she’s now depressed and won’t leave her room or engage with the family. If a family member is obsessed with drugs or transgender issues the outcomes seem similar. For someone to say just ignore it because it’s a free country is odd
This us such a complete non-sequiter from leftists. He talks fast therefore he's wrong? If your simple mind can't comprehend it slow down the video, turn on captions.
@@JobVanDam He talks fast so you cannot get your point across. Works with woke 20-year olds in college campuses. If he tries that against a competent debater, he'll tear him a new one.
@@DudeWatIsThis You leftists live in a bubble then you claim to know what happens outside your bubble. Ben has debated Ana Kasparian, Cenk Uygur, Destiny, Alex O Connor and TONS of people on his Sunday Show. None of them are the type you can just steamroll by talking fast, he makes his point, when hes done talking they respond. Furthermore if they don't understand why can't they just say "excuse me, can you please repeat that?" Both Destiny and Alex O'Connor, intelligent left wing people, have complimented Ben. Only you bubble leftists can't because you have to live in a binary world. You are good and he is bad. You are nice and he is mean. You are the truth and he is the lie. You are the light and he is the dark.
@@JobVanDam I am not a leftist, lol. I'm just critical. And I just think Ben Shapiro is a doofus, that's all. Ana Kasparian and Cenk Uygur are MUCH worse, though. There's barely any merit in winning a debate against them. But what would Shapiro do against Sam Harris? Against Dan Dennet or Slavoj Zizek? Well, maybe if you are American you can still consider me a leftist, since you guys just pick between "right wing" and "more right wing". But in Europe I'm center-right. And no, I'm not British.
"A society that puts equality before freedom will get neither. A society that puts freedom before equality will get a high degree of both.” ― Milton Friedman
@@worldscar6422 "Woe unto them that call evil good and good evil; that see darkness for light and light for darkness; that taste bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter." Isaiah 5:20
So intelligent Ben Shapito, but he does not realize that Neil deGrasse is exposing a lot of different points, and every time Shapiro tries to answer one, he interrupts Shapiro arguing and introducing more points, without allowing him to answr his own questions and taking the most of the conversation. Is a subtle tactic of temperamental imposition when a person is so prompt to speak without the will to listen to the one he speaks to.
Exactly right. The politicians and officials should only ever seek to protect and expand our freedoms. Any time someone tells you, we must all appose some group that is already marginalized, you are being used. And Ben here is looking for some, really any, rationale that makes people think that's ok. He's pretending to be scientific and dispassionate, but he is anything but. He's an erudite apologist.
Actually it should. There’s right and there’s wrong. There’s facts and fiction. If a man identifying as woman can walk into any vulnerable space used by biological women this will make them feel uneasy, and frightened. Not everyone agrees with this, and rightly so. This is dangerous!. Neil is a scientist, and he should be reporting facts. Instead he danced around the questions.
It matters when it effects everyone else. It matters when it's forced onto others or violates the rights of others such as biological makes using woman's bathrooms and entering their sports
It matters when it effects others. It matters when it violates the rights of others, such as religious freedom, freedom of speech, biological men using women's bathrooms and entering women's sports
@@reginayoung5578 if someone's existence violates your religious freedom, then your religion is built off controlling others and is precisely the type of thing the right to religious freedom is supposed to protect us all from: you imposing your beliefs on me. we gotta get over the bathroom thing. if you're worried about a trans person coming in to violate you, then please consider that someone coming to violate you is not gonna be stopped by a sign on a door anyway, irrelevant of gender. what are they gonna do to you in there, pee in the stall next to yours? fix their makeup? exist? if you've ever seen a gender neutral restroom in any of the dozens of countries where they're standard (or a family bathroom in the US), you can notice quite clearly that people, by and large, use a bathroom as a bathroom, not a hunting ground. if that's all you can think about then i question why, frankly
I don’t think this is even a debate. It’s literally just Neil talking about “culture wars” and making sure Ben doesn’t get a catchy soundbite out of him
If you are FUNDAMENTALLY OPPOSED to transgenderism. There is nothing for you in this debate. If you are someone WILLING TO LISTEN Neil makes very great points. Whether you use biological arguments or whatever, the FACT is that people in a free country are choosing to express themselves outside of a gender binary. This EXPRESSION is regardless of biology, or other such arguments. And again, if you are WILLFULLY REFUSING to listen to Neil, like you said "it isn't even a debate". But for those more open-minded, they might just receive a new perspective that they otherwise did not have. I would recommend that you live your life LISTENING to others, rather than constantly living defensively and argumentatively. You do not have to AGREE with someone, to simply listen.
