I really appreciate Carole's brilliance, humanity and courage in the face of mistreatment. Her experience at Harvard has strong parallels with that of Roland Fryer, another brilliant, moral and unorthodox mind.
Retired clinical social worker here - retired in 2014 out of Alaska - just before the madness really broke out full bore. If someone had told me at that time that I'd be called a - "trans-phobic bigot" - for being willing to say out loud that "women do not have a penis" - I would never have believed it. The retreat into self-absorbed fantasy worlds by so many young people today speaks volumes about the lack of meaning and hope for the future in today's Western societies.
The madness is the fear mongering social contagion that is the main cause of killing those by social erasure who are different and the very few caught up in ya alls ignorant never ending stereo types who might do some transition that it wasn’t good for. Shame shame shame on you
“Boo boo, I can’t oversimplify issues and promote out dated thinking anymore! People today are being forced to think new ways about gender issues they never considered before- it’s hell on earth!” What you claim might happen will never actually happen unless you say this with the intention of shutting down a lot of actual complex issues that surround gender. The whole premise here stumbles on the idea that everyone is supposed to agree on what it is to be “real”. We never have. We never will. It’s a false standard.
Because trans-people actually do exist and have always existed, it is out-dated to deny they exist and proclaim "women do not have a penis" as if that means something important. Hermaphrodites are born with both genitalia, but are not both genders. Some are indeed "women with penises." Pretending this is not so was outdated long ago and remains outdated because it is factually and ethically wrong.@@spencerantoniomarlen-starr3069
Nah. She’s pathetic. She spends the whole time saying science and university should be about the truth. Then does a 180 on race science. She’s the problem.
I’m trans and I read Dr. Hooven’s book T twice. It is extremely interesting and informative. I don’t know how anyone could ever perceive her as being transphobic, as I never got that impression from anything I’ve seen from her. I look forward to reading her next book. Thank you for your study in the area of sex differences. You have certainly opened my eyes to many aspects I would have never thought about. Keep up the good work!
Loved it! Open, honest, direct. Thanks for doing this interview and for this channel. I’m especially interested in Dr. Hooven’s new book regarding the war on men. Perhaps it will provide some stars to navigate by, so we can help our sons and grandsons flourish regardless of our current cultural chaos. I retired from academia in 2014, not a moment too soon. I’m grateful I could. Good luck going forward, Dr. Hooven.
What an interesting conversation. Great hosting by Tomasi, and I appreciated Hooven's candor and humanity. One great Hooven quotation among many: "We can't have the discussion if we can't produce the facts." I also found the distinction between academic justice and academic freedom very useful. The question of which scientific questions shouldn't be asked for fear that their findings may be misused or used to disadvantage an already disadvantaged group is an important one, but as is true with any question or answer that may be considered contrary to the prevailing orthodoxy, it really shows how little confidence people have in our ability to use information responsibly and responsively. Of course, there have always been and there will always be bad actors or misguided individuals who distort scientific information, but it seems very foolish to prevent that information from being produced merely on that basis.
How refreshing! Great interviewer.....marvelous guest.....direct information clearly expressed....respectful attention to nuances of meaning intended! This is what I thought universities encouraged. What has happened to our ideas about learning? Thank you for this! I'm delighted to discover this Heterodox Academy. New subscriber!
Fantastic interview! Very important content. There is so much I could say but I'll restrict my comments to one thing. I have a way of looking at IQ that I've never heard expressed anywhere. So many people are afraid to talk about, do research about IQ for fear of insulting or hurting feelings. My observation is that IQ has nothing to do with the "worth" of a human being. So what if one person has a higher IQ than someone else! I got a PhD in biophysics at a highly regarded university. I rubbed shoulders with many very high IQ people. Most of them were great but there were a few that I wouldn't give you two cents for. They were rotten human beings. I've also known some very average IQ people whom I regard highly and who are a much greater asset to the human species than some very high IQ people. I wish we could completely separate the concept of the value of a human being with their IQ.
Agreed. Case in point: William Shockley, Bell Labs physicist who shared the Nobel prize for the invention of the semiconductor transistor. He was also a despicable racist, publicly promoting the sterilization of black men.
