Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey - Ep 62 | Girls & Boys

Episode Date: December 13, 2018

I'll dive into the latest insanity of the "gender fluidity" movement and discuss the truth behind its myths. Copyright Blaze Media LLC. All rights reserved.

Hey guys, what's up. It's Allie. Today we are going to talk about the difference between men and women and how this very basic truth is being assaulted by regressive progressives. And we're going to talk about a couple stories in which this is on full display. We're going to talk about why the left is doing this, kind of where this came from and what their reasoning is, if you can even call it that. And then, of course, we're going to refute all of their silly myths about gender fluidity. So there are two stories that have brought this whole gender fluid movement to mind. And one of them is about the Boy Scout. So there was an article a few days ago by The Washington Post.

And the headline of the article is this. Scouts recruitment war raises questioned about what it means to be a girl or a boy. Very interesting headline for a publication like the Washington Post, which tends to lean to the left. the fact that it is digging into that question, which so many people haven't even been brave enough to ask, what it actually means to be a boy or a girl. Like we haven't even able as a mainstream culture, of course, you and I have, but the mainstream hasn't been willing to even wrestle with that question because even wrestling with the question of what it means to be a boy or a girl is seen as transphobic, especially if you end up when you were wrestling on that question with the side of science.

The site of science obviously says that your biology actually dictates your sex, obviously, and that your sex, you know, beyond that, your sex also dictates at 99.9% of the time what gender you are. Of course, there is intersex, that tiny percentage of society that was actually born with ambiguous biology. But for the most part, unless you have some kind of dysphoria, like gender dysphoria, which is actually a disorder, then your sex actually determines your gender, what you identify as. But the line of so-called reasoning right now is that your sex is completely independent from your gender, that you can totally choose what you want to be, how you want to be, and that has nothing to do with your biology whatsoever. The idea that your body determines how you

behave how you think and the choices you make is now seen as bigoted. It's now seen as wrong, despite thousands of years of science, psychology, and sociology that proves that your body does indeed affect in large part, not completely, but in large part how you behave and what priorities that you have. Your gender determines a lot of the way you act, but of course, we're not allowed to say that anymore, which is why the Washington Post is wrestling with this question. Scouts, recruitment war raises questions about what it means to be a girl or a boy. So if you don't know, Boy Scouts of America has started accepting girls into their ranks. They are no longer going to be exclusive to boys. They already, a few years ago, started letting gay people or gay men

be in Boy Scouts and actually lead Boy Scout troops. That was a battle that was fought for a long time, but they ended up giving into that. And now they are going to step further to say, okay, well, we're not going to close our doors to girls either. Now, Girl Scouts of America is not happy about this. They are actually suing Boy Scouts of America because they are taking what it means to be a Girl Scout. Now, Girl Scouts are not doing this because they are socially conservative. They're not. They have been part of the feminist movement for a while. But the Girl Scouts now represents an old kind of feminism, which actually says it's unique and important to be a girl. But they are pushing back against Boy Scouts of America, not primarily for social reasons,

or certainly not for moral reasons, but really for marketing reasons and for business reasons, because they're afraid that boys are going to take all their customers. They want to remain a unique girl-only organization because that's where they've been able to make their money. That's how they've been able to remain an organization. They are afraid, of course, that Boy Scouts of America, if they accept girls, is going to make them obscure. So they're having this whole battle over this. Girl Scouts is trying to change to offer some of the things that Boy Scouts does. Boy Scouts is trying to accommodate girls.