Neil was putting forth legitimate arguments. If your preoccupation is to take a "soundbyte" out of context, you have already told on yourself, that you are NOT listening and acting in bad faith. Only sensationalists look to take arguments out of context.
Neil deGrasse Tyson is trying to avoid pressuring Ben Shapiro so much he throws a tantrum. It's an uncomfortable spot to be in. We all remember the BBC interview.
If I may point something out quickly - yes, I agree, they were calm and it's nice to watch that... But let's not be naïve, it helps that none of the speakers' fundamental rights, such as self-determination or physical integrity, were at stake in this discussion, let's never forget that.
Sadly no you did not watch a civil debate it was civil but it was not a debate One person was trying to acquire objective truth and trying to explain that to the other person The other person was trying to achieve confirmation of their predecited definition of what the universe should be and the way they want it to be Ben Shapiro did not have a debate his mind is made up his mind is not changed he is not willing to consider anything else except what is already made up in his mind at least that's the way he reads and comes across in this video He was not looking for a debate or discussion from Neil deGrassi he was looking for confirmation he was looking for Neil to say you're right Ben the way you see the universe is how it should be and we watch Ben jump around try to shift the goalpost tried to redefine words or limit the definition of words into a false dichotomy and try to pigeonhole Neil Degrassi into a corner so that he can say see I'm right it's not science. That's another interesting point there's no such thing as anything that's not science everything is science if you wish to understand something you just made it science You're dungeons and dragons role-playing game that's science you could do all kinds of science with that You're fiction fantasy soft p*** books you can do science over that You think the way the brain operates the way our operating system runs on the CPU inside of our skull the way we edit and alter our programming to run on that computer inside of our skull you think that's not science? You're trying to say it's not science because you want to be able to say well if it's not science then it's wrong. This was not a civil debate this was one guy trying to have a civil debate and one guy trying to get confirmation for his false dichotomy
This is so valuable! Finally a discussion with two people with opposing views that is not a shouting match. This type of discussions is what society needs. It invokes critical thinking
Seems like Neil is afraid to commit to an opinion. When pressed for an opinion, he says “what does it matter” or “what’s your motivation?” Seems like a cop out
I think what he is saying is Why should someone else's gender matter? What's the motivation to care about someone's gender? He's saying it shouldn't be politically motivated. Legislation to restricts people's freedom shouldn't be the motivating factor. There have been females competing against and with males in sports like little league baseball, soccer, volleyball and even wrestling.
@@WildBillandFriendsbecause he's smart enough and patriotic enough to know the basis of the inquiry is rooted in a political agenda to undermine the basic freedoms of others, and he's smart enough to dangle it out there to expose that agenda.
Let's see, centuries of men physically ruling others, and there were queens only because they were wives or daughters of kings in stable countries. Now that technology can be used to equalize physical differences to a certain extent, we should purposely throw away known physical facts? That's simply not a appropriate use of the new abilities afforded by technology
What does that even mean? We give a sh!t because these people with freedom to identify themselves as what they like (which infact is not a REAL thing) are passing down, more like, CONVINCING children who have no understanding of what is real or not. They can bloody well dwell wherever they want, but it gets dangerous when they infect others with unproven fact. I don't even know how most people are taking the words of Neil as a word of God. When infact what he is saying is ridiculously nonsensical. What does "Science can study more about it" mean? The studies have already been done, both physically and psychologically. What part of this problem exactly is he referring to be studied?
NDT way of thinking in this dialogue feels to me so much more unique, probably the most detailed, observationally aware and justly humanitarian way I’ve heard anyone talk, politically speaking, about transgenderism.
Or maybe he just doesn’t want to get cancelled. He obviously has no science to support his arguments so the smart thing is to dance around the topic or not answer any at all.
@@LaSantaPatronaI think you misunderstood what science is. Science is observation of facts and data and making best inferences from them. Sometimes we do experiments to get more data. Science is not a scripture that everyone needs to follow. Transgender people are present, that is a fact. Now why they are present can be a research topic, TBH it's already being studied and may need more work, but putting a blindfolded on and acting like it's a lie is not scientific temperament.
@@LaSantaPatronano, he is trying to not absolutely destroy Ben since he is on a tour promoting his book. He doesn't want to get cancelled by unintelligent backwards bigots for ridiculing someone so greatly deserving of it.
@@LaSantaPatrona You can ask scientific questions about gender, but there is no clear scientific test of gender. Biological sex can certainly be tested. In this discussion Ben is trying to say that because there is no scientific test, then it's meaningless - so the only option we have is biological sex as a stand in for gender, so no one gets support for deviating. Tyson is saying that because gender and biological sex are not the same thing, you can't limit or oppress those who deviate. I would rather live in the world where the oppression is limited and the support is not.