This was so interesting; thank you so much. I suddenly had to leave my comfy armchair to rush to my tiny "safe" room here in Ramat Gan, Israel (near Tel Aviv)--as I heard booms from above--more rockets starting again. I'm 77, Israeli-American... I decided at 20 to live in Israel to help my people build a new country, after living for a year in a kibbutz. It's not been easy. A "peacenik", I never dreamed that after the wars where my husband fought , and our daughter and son served years in the army, that I would find myself again worried sick--this time about my grandsons fighting now in Gaza, and all those who suffered these last 56 days. This program made me forget it all for awhile. I was curious about the academic life in the US now. ops--booms again. , safest place in the little house again--8 pm. ....soon I'll probably hear ambulances and helicopters overhead, too, taking wounded to the nearby hospital...
So so sorry Israelis are having such an awful time. Thoughts and prayers are with you all. I think Hamas must go and so must Netanyahu so that compromise can happen.
Retired U.S. Army Aviation officer here. Re mental rotation, when I took the Army's Flight Aptitude Standardized Test (FAST), a major section of it had small cartoons of a 1950s F-84 fighter shown in a sequence of three attitudes. The test-taker was to pick the image that would be next in the sequence. There were perhaps 40 or 50 of those problems. There was another section of the test with similar-looking problems that just had two images. The test-taker had to choose which set of stick-and-rudder inputs would cause the change from the first image to the second image. For the record, I am a man.
This discussion was edifying and modeled well how to work through ideas. Having seen a number of complaints about the interviewer I really want to say how excellent he was. Remember, he is also working for the audience- both those that bring enough context and those that may not. He did really well with that except for when she interrupted him- and he still worked well and flexibly with keeping the conversation tied together, flowing, and meaningful- he was excellent.
I’m not an expert on anything. I can’t figure out why the Supreme Court is not being called upon to establish a legal definition of man and woman. How can you write, interpret, or apply a law without clearly defined terms?
10 місяців тому+5
Get her and Cordelia Fine together on these subjects...
This is the problem: informed people are afraid to speak, but we need to speak. If they don't speak and close their eyes for what is going on they are enabling this harassment to continue.
I can not wrap my head around why anyone's feelings about facts matter. As adults, we are responsible for our feelings and how we act. In school, you are responsible for learning the facts, not controlling the facts. This is so sad....and wrong. My son's college is paid for and with all of the insanity going on in universities, I am not sure I want him around those people. When we fear sending our kids to school, then we are going in the wrong direction. Why do we allow kids to determine what direction ANYTHING goes?
Not to twist the facts but to discuss the implications of certain conditions is the logical solution. The problem arises when people refuse to see conditions as "conditions". I have an acquaintance who is diagnosed with schizophrenia. She also refuses to accept her condition, and places the causes of her "illbeing" on friends, family and society. She also makes unrealistic demands on people around her, like for instance knowing how she feels instinctively (i.e. reading her mind).
Can you please add a link to the article the author wrote that was heavily referenced at one point in this interview? The interviewer said he read it three times.
Lots of people have already mentioned the poor sound quality and the excessive interruptions. Host also needs to stop swiveling in his chair. Otherwise, interesting conversation!
It’s strange to me that the time regarding conservatives is that they need to be better informed when it seems to be progressives who are muddying scientific terms (male,female for example) or attempting to eliminate them altogether.
To me, a person born in the 60's (a woman, but this is, i believe, less relevant in this context than my age), it is totally and utterly incomprehensible that people can even believe for a moment that sex is not a material fact.
This is one of several interesting guests you have had on your site. However, the interviewer constantly interrups with unnecessary explanations. Please keep inviting good guests but let them speak.
I'd really like to listen, but she's really hard to listen to with the constant upspeak. Hopefully she can work on resolving this so her message can be heard more clearly.
I think the interviewer didn’t properly define the constrained versa unconstrained visions. The unconstrained thinks we are totally malleable, and that if we get the government involved (which is almost always the answer) then we can have a “perfect” society since we humans just need the right policy and this will iron out all inequities of society. To just hit part of this unconstrained vision
Great information. Please get a sound engineer, or at least test the audio before recording starts. I want heterodox ideas to be taken seriously, and this level of production quality isn't helping. Also, John, seek honest criticism on your interviewing style from interviewers you admire.