But within that, there is a question. There's a question of what girls like and what boys like and are those things different. And what we are finding out through this story and through even the morphing of these two organizations to try to meet the needs and the desires of boys and girls is that girls and boys are very different. They like different things. They're motivated by different things. They're entertained by different things. That doesn't mean that some girls don't like some things that boys do. It doesn't mean that boys don't like some things that girls do. But it does mean in general that boys and girls behave very differently. They value different things. They have fun doing different things. The things that actually build up a girl

to be a responsible woman can be different than the things that build up a boy to be a responsible man. And they're trying very hard. The boy and the Girl Scouts, both pretty progressive organizations, now trying very hard to deny those differences while also pushing them in our faces by showing us the changes that they're making within the organizations to try to accommodate both genders. So it's really interesting because it does ask us the question what it actually means to be a boy or a girl. Can you just say that you are a boy and be a boy? Can you just say that you are a girl and be a girl? Are there real differences between boys and girls? Or is it just some meaningless social construct. That is what the culture is wrestling with right now. And the

reason why I say it's the regressive, progressive left is because this is a question that has been answered for literally millennia. And now we're asking it. And I'll say again, something I've said before, this is one of the reasons why the left and the right are so far apart, not because our differences are more complex and they used to be, but because they're more fundamental things that we agreed on forever, things that had already been proven, we question. now, for example, is killing a life inside of the womb actually killing a life? When a woman becomes pregnant with a baby, is it actually a baby or is it a clump of cells? Does it have any value whatsoever? The answer used to be, well, obviously, that's true. Even when Roe v. Wade passed,

it was, yeah, we still believe that life inside the womb is a life. And if science actually advances, then we'll know that it's a human baby and we won't be able to do this anymore. Of course, that's not the line of reason anymore. The line of reasoning is that the life inside the womb is not a life. It's just a clump of cells. And then we have this kind of conversation where we say, okay, are boys and girls really different? Does the testosterone and boys and the estrogen and girls have any kind of social implications whatsoever or not? That used to be, yes, of course it does.

Now the question is, I don't know. Of course, we disagree on things like borders. It used to be accepted across the board that, of course, borders are good. Of course, you have to have some kind of sovereign country. now that's being questioned. So all of these things that used to be accepted on both sides of the aisle are now becoming points of contention. Now we don't agree on these things anymore. So it is because our differences between the right and the left are so fundamental, that is why we are so far apart, not because of the complexity of our disagreements, but because of the simplicity of the fundamental

nature of our disagreements. And this war on gender is just one of those. There's this other story that brings the problems of the transgender gender fluidity movement to the forefront. And that is the story that I'm sure that you guys have heard about the twin boys who live in Texas. They're from divorced parents. They're six years old right now. The mom is a pediatrician. She has decided that one of her boys is going to be a girl. I might have actually talked about this on the podcast before has decided that one of the boys is going to be a girl.

Has called the boy Lola dresses up the boy in girl clothes. the other boy she allows to be a boy. Now, the problem is when this boy is with his dad or at school, he chooses to be a boy. He goes by the name of James. He wears boy clothes. He wants to act like a boy. Other people in his life, his teachers and people in different parts of his life where he either does activities or whatever it is, says that he acts like a normal six-year-old boy. Nevertheless, this mother is not only a planning to start chemical castration, to this boy when he turns eight. So putting him on some kind of hormone therapy that essentially castrates him and has affirmed what she believes is his gender identity. But she is also suing the dad

for full rights to her child, suing the dad for child abuse, for not affirming this kid's transgender identity that really his mom has just put on him. She sends him to this gender dysphoria counselor that, of course, is affirming of transgenderism. But she said in, she said herself that actually he does not show persistent signs and consistent signs of gender dysphoria, that he actually goes back and forth between, oh, I'm going to choose to be a girl when my mom's in the room, but I'm going to choose to be a boy when my dad's in the room because he's a six-year-old kid that just wants to please his parents. As if divorce isn't hard enough for kids, now he's dealing with a psychotic mother who wants her, what's a daughter, basically, and is ruining this poor kid's life.