A hormonal equalized league would be one way to circumnavigate the differences between men and women. I know I would watch out of curiosity. Long-term Idk if it would be able to compete with mens sports but short-term it would be a hit.
@@TN-br9yl yes sir, but he made this personal, he had not respond as a scientist, even if it matters when u want to compite against a cheeta in a 100m run, they just said who cares do whatever u want, or what do u mean by that? Why u even care? That's ridiculous
Lol what a bunch of babies. Neil's point is that in a "libertarian" society, your gender identity doesn't matter and you can't even cope with how fucking ironic that is. Cope harder, cucks. Neil literally used the argument of an adult, to a malding child. "If it doesn't affect you (because it doesn't) then why do you care"
All I know is that whenever I talk about science, people on both the political left and the political right get upset-for different reasons-because the science doesn’t support their political prejudices. I’d rather spend my time with people who neither seek to silence scientific inquiry nor twist it into excuses to violate the rights of others. Doesn’t seem like much to ask.
I don’t care about anything unless someone says that gender is sex. That is not remotely scientific. They say that because they don’t have a thought behind that head and they blindly follow a book. I only get mad(or, offended) when people are wrong.
Ben looked awkward all the time cause he didn't want to slap him with facts in a brutal way he gave him space and just tried to close this interview asap cause u could see that he had respect for him before the interview started .
@@patrycjaolewicz5108 a true scientist knows when to say that they don't know and don't have the right answers yet because the right information hasn't been given.
It's more like mr Tyson and mr Shapiro are in agreement but mr Tyson can't show it on camera , it's the subject of rhetoric which is the art of being persuasive which allows mr Tyson to get around answering direct questions but still be in relative agreement, the whole video was balancing act.
@@enoch3874 Obviously Mr Tyson came "well prepared" to that interview with Shapiro! He knew his political views and did not want to align with Shapiro on some touchy subjects...
@@sergeayissi939 being that mr Tyson is a scientist (astrophysicist in particular) and sociology is regarded as not science in the typical view of it..its not obvious to me how you come to your conclusion . The reason I why sociology, I think, is viewed as the odd man out in the scientific community is because the interpersonal demention that's included allows for subjectivity to come in
@@enoch3874 Sure, but Shapiro is no scientist, he is political + he's far right! Tyson knew exactly where Shapiro wanted to take him and he politely declined the invitation to extremism...
I agree with both sides of the argument. The thing about freedom (particularly when it exists alongside equality) is a two-way street. If everyone is free to express themselves however they please, then you are free to go through life acting like a cliche example of the opposite sex if that’s what you choose, and simultaneously, other people are free to react to your choices however they choose. Freedom comes with a price: and that price is growing a thick skin and accepting other people’s criticism of the more obscure among your free life choices. Otherwise there is, by definition, at least some degree of oppression involved. How you choose to live your life is up to you. How other people respond to it, is not.
P.S. this is coming from an autistic ginger. I’ve been called just about every variant of “retard” under the sun. But I don’t complain. I barely even take offends anymore. I embrace it. Because it is part of the compromise of living in a free society, and I value freedom and equality for all more than I value my own feelings not getting hurt.
This is the smartest comment I’ve seen so far. The way I see it with this community, they’re gonna have to learn to compromise just like EVERYONE else has done before them. Blacks are free from oppression and have the same rights as whites in this country for example, but to ask that all white people not to like them is never gonna happen and they just have to accept it and move on. I agree that trans people are humans and should enjoy basic rights just like the rest of us but absolutely nothing more. We shouldn’t have to suck up to them or learn their million genders or be obligated to refer to them as whatever gender they please. I say this as a lesbian myself who is tired of the bs and entitled behavior coming up across all these “minority groups”.
But responses to it when it is dangerous or hateful should not and is not freedom. And how people respond to others response is also free to be whatever if it is lawful
Exactly my thoughts. People can do whatever they want, I don't care. But the moment they start to force something like their pronouns on others they turn into oppressors.
This isn't a debate, It's a scientist talking to a media personality. There has to be an element of equity of standing in order to consider it a debate and the knowledge gap is massive between these two in regards to almost any scientific premise. It's interesting that these two are talking about a subject but they are not debating and you can tell he knows that.