Who said Fox news is not "compassionate"? That's prejudicial already, against conservatives. That's the problem with HA -- they feel compelled to attack conservatives when nothing supports their prejudice. Try to get to know some of them!
@@ransakreject5221 I'm not sure I follow. I think her point in addressing Tomasi's comment about Murray was to acknowledge that 1) no question is off limits, and 2) those questions need to be framed carefully lest we invite ridicule of the ideas before we've even had a chance to explore them. So there are two issues: the kinds of question we ask, and the environment within which we ask them.
She and Dr Sapolsky have all the same understandings of the science but where Sapolsky says we ought to give credence to what the brain is saying, she says ignore what you FEEL because your body says otherwise to ME ME ME ME ME.
I'm a transwoman and a healthcare provider (NP) working for a medium sized healthcare system in Florida. I do not work in trans health. Ms. Hooven makes some very good points in this interview and seems quite intelligent and rational. I wonder if she could have done a better job trying lower the temperature during her troubles at Harvard. Maneuvering the politics within any large organization is tough. I also noticed that she has several other interviews on youtube, primarily with people who seem to be pushing transphpbic points of view. This gives me the impression that she may be a bit disingenuous when she denies that she is just explaining facts and truth. Objective facts are facts. Humans do reproduce sexually with eggs and sperm, as do most life forms, but that does not cancel trans identities or should it give any group, even a majority the right to discriminate. Even in a democracy.
I did not accuse her of explicit transphobia, I do believe she is disingenuous when she states she is not transphobic as she has been interviewed supportingly on multiple transphobic podcasts. As for discrimination, in this interview, she speaks as if it would be okay, in a democracy, for the majority to repress a group. I believe she used a Catholic majority as an example.
@franceshaas162 I am a moderate conservative and have great empathy for trans people. I wish them nothing but to live in peace and happiness. However, I bristle at the term "transphobic" when "cis" people state the obvious sex differences and their impact on behavior, performance, etc., when trans people want to push into the spaces of bio-women (for lack of a better term), demand to be considered identical, etc and especially given the reality of autogynophiloa and predatory behavior exhibited by much-too-large cohort of the trans population (or those who wear that "identity suit" as an avenue for predatory behavior). I also bristle at the encroachment into childhood development, the medical interventions into rhe lives of young people who are not cognitively or emotionally ready to make decisions about MASSIVELY life-altering decisions, the major overlap between trans and other mental illnesses, autism, etc. the demand rhat their worldview, language, etc take primacy over anyone else's and the absurd notion that sex is a spectrum (it is like saying that the number of fingers a person has is a spectrum from 0-12). The trans community and its supporters are FAR too aggressive, losing acceptance and empathy. If you are trans, fine and you do you - I really mean that - but you have no right to control other people's viewpoints or speech. That doesn't make me either fearful or hateful - it means that I think your conception of material reality is wrong and has negative real-world consequences for other people when it's adopted on a wide scale, when you demand they adopt it under threat of violence, job loss, ostracism, etc. I'm not demanding you change yours - why demand that I change mine?
@@franceshaas162 Well, I think this depends on your definition of "transphobic". She most likely would not accept the claim that "transwomen are women" is a true statement. I don't accept it either, and nor do the vast majority of people - including many who claim they do for political reasons. If this is what you mean by transphobic, then yes she is transphobic. Is that what you mean? I also would add that because she has appeared on a podcast does not mean she, or anyone, agrees with all the host's opinions. People are complicated and cannot be divided into two camps like that.
@zatakification transwomen are transwomen Zak. I get the impression that she is disingenuous. For example, if I claim to support women's right to choose but consistently vote for a politician who is vehemently anti choice by claiming I support their views on say, the economy, I would the myself be disingenuous. These are complicated issues, I know. If she made it very clear that she supported trans rights on her Fox interview and in the podcasts I've seen, I may then have a different opinion. Honestly. I think alot of people on both sides are just attention seeking.
“Students want me to tell them the truth” she claims, as if she holds the truth which others want to suppress. Not that we want to use the best current understandings and data to seek the truth together, but she wants to download truth to her students. Hmm. Not really how things work in science. Or in any field.