So that brings up other problems to the forefront is that this whole gender fluidity movement is actually the social construct. So we have these people who are advocates of the gender fluidity movement saying that gender and the differentiations between the sexes are just social constructs when the reality is that we see not just in this story, but also another part of the world that we'll get into, this whole idea of trying to mix the genders into just being one large gender, that is actually the social. social construct with no science behind it whatsoever. And I think we're going to see more stories like the one that we see in Texas, where parents are forcing their kids into an identity that they aren't actually, that they don't identify with, which is very sad. Of course, I believe that mother should be thrown in jail for child abuse. But we have some liberal courts here in Texas, unfortunately, I'm praying for that family. But again, it brings up this question that we're dealing with what does it mean to be a boy or a girl? Of course, we who have functioning brains,

we who are, you can even call it conservative, but it shouldn't even be conservative, who are just in touch with reality. Of course, we know that there are differences between boys and girls. But the popular message on the left is that there's really not. And here's what's behind that. Here's what's behind the gender fluidity movement that's pushed by feminist, third wave feminist. And I won't even actually say third wave. It's been pushed for a long time. Here's what's behind it. They believe that if we push this gender fluidity meth, that gender is this thing that just oscillates depending on the day, depending on what you feel, that there is no gender that's actually tied to a certain anatomy, no gender that's tied

to another anatomy, that there's no behavior that a woman prefers, there's no kind of jobs that a woman prefers. Same thing for men. This is all a social construct that needs to be. deconstructed. It's called patriarchy. Feminists believe that if they tear down all of these differences between men and women and they make us just into this one big blob of one gender, then finally we will reach our egalitarian paradise. There will be no domestic abuse or no abuse at least from men to women. There's not going to be a gender pay gap. There's not going to be inequity of any kind. We're all just going to be equal. All of the abuses and all of the discrimination and the sexism and the horrible disparities that we see between men and women

are no longer going to exist if we just convince people that men and women are the same. Of course, how you do that is that you convince women to take on more masculine traits and you convince men to take on more feminine traits. That is part of the push behind abortion, for example, because if men are able to walk away from unwanted pregnancies, then women should be able to walk away from unwanted pregnancies too. So that's what feminists have been doing for a long time, is making men more like women and making women more like men to create one big gender and this one egalitarian paradise. Gloria Steinem, who is a very famous feminist, she's in her 80s now.

So she might have even started with like the first wave feminist and the suffragettes. She's so old. But she was in a PBS interview a few years back and she was asked by the interviewer about biological differences between men and women. She says, even if they're right, even if these people who are asserting that biological differences exist between men and women, even if they are right, it doesn't have to continue to be so. So what we see by the so-called side of science, the so-called ideology of science, that they are

desirous to overcome science in order to put in their social construct. Of course, they say that everything the belief is scientific, but we see from Gloria Stein's mouth that it's actually not. It doesn't actually matter if there's a scientific difference between men and women. What matters, what's most important is the social reality we want. This egalitarian utopia, which we really know is a dystopia, that we desire. That's more important than the scientific differences. We can overcome the scientific differences between men and women to have the future that we want

because they believe that eliminating or pretending to eliminate the differences between men and women, is going to actually eliminate discord, eliminate inequality, eliminate discrimination. So that's why they see this gender fluid movement as a human rights movement, as good for women. But here's the trap that they're getting into. So in doing that, they set the stage for the transgender movement. Because if men can be just like women and women can be just like men and no one can tell you any differently, then why can't women be men? and why can't men be women?

Well, the feminists would say that's a really good question. So they've opened the door to this transgender movement, which basically says, if I feel like a woman today, then I am a woman. It doesn't matter what my anatomy is. And if I feel like a man today, then I'm a man. It doesn't matter what my anatomy is. But here's the problem that feminists are running into. They're running into the fact that all of the work that they say they've put in for women

to accomplish things, to be in Congress, to be in boardrooms, to be president of the United States. Well, all of that's going to be moot when all of the people who become the first woman are actually biological men. Men are going to end up being better women than women are. So that's really going to suck when all of the people that take the titles

that feminists say that they have worked so hard for women to achieve are actually biological men. I don't think feminists are going to be very excited about that. They talk so much about the unique experiences of women the sexism women have dealt with all of the biological things the women have to go through, which quite honestly suck. And they talk about the unique strength that women have because we are women because of our unique experiences. Well, these biological men have not gone through those experiences and yet they are going to get all the accolades and achievements that we women

have been working towards, that feminists say that they have been working towards and they haven't had any of the same experiences we do. Okay. Well, that's interesting. I mean, think about it. Why can't President Trump tomorrow say that he's a woman and say that he's the first woman president? Then Hillary Clinton or Kamala Harris, whoever becomes president next, isn't going to be able to say that they're the first president. Why not? Why can't President Trump say that? And then it's no longer going to be someone that they heal a hero on the left who becomes the first woman president and who accomplishes this thing is actually going to be a biological male who has lived his whole life as a biologically rich male. But now he says that he's a woman.