@@hagifashion7513 my mistake. Ben Shapiro is a energetic speaker and can seem combative. Neil was also a bit more deliberate with his words than normal. Typically you get the sense he’s trying to be accurate, here he seemed like he wanted not to be misheard. Plus Ben kept jumping in there cutting Neil off. Those mannerisms made my mind go to debate. Plus they had differing views and they were arguing the merits and pitfalls of those views on an important discussion in today’s society.
@@python-pyqt5982 He's only an intellectual giant in the realm of astronomy and astrophysics. He was having a lot of trouble answering most of these questions. This was no lecture, it was barely a discussion.
@@imsikc In your extremely twisted right-wing logic, a political commentator with a law degree knows more about science than a person who holds a PhD in Astrophysics.
It’s amazing to see even kneeling to the pressure to speak “accordingly””. He tried to not be emphatic on talking about plain scientific truth. He dodges direct simple questions, which is not his usual. Sometimes he responds asking a question as if they should not even be talking about this, but well….they are.
Ben: biology exists so we have to protect children from them with legislation so our kids don't learn to be nice to trans people, that would be bad somehow. I can't say how. Neil: people should be allowed to express themselves however they want, why do you even care? Comments: Neil is a fake scientist! Trans people: we know all about biology and don't deny any science, please leave us alone
@@wgo523 You do NOT know all trans people! Why do you think you can talk for all of these individuals? The legit one's want to be left alone. The narcissistic million-gender, self ID people, like that one calling himself trans-racial, make it harder for real trans people, to be taken seriously. I bet you don't accept trans people like Blaire White. There are more than you think. BTW, nice strawman! Shapiro has never said that children should be mean to trans people. Stop, spewing nonsense!
@@wgo523 No one takes issue with how you choose to live your life, we live in a free country and you can do as you wish. The problem is it becomes an issue not of freedom when you expect others to participate in your lifestyle, which is exactly what trans people are doing when they demand/compel others to use their preferred pronouns. If a Muslim for example doesn’t believe in your concept of gender roles and you compel him to use your pronouns, he is not the one that is intolerant of your transgenderism, it’s you that’s intolerant if his religion.
In Cosmos he used to herald the bravery of Galileo, who told the truth about scientific reality despite persecution and ultimately execution. And now Neil has a chance to fight against the new orthodoxy but instead he chooses to just stay out of the fight, and if pressed further then he just acquiesces to the “church” of the Left.
@@relaxingsounds1386 are you that dumb? Even Ben in the video talked about gender as a social. Not biology, that was exactly one of his questions to Neil lmao
@@amymartin8243 A lot of show and little of substance. Or another way of putting, I don't put much stock in what I say because I am not able to support it, but I can make a lot of money from being a puppet.
This was a very hard-nosed butting of heads... like to of those rams that like almost kill each other doing it- yet so polite and civil. Even while like sooooo contentious and adamantly opposed, they maintained a sense of respect and civility. We NEED this kinda conversation more in our society.
He was trying so hard to avoid answering the question because he knows the answer but knows he will be heckled by leftists for giving the answer that science will say
Yeah this was actually kind of hard to watch it was almost like not having him on to debate at all because he's giving him very vague non answers that circle around the real question Ben is asking, he knows men are men and women are women and men as women in sports DO have an unfair advantage he just doesn't want to be canceled which is wrong.
Honestly, idk why they keep pandering to those that think mediocrity is special when they probably don't follow their work. They'd probably have a larger audience if they stated truth over feelings
Why does your identity in society need to be matched with your genetic code? That seems pretty primitive, to be honest. What happens when technology advances to the point where people can just swap body parts whenever they want, or transfer their consciousness into another body? What if a man chooses to play as a woman in an extremely realistic virtual reality simulation?
Ngl, I tried writing 20 different comments to this to try and not get myself cancelled due to daring to have my own opinion on the matter and its extremely hard. Kudos to Neil for taking this matter on.
He's answering truthfully about the question directly not the broad implications that most people have pre conceived when it comes to hot button topics. Of course this is all purely the opinions of a astro physicist.
neil is highly educated in astrophysics and was groomed by carl sagan. he's one of the worlds most intelligent ppl right now. however i must point out.... neil is not a biologist or educated in genetics. i also believe neil did not want to stir the pot and be caught up in something he would consider a distraction to his career.