I think highly sensitive kids have been reacting to seeing a rise in fascism in the culture. So sorry you had to deal with it. Perhaps if you weren’t taking sides with the body over the brain, your language would get less scrutiny by those who mentally feel like the opposite of their phenotype and feel like you’re questioning their core identity. Dr. Robert Sapolsky (neurobiologist) makes no apology for taking sides with the brain - what people feel like and cannot willfully change even under threat.
What a fantastic conversation!
Carole is knowledgeable, nuanced, thoughtful, open, and principled.
I really appreciate Carole's brilliance, humanity and courage in the face of mistreatment. Her experience at Harvard has strong parallels with that of Roland Fryer, another brilliant, moral and unorthodox mind.
This wonderful conversation is an example of how we should all strive to engage with one another where the goal is understanding, not agreement.
This woman has earned a place at the table.
Retired clinical social worker here - retired in 2014 out of Alaska - just before the madness really broke out full bore. If someone had told me at that time that I'd be called a - "trans-phobic bigot" - for being willing to say out loud that "women do not have a penis" - I would never have believed it. The retreat into self-absorbed fantasy worlds by so many young people today speaks volumes about the lack of meaning and hope for the future in today's Western societies.
The madness is the fear mongering social contagion that is the main cause of killing those by social erasure who are different and the very few caught up in ya alls ignorant never ending stereo types who might do some transition that it wasn’t good for.
Shame shame shame on you
“Boo boo, I can’t oversimplify issues and promote out dated thinking anymore! People today are being forced to think new ways about gender issues they never considered before- it’s hell on earth!”
What you claim might happen will never actually happen unless you say this with the intention of shutting down a lot of actual complex issues that surround gender.
The whole premise here stumbles on the idea that everyone is supposed to agree on what it is to be “real”. We never have. We never will. It’s a false standard.
@floatingholmes why is it out dated?
Because trans-people actually do exist and have always existed, it is out-dated to deny they exist and proclaim "women do not have a penis" as if that means something important. Hermaphrodites are born with both genitalia, but are not both genders. Some are indeed "women with penises." Pretending this is not so was outdated long ago and remains outdated because it is factually and ethically wrong.@@spencerantoniomarlen-starr3069
failure of teaching, don't blame the kids
Very good show, Carole you have balls and I applaud your work.
Nah. She’s pathetic. She spends the whole time saying science and university should be about the truth. Then does a 180 on race science.
She’s the problem.
I’m trans and I read Dr. Hooven’s book T twice. It is extremely interesting and informative. I don’t know how anyone could ever perceive her as being transphobic, as I never got that impression from anything I’ve seen from her. I look forward to reading her next book. Thank you for your study in the area of sex differences. You have certainly opened my eyes to many aspects I would have never thought about. Keep up the good work!
Loved it! Open, honest, direct. Thanks for doing this interview and for this channel. I’m especially interested in Dr. Hooven’s new book regarding the war on men. Perhaps it will provide some stars to navigate by, so we can help our sons and grandsons flourish regardless of our current cultural chaos. I retired from academia in 2014, not a moment too soon. I’m grateful I could. Good luck going forward, Dr. Hooven.
What an interesting conversation. Great hosting by Tomasi, and I appreciated Hooven's candor and humanity. One great Hooven quotation among many: "We can't have the discussion if we can't produce the facts." I also found the distinction between academic justice and academic freedom very useful.
The question of which scientific questions shouldn't be asked for fear that their findings may be misused or used to disadvantage an already disadvantaged group is an important one, but as is true with any question or answer that may be considered contrary to the prevailing orthodoxy, it really shows how little confidence people have in our ability to use information responsibly and responsively.
Of course, there have always been and there will always be bad actors or misguided individuals who distort scientific information, but it seems very foolish to prevent that information from being produced merely on that basis.
As an example, we should know a lot more about the causes of homosexuality and transsexualism. Who is researching these questions today?
oy...note to the interviewer: less interruption, pls!!!!
Maybe instead of "curiosity is king" we should frame it "a dedication to the truth is a prerequisite for moral living".
What a wonderful conversation and a beautifully passionate women.
Thank you to both ❤
How refreshing! Great interviewer.....marvelous guest.....direct information clearly expressed....respectful attention to nuances of meaning intended! This is what I thought universities encouraged. What has happened to our ideas about learning? Thank you for this! I'm delighted to discover this Heterodox Academy. New subscriber!
I also failed English and gym senior year. Now I'm in the very exclusive GED/PhD club. 😝
Great conversation. What's up with the sound?
She’s a brilliant guest. Crazy that scientists can’t just state the evidence without getting cancelled.
Fantastic interview! Very important content. There is so much I could say but I'll restrict my comments to one thing. I have a way of looking at IQ that I've never heard expressed anywhere. So many people are afraid to talk about, do research about IQ for fear of insulting or hurting feelings. My observation is that IQ has nothing to do with the "worth" of a human being. So what if one person has a higher IQ than someone else! I got a PhD in biophysics at a highly regarded university. I rubbed shoulders with many very high IQ people. Most of them were great but there were a few that I wouldn't give you two cents for. They were rotten human beings. I've also known some very average IQ people whom I regard highly and who are a much greater asset to the human species than some very high IQ people. I wish we could completely separate the concept of the value of a human being with their IQ.
Agreed. Case in point: William Shockley, Bell Labs physicist who shared the Nobel prize for the invention of the semiconductor transistor. He was also a despicable racist, publicly promoting the sterilization of black men.
GREAT point. High IQ is good and productive, and that's good for society, but it says nothing about the worth of a person.
This was so interesting; thank you so much.
I suddenly had to leave my comfy armchair to rush to my tiny "safe" room here in Ramat Gan, Israel (near Tel Aviv)--as I heard booms from above--more rockets starting again.
I'm 77, Israeli-American... I decided at 20 to live in Israel to help my people build a new country, after living for a year in a kibbutz. It's not been easy.
A "peacenik", I never dreamed that after the wars where my husband fought , and our daughter and son served years in the army, that I would find myself again worried sick--this time about my grandsons fighting now in Gaza, and all those who suffered these last 56 days.
This program made me forget it all for awhile. I was curious about the academic life in the US now.
ops--booms again. , safest place in the little house again--8 pm.
....soon I'll probably hear ambulances and helicopters overhead, too, taking wounded to the nearby hospital...
So so sorry Israelis are having such an awful time. Thoughts and prayers are with you all. I think Hamas must go and so must Netanyahu so that compromise can happen.
Good grief pad the studio walls or figure out how to fix the tinny echo when the guest speaks. It's painful to listen.
Absolutely superb! Thank you both for this, and thank you to Carole for 'T', which I have on my shelf and look forward to reading.
Thank you! Tomasi was a great conversation partner. Hope you like T!
Retired U.S. Army Aviation officer here. Re mental rotation, when I took the Army's Flight Aptitude Standardized Test (FAST), a major section of it had small cartoons of a 1950s F-84 fighter shown in a sequence of three attitudes. The test-taker was to pick the image that would be next in the sequence. There were perhaps 40 or 50 of those problems. There was another section of the test with similar-looking problems that just had two images. The test-taker had to choose which set of stick-and-rudder inputs would cause the change from the first image to the second image. For the record, I am a man.
Subscribed to this channel. Great interview.
This discussion was edifying and modeled well how to work through ideas. Having seen a number of complaints about the interviewer I really want to say how excellent he was. Remember, he is also working for the audience- both those that bring enough context and those that may not. He did really well with that except for when she interrupted him- and he still worked well and flexibly with keeping the conversation tied together, flowing, and meaningful- he was excellent.
Interviewer, your constant interruption of your guest was both annoying and disrespectful during this interview.
It's a debate about science and truth ... respect and dignity should not be guiding principles here. ;)
@@davidk.8686Did the guest know it was a “debate”? I listened to the whole interview and I did not hear it set up as a debate.
Fair play to her for biting the bullet on the race and IQ question.
So rare to see someone stand on principle these days. 👍
What's going on with the audio?
Agreed. They really need to fix it. It happened in the interview w/Steven Pinker as well.
Too much indirect sound in the mic. He needs to treat the room a little
I’m not an expert on anything. I can’t figure out why the Supreme Court is not being called upon to establish a legal definition of man and woman. How can you write, interpret, or apply a law without clearly defined terms?
Get her and Cordelia Fine together on these subjects...
Trying to finish up a correspondence with her for Aeon mag!
To the presnters: Talk to someone who understands audio recording!