@@ricklazio7923 As a curious guy and a man of science in general, Neil very likely has a better basic understanding of biology than lawyer Ben Shapiro. I do think it's interesting that many people respect psychologist Jordan Peterson's opinion on climate science or evolutionary biologist Bret Weinstein's opinion's infectious disease (biology is a very wide field and these two are on opposite ends of the biology spectrum; they have a very loose connection). Better yet, many people seem to respect Tucker Carlson's opinions on infectious disease more than the vast majority of doctors and scientists that study it
@@ricklazio7923 Also notice that Neil didn't say anything that is biologically false. He didn't really make any biological claims; he just approached it with curiosity and objectivity. He didn't say that XX people can magically become XY. He just said that we see some people presenting as a different gender than the one they were assigned at birth and that would be an interesting phenomenon to study
I'll give you an effective tip, Ben. Briefly, I was once falsely accused before a group, and when the Boss came he heard my opponent's story and without asking me a question started to lash out at me talking without stopping. What did I do to keep my decency and courtesy and ask for my right to speak?? I stood in front of him, and surrounded by the group raised my open hand high and made my body rigid like eagerly to be heard while staring into his eyes. He tried to ignore me, but I kept insisting in a silent body language with my hand on high staring at him. Then he got very confused and asked me why I was doing that. Then I spoke for the first time and said, "May I speak?!" He got totally ashamed and said, oh, yes, yes, of course, go ahead, speak. Then I calmly exposed the truth while nobody interrupted me at all. They all got dumb and disconcerted while I could go on my way self defended in a most effective way.
I feel like things can be studied and that only once there is evidence of harm directly from that thing should determine whether the state has the power the make that illegal.
@@Dennis-nc3vw bro you say we only muster one word rebuttals yet in a video full of incredible points by a genuine scientist you came out thinking he was in the wrong. No matter what anyone says you'll just say they're either antifa or "scared of being cancelled by the left"
@@averypatrick5279 Well, at first he said "the left's understanding of gender is unscientific," then he had to back up to "well, okay, it's a social construct and therefore not designated by science per se, but they're still not biological women," and then when Neil addressed that line, it seems as though he just stopped engaging with the convo altogether. Essentially, his plan was to run through his regular talking points, but because deGrasse Tyson gave a nominal amount of pushback, these argument fell like a shitty house of cards (after all, Neil most likely isn't some sort of gender theorist or anything). And I think that's Clara's impression as well.
I'm glad Neil came at this with the idea that it doesn't matter in most regards because it's a free country and someone's choice on how they live THEIR life.
"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use." - Galileo
@@abacuswatches2230 he doesn't agree with someone else's choice so he must not be libertarian, ya know? Here I was, thinking I'm libertarian because I believe people should be free of government coercion. But apparently if I disagree with someone who makes stupid decisions or spouts a dumb ideology, I am not a real libertarian.
"People express themselves on a spectrum." People do a lot of things, like reading Tarot cards or raiding "haunted" places, that does not bring what they do to the realm of science.
Tarot is mainly used as a tool for prediction (as divination can basically just be a fancy word for prediction, which is what humans naturally do), if we're going to speak frankly without the spirituality behind it. It's less of trying to bring nonscientific stuff into reality and more trying to make sense of the world around us via a tool of picture cards. Even if it is just placebo, what's the harm in letting people have fun with things like that? Most people that use tarot or go into haunted buildings don't try and shove it down other people's throats (unless they're leftists). Human's naturally predict things and want to know more about the world around them. What's the harm in using tools for that insight?
@@screamingopossum7809 But you don't base scientific facts based on what someone wants to do or not do. Science is SUPPOSED to be objective. Desires change literally on a whim. The basic scientific process/method is the establishment of repeatable (thus True) cause/effect. "Gender isn't Sex" is NOT a repeatable process. Everyone is born with a dingding or cooch (regardless of whether the plumbing works properly or not). Those are the options. No matter what someone WANTS doesn't change that.
@@Dennis-nc3vw I’m kind of curious, even tho it seems impossible for you to have a civil conversation behind your seething teeth and maddened eyes. Did you watch his video?
Reading his book now and I think he is a person with huge heart, someone who is very forgiving/generous, and still rocks this child-like wonder within him when I think of the vast information he owns/understands. It’s incredible. I get the sense that he understands more than he let it show. #NationalTreasure #NobleMind
I appreciate Neil’s clarity of logic! I don’t agree with him on everything but he put this issue to rest in my opinion… I mean there is still the question about sports but his idea about testing hormonal levels makes sense…
Neil is "happy to opine on this." And adds, "why do we give a shit about this?" And, "freedom to behave in any of these ways, should not concern you at all" And, "I don't see anything meaningful solutions" And, "People express themselves on a spectrum." And, "what are you trying to accomplish by asking yourself, is it science or is not science?" Neil was sooooo uncomfortable with this topic. I am a Ben fan, but I agree with other comments that he should have hit harder on this. This was one of Neil's most unscientific interviews ever.
The point Neil was trying to make is that your feelings about trans people, whether good or bad, don't matter in a free society. Cause regardless of whether it's scientific fact or not, you should be able to do what you want. I thought republicans were all about freedom? Lol
I think Ben hit just as hard as he needed to to get NDT to express his ambivalence on the topic. NDT doesn't feel backed into a corner yet, and it could be to his detriment. Either way, he's clearly not a thought leader in this debate, which is an arguably acceptable position, and Ben got that out of him.
To respond to your first point, NDT's opinion was that people like Ben, who claim to be libertarian, should actually approach trans issues by first asking why they care. Why does Ben care so much what pronouns a person uses? Why does he care if someone who identifies as male wears a dress? The argument here is that, beyond his own prejudices about those things, he has no actual reason to care because those other people just want to exist. Trans issues are hardly issues once people like Ben Shapiro just live and let live.
Anyway, that doesn't change the fact that transwoman are man who IDENTIFY as women. A real woman (a female one) doesn't need to identify as women she's already one
they’re not, no matter what you change you will never be able to transition to a biological male/female. though, that’s not to say that people can’t be trans, but you can’t change your biological gender
He's terrified of giving a direct answer, just like all people who make boatloads of money by encouraging societal lies....to sum it up.... He don't wanna be cancelled
Does that really matter to you that much. If it really bothers you that much go live in a place that dosent have transgender people like Iran. Personally I like the freedom we have in America that every individual can find self fulfillment in the own way.
This was amazing to watch especially when your high out of your mind, one genius put his efforts and interests into astrophysics and physics and the other put his genius into political science and statistics.
He admitted they don't use the scientific method in his field. They just speculate with zero evidence and we are expected to believe it just because they said it.
I get where he's coming from. It's a luxury to express what you think about yourself whether it's reality or not because of where people live. It's a progressing in humanity that can either go bad or somehow become beneficial
The amount of copium in these comments is hilarious. What happened to facts dont care about your feelings? Does that all go out the window when, the facts point to something your political views dont align with
There's nothing factual NDT made. He tried to divert the issue by asking what's the purpose of determining if it's biological. Which is not the topic being asked.
Ah Ben Shapiro the harbinger of data and science meanwhile he wears a funny hat because he follows a religion with miracles that are literally scientifically unexplainable. Ben "Logicman" Shapiro.
Bill Nye (and Neil) was involved in a Veritasium video recently where a prof bet $10K that Veritasium was wrong about something (which he wasn't). The video, at first, showed how Bill Nye wrote an email after witnessing the signing of the $10K bet that, perhaps, he had been too excited by Veritasium's previous video and that he now thought that Veritasium was probably wrong (again, he wasn't, as the video shows here on RU-vid). I watched the video again after a week to show someone and, lo and behold, that part of the video had been edited-out/removed. BILL NYE COULDN'T HAVE IT KNOWN THAT HE WAS WRONG ABOUT SOMETHING. Ego above science. We see this with Neil as well.. it's kinda fucking sad.
@@baghead4548 when I saw Bill Nye get destroyed by Ken Ham in the Creation Debate, then Mr. Ham walked Bill through the museum to show and teach him about REAL science.... Well, I was done with Mr. Nye. When Tyson spouts the same exact tired, beat up arguments that dissemble the wisdom entailed in the message, that Bill Nye used... I realize that NYE and TYSON must have graduated from the same school of science... Wherever THAT may be. I really want to check these dudes credentials, now that I think about it. Lacking the ability to hold a decent, sense-filled conversation is a HUGE problem and I am surprised that Ben even let this guy on the stage. Honestly.
@@JavierCespedes90 which virtually never happens. and in the rare cases it does, the trans community shuns those people. and when it does, sure you have a right to be upset with that person. does that mean we should let that shape legislation that would affect the rest of the community? hell no. this is a free country. we judge individuals for their actions. you can't prosecute an entire demographic because of the actions of some. otherwise we'd be banning Christianity because of the statistical correlation between priests and pedophilia lol.
@@JavierCespedes90i think you only think you’re tricked because you think transgender is an adjective term rather than an verb to describe someone’s experience in life. someone is not trans, they are a woman or a man (whatever they transitioned to). they are not trans, but they have transitioned. i hope that made sense idk how to really word it but this kind of thinking really changed my view on transgender and everything. overall, gender is a total made up thing and overall it is genuinely how we express ourselves. if they were extremely feminine, had a feminine personality, and had the surgery, would you have an issue ? i do completely also understand where you’re coming from, as for a period of time i didn’t really think i would date someone who was trans. but i think the idea of being “tricked” stems from a false idea on what trans people are that i often see
@@ProudCommie Idk why people think that God (at least the Judeo-Christian God) and science are incompatible.... The most influential scientist and mathematician*, Isaac Newton, was a devout believer and used his faith to understand and explore the world around him. To suggest that religion and science are competing forces is absurd.