I had to skip over the interviewer a lot
A lot of those questions were unnecessary and interrupted the points she was making
Less can be more
This is the problem: informed people are afraid to speak, but we need to speak. If they don't speak and close their eyes for what is going on they are enabling this harassment to continue.
I can not wrap my head around why anyone's feelings about facts matter. As adults, we are responsible for our feelings and how we act. In school, you are responsible for learning the facts, not controlling the facts. This is so sad....and wrong. My son's college is paid for and with all of the insanity going on in universities, I am not sure I want him around those people. When we fear sending our kids to school, then we are going in the wrong direction. Why do we allow kids to determine what direction ANYTHING goes?
Not to twist the facts but to discuss the implications of certain conditions is the logical solution.
The problem arises when people refuse to see conditions as "conditions".
I have an acquaintance who is diagnosed with schizophrenia. She also refuses
to accept her condition, and places the causes of her "illbeing" on friends, family and society.
She also makes unrealistic demands on people around her,
like for instance knowing how she feels instinctively (i.e. reading her mind).
I wish the interviewer would not interrupt quite so much.
Stop interrupting guests
Very interesting discussion but way too many interruptions by the interviewer. The guest should do most of the speaking IMO
Can you please add a link to the article the author wrote that was heavily referenced at one point in this interview? The interviewer said he read it three times.
link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-022-02467-5
@@HeterodoxAcademyThanks. I can read it - if I pay $39.95.
(I wonder if I can make those payments in three easy installments.)
@@TSwift-zm2ti en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sci-Hub
Lots of people have already mentioned the poor sound quality and the excessive interruptions. Host also needs to stop swiveling in his chair. Otherwise, interesting conversation!
It’s strange to me that the time regarding conservatives is that they need to be better informed when it seems to be progressives who are muddying scientific terms (male,female for example) or attempting to eliminate them altogether.
Fix the audio!
Please fix your microphone issues. The sound quality is awful
I understand nowadays students; I was like that when I was 13.
john shut up and let her talk, it is not about you, it's about her ideas, that is why she is a guest
To me, a person born in the 60's (a woman, but this is, i believe, less relevant
in this context than my age), it is totally and utterly incomprehensible
that people can even believe for a moment that sex is not a material fact.
One would hope that's what Harvard is all about! 👀
Video is mostly about her and not about sex difference in humans
This is one of several interesting guests you have had on your site. However, the interviewer constantly interrups with unnecessary explanations. Please keep inviting good guests but let them speak.
I'd really like to listen, but she's really hard to listen to with the constant upspeak. Hopefully she can work on resolving this so her message can be heard more clearly.
I think the interviewer didn’t properly define the constrained versa unconstrained visions. The unconstrained thinks we are totally malleable, and that if we get the government involved (which is almost always the answer) then we can have a “perfect” society since we humans just need the right policy and this will iron out all inequities of society. To just hit part of this unconstrained vision
This channel is being shadow banned big time.
Great information. Please get a sound engineer, or at least test the audio before recording starts. I want heterodox ideas to be taken seriously, and this level of production quality isn't helping. Also, John, seek honest criticism on your interviewing style from interviewers you admire.
Omg! The interviewer is really irritating! He interrupts constantly! Let this marvellous woman speak ffs!
i had to turn it off despite the fascinating content, because his interruptions were so annoying!
Who said Fox news is not "compassionate"? That's prejudicial already, against conservatives. That's the problem with HA -- they feel compelled to attack conservatives when nothing supports their prejudice. Try to get to know some of them!
the interviewer is annoying, disrupting the flow
sad world these days.....
I was with it until race and iq
Yup. She completely undermines her entire case.
She IS cancel culture. She just doesn’t want it pointed at her
@@ransakreject5221 I'm not sure I follow. I think her point in addressing Tomasi's comment about Murray was to acknowledge that 1) no question is off limits, and 2) those questions need to be framed carefully lest we invite ridicule of the ideas before we've even had a chance to explore them. So there are two issues: the kinds of question we ask, and the environment within which we ask them.
Just to be cute: Abiological sex seems, so far, not reasonable.
She and Dr Sapolsky have all the same understandings of the science but where Sapolsky says we ought to give credence to what the brain is saying, she says ignore what you FEEL because your body says otherwise to ME ME ME ME ME.