Newton didn’t have today’s technology and advancements in science to figure otherwise, he was closer to a deist, he also didn’t believe in the holy trinity or jesus was god. religion and science are as compatible as reason and faith, no compatibility at all.
Talking about sport, is there a point on the gender spectrum where a person should switch to compete in a class whose members have eggs or in a class whose members have sperm ? Hormones level ? Which hormone should be taken into account, the ones produced by an individual who is equipped with eggs or sperm ?
“Why does this matter other than sports” Uhh…how about bathrooms/locker rooms, private schools/classes segregated by gender, and to use a recent example, beauty contests.
Also, people should be free in a free country, he claims. So why can't I freely use correct pronouns instead of being forced to use the woke pronouns _demanded_ by the transgender community? This whole movement is a denial of freedoms.
I just don't get how they can say my daughter and I do not deserve penis free spaces. Or that my son must share his space with girls. He's a teenage boy. I mean c'mon. Those transboys/men are in danger.
Indeed, and with the way that Neil was able to absolutely shred and obliterate each of Ben’s points, it should show people that the way to respond when confronted with Republican propaganda is to use the Socratic method. Ask questions to get them to think for themselves and hopefully shift their perspective, don’t try to offend them and polarize them even more
@@Keke_Poutri because theres one side that's literally trying to live, and the other side thats literally trying to erase all minorities and create an ethnostate.
"How" we address Sports isn't the main question regarding gender assignment,..... I argue that tasks, and roles assigned in Military Service, (Were lives are on the line), is the most important question on this topic.
NDT: "This only matters because today we segregate nearly all sports by gender." REALITY: "Sports segregated by gender, Prisons segregated by gender, Restrooms segregated by gender, Biology segregated by sex, Medical diagnoses segregated by sex, Legal charges against violence also segregated by sex" NDT: I can't find a significant solution (regarding the sports situation). REALITY: "if we can't find a significant solution. Why does that happen?"
This is rich. He doesn’t hesitate to bash Deism on the basis of science but when science undisputedly establishes a truth he brings up excuses. So now Sports is a higher factor than evolution for him. “Looking for truth” my a$$.
Joe Browser, exactly! He is vehemently against creationism being taught (or even embraced) in any context, but teaching or embracing the idea that men and women are interchangeable and it's "who gives a shit."
I'd say Niel isn't even that smart. He denies the first law of science, which is: you can't create something from nothing. In order for something to exist, something had to create it or manifest it. Denies creationism but doesn't actually believe in science, sounds like a dumb man to me.
No. He's saying you shouldn't apply science to cause harm. His argument that politics shouldn't use science to remove constitutional freedoms is weak, as politicians shouldn't use anything to remove constitutional freedoms. However I bet he can provide more examples where 'science' of some sort has been used to remove freedoms causing genuine harm.
No he isn't, how the fuck did you come to that conclusion. He's saying that science shouldn't at all dictate someone civil or human rights. He literally clarifies that at the end.
@@leonais1 The science used to create the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima removed a lot of freedom from the people it killed. No one cares what a transgender furry does in their spare time. People object to being forced at gunpoint by the government to use their fantasy language.
@Jeremy Dionisio You point is ALMOST all the way there but the "science is the future may also change" is where you lost me because that's too much like that (male) transgender mother, whose infant (birthed by his (female) transgender husband is latching but not finding breast milk (naturally) despite the "mom" hoping that will change soon. Sorry Jeremy but hundreds, if not thousands or years of science shouldn't be washed away exactly for reasons like this. The male "mother", if properly informed, should know that at no point EVER will she be able to produce breast milk because she is ACTUALLY a he. Otherwise I, too, kinda don't care what people do, who they are, etc...but (to Shapiro's point) when the categorically true science behind everything starts getting swept under the rug for social appeasement...I simply can't go there as I think that is reckless.
@Jeremy Dionisio No anger on this from me. Let them be whatever gender they want to be. But explain how it's fair to biological women to have a biological man-now-turned-into a "woman" compete against them in sports. You have a daughter?
@Jeremy Dionisio Who is attacking them for existing? Funny how mere criticizm all of the sudden becomes and "attack" and this is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. MAYBE men will evolve to be able to produce milk but seeing how that hasn't happened once yet in thousands of years...why pretend it may happen any minute? There is more evidence of evolution pushing us towards twelve fingers/twelve toes (as babies with this "defect" are increasing in number) but for someone to believe they are a women (when really a man) to the extent that they believe they WILL be able to produce breast milk is as sad as it is laughable...and because people like you perpetuate the "maybe" instead of the FAR more likely and entirely science-based "don't count on it". There is a human infant in the middle of this, don't forget...one whose parents refuse to complete a birth certificate for because they would have to list the "father" as the (in reality) natural mother. It's a prime example of people living in la-la land to a VERY unhealthy extent, cheered on by folks (presumably like yourself) who would rather see them try and fail and try and fail and try and fail - with a VERY confused infant at the center of it all - than step in and say "listen, I know you don't want to hear this but, biologically, you won't be able to produce milk. As such it would be better for you and the baby to stop pretending otherwise". I fail to see the problem with that. By comparison, I see a MUCH bigger problem with society just going along with their fantasy as to not hurt their feelings. As someone who doesn't have the luxury to pretend things that aren't true, I don't mind transgenders one bit but I do think their attempts to wish away their anatomy, biology and all the science behind it in favor of living in a dream world - and expecting everyone around them to bend to their fantasy - is where I draw the line. I have a transgender person in my family and OF COURSE I refer to him as her...but that's out of courtesy/respect. I think if I saw her crying because, no matter how hard her and her mate have tried, she simply CANNOT get pregnant, I'd say someone REALLY ought to talk to her and bring her back to Earth. Sorry if my realism conflicts with your optimism but, until I see ANY evidence of men POSSIBLY being able to produce milk, I'm not holding my breath and will continue to be concerned for a child being raised in those conditions. As for sports, my solution would be three leagues, basically: One all biological men, one all biological women and one that caters to both/anyone in between. I don't like your idea of pitting them all together because in doing so, you've basically eliminated a fair playing field for just women and are essentially robbing them of chances for scholarships, sponsorships, etc...and for what? So that biological men-turned-women can crush every women's record in existence? If so then I can only assume you believe that men are better at being women than actual women! ;) As for "within a year, I 100% believe that we should see a growing number of new gender being born". Really? Wanna bet? Because that would be the safest bet I would have ever made in my life and even more evidence of your delusion. I don't disagree that "life finds a way" and "nothing stays forever" but you seem to think that evolution is going to move at the speed of social change and I'll bet every penny I have that you are wrong.
I love NDT but I think Shapiro has a small point. My tween girls have to regularly state that they identify as she/her. It’s not the biggest deal but it’s normalising the idea that gender is a choice rather than an scientific fact for most people. I don’t ask my girls to identify the colour of the sky everyday and then have to go along with whatever they come up with. Kids are pretty impressionable and peer pressure is a real thing. When they were 9 years old this was the hot topic in the playground and coming out with the binary answer was seen as boring and conservative. So I am left leaning and progressive but it doesn’t sit well with me to have the assumption that you can choose your gender imposed on my kids. Especially when some choices you make in that regard you cannot change back.
He’s just trying not to get cancelled. He’s not a politician or anybody that is supposed to be good at debate. He’s just trying to protect his career. Whether or not he even agreed with Ben in the first place he would have said the same thing.
couldn't agree more. ppl should see right through his pseudo-intellectualism. try watching him on mute.... all that knowledge and he denies the existence of a creator or at the very least intelligent design... tells you a lot about him.
Yeah, and he SHOULD because he is a science educator to the public which is extremely important giving people the perspective of scientists - public image matters to that goal and could be detrimental if it went way south.
@Riki P. my comments were too vague for you to jump to such conclusions, you have no idea what I'm about. There is an undeniable natural law in science, there are also always exceptions to the rules, Mr. Shapiro was attempting to have a scientific discussion about natural law with a scientist, before getting into specifics of exceptions.
Yes, when someone you consider smart disagrees with your opinion it means that they are afraid of being cancelled. Controversial take - Maybe Neil is telling the truth! OMG, so crazy!
He clearly laid out his position. Don't call him scared because it's one you don't agree with and thinks he _secretly_ holds another. Speculation is not a good look.
Neil "feels" Ben "facts" Neil "I'm a scientist" "factual statement about societal opinion" Ben "yes, but reality " I'm paraphrasing, of course, but you get the point.
Most people are concerned with the way neil degrasse tyson answered questions, But i think it shouldnt have been expected for him to answer differently he is rather centrist and doesnt have as radical opinions on social issues as people expect
@HS boohoo they contained a level of nuance that Shapiro’s audience doesn’t seem to be able to parse, though I think Ben understood him just fine yet continues to roll with the same narrative anyway.