Who says an egalitarian world is a good goal?
i am going elsewhere to hear her views, not yours!!!!!
She committed the cardinal sin, she declared that trans women aren't women. That will get you excommunicated every time.
I'm a transwoman and a healthcare provider (NP) working for a medium sized healthcare system in Florida. I do not work in trans health. Ms. Hooven makes some very good points in this interview and seems quite intelligent and rational. I wonder if she could have done a better job trying lower the temperature during her troubles at Harvard. Maneuvering the politics within any large organization is tough. I also noticed that she has several other interviews on youtube, primarily with people who seem to be pushing transphpbic points of view. This gives me the impression that she may be a bit disingenuous when she denies that she is just explaining facts and truth. Objective facts are facts. Humans do reproduce sexually with eggs and sperm, as do most life forms, but that does not cancel trans identities or should it give any group, even a majority the right to discriminate. Even in a democracy.
I think you may be a bit disingenuous when accusing Hooven of transphobia and discrimination. Can you provide some specific examples?
I did not accuse her of explicit transphobia, I do believe she is disingenuous when she states she is not transphobic as she has been interviewed supportingly on multiple transphobic podcasts. As for discrimination, in this interview, she speaks as if it would be okay, in a democracy, for the majority to repress a group. I believe she used a Catholic majority as an example.
@franceshaas162 I am a moderate conservative and have great empathy for trans people. I wish them nothing but to live in peace and happiness. However, I bristle at the term "transphobic" when "cis" people state the obvious sex differences and their impact on behavior, performance, etc., when trans people want to push into the spaces of bio-women (for lack of a better term), demand to be considered identical, etc and especially given the reality of autogynophiloa and predatory behavior exhibited by much-too-large cohort of the trans population (or those who wear that "identity suit" as an avenue for predatory behavior). I also bristle at the encroachment into childhood development, the medical interventions into rhe lives of young people who are not cognitively or emotionally ready to make decisions about MASSIVELY life-altering decisions, the major overlap between trans and other mental illnesses, autism, etc. the demand rhat their worldview, language, etc take primacy over anyone else's and the absurd notion that sex is a spectrum (it is like saying that the number of fingers a person has is a spectrum from 0-12). The trans community and its supporters are FAR too aggressive, losing acceptance and empathy.
If you are trans, fine and you do you - I really mean that - but you have no right to control other people's viewpoints or speech. That doesn't make me either fearful or hateful - it means that I think your conception of material reality is wrong and has negative real-world consequences for other people when it's adopted on a wide scale, when you demand they adopt it under threat of violence, job loss, ostracism, etc. I'm not demanding you change yours - why demand that I change mine?
@@franceshaas162 Well, I think this depends on your definition of "transphobic". She most likely would not accept the claim that "transwomen are women" is a true statement. I don't accept it either, and nor do the vast majority of people - including many who claim they do for political reasons. If this is what you mean by transphobic, then yes she is transphobic. Is that what you mean? I also would add that because she has appeared on a podcast does not mean she, or anyone, agrees with all the host's opinions. People are complicated and cannot be divided into two camps like that.
@zatakification transwomen are transwomen Zak. I get the impression that she is disingenuous. For example, if I claim to support women's right to choose but consistently vote for a politician who is vehemently anti choice by claiming I support their views on say, the economy, I would the myself be disingenuous. These are complicated issues, I know. If she made it very clear that she supported trans rights on her Fox interview and in the podcasts I've seen, I may then have a different opinion. Honestly. I think alot of people on both sides are just attention seeking.
Great but what is a "trans" person?
“Students want me to tell them the truth” she claims, as if she holds the truth which others want to suppress.
Not that we want to use the best current understandings and data to seek the truth together, but she wants to download truth to her students.
Hmm. Not really how things work in science. Or in any field.
I think highly sensitive kids have been reacting to seeing a rise in fascism in the culture. So sorry you had to deal with it. Perhaps if you weren’t taking sides with the body over the brain, your language would get less scrutiny by those who mentally feel like the opposite of their phenotype and feel like you’re questioning their core identity.
Dr. Robert Sapolsky (neurobiologist) makes no apology for taking sides with the brain - what people feel like and cannot willfully change even under threat.
Ridiculous and dramatic, as usual.