And so he's actually the first one president. I'm not so sure that the feminists are going to be excited about that. I mean, say goodbye to female athletics. Really? I mean, say that there's a transgender man that plays basketball against women that runs track, that plays soccer, wrestling, any of those sports that are, you know, the side that's reserved for women is infiltrated by biological men. We don't stand a chance.

Women do not stand a chance in this whole thing. identifying as whatever gender you want to. That is how the patriarchy is going to end up winning over women. It's going to be that they infiltrate womanhood by being transgender because it will mean nothing to be a woman anymore. It will have no, it will have no significance whatsoever. You can give birth. Okay, whatever. Men and women can give birth. You experience sexism from a young age, okay, whatever, men and women both do. It doesn't mean anything to be a woman, and I'm not sure that feminists are going to end up being very happy with that. But there are also obviously much bigger problems with this whole gender fluid movement that have nothing to do with feminism,

because quite frankly, I don't really care about the plight of feminism very much. There's obviously sociological and psychological perspectives in this or problems with this that it just doesn't work because men and women are different, because women have more estrogen than men do. Men have more testosterone than women do. And that actually affects how you behave. Your brains are actually created differently. Women tend to be more nurturing, more nourishing, better communicators. We are better at handling crises. We are better at multitasking than men are. Men happen to usually be more aggressive, more willing to fight, protect, defend. they're better at compartmentalizing. In situations, they're better at actually fixing the problem than just

analyzing the problem. Men and women complement each other really well. But we complement each other because of our differences, and we are actually biologically made that way. Now, the caveat to that is, of course, that just because you are a man, does it mean that you have to be overly aggressive or always wanting to fight or writing four-wheelers and fishing and hunting all the time? That's not what it means to be a man that does not even, in my opinion, what it means to be masculine. You don't have to necessarily be physically strong to be a masculine man. In a way, gender is a, if you want to call it a spectrum, it is in some ways, and that there are women who are want to just be moms, and I don't mean just, but want to only be moms and to nurture and nourish and to help and to cook their whole lives.

There are also women who want to be CEOs and want to be president and who are career-oriented. there is a spectrum there. The same thing with men. There are male dancers. There are, then there are male wrestlers, whatever it is. There is a spectrum on both sides of gender that says, okay, you don't have to be one way. You don't have to fit into a compartment. But if you look throughout time and history, throughout every single culture, there are very real differences between men and women that just can't be denied. Men are always in virtually every single society for as long as humans have existed, the ones who hunt and the ones who defend and protect and provide. That's what men do in tribes, in societies, in nations. That's what they do. Women don't. Women typically

stay back. They typically raise the children. They typically cook and they garden and they gather, they nurture, they beautify. That's just what women do. They're good at cultivating. They're good at maximizing. They're good at taking something and making it grow, making it better. Men are really good at conquering and destroying and then building something back up. That's how men and women compliment each other. That's how they've complimented each other throughout history. So the way to know if something is true is to say, is this true throughout time, throughout history in multiple society? It's like this isn't just a Western thing. It's not just an Eastern thing. And that is true of men and women. The differences between men and women, the aggression that men show, the capacity

for nurturing that women show. It has been true forever. So it doesn't make sense that it is a social construct because it's not just part of one or a few societies. It's been a part of every society. Now, that's not to say every society has been exactly the same, that every society has been patriarchal per se, or every society has had the exact same gender hierarchy. But in general, the rules have been separate and the roles have been between hunting and defending, doing things with your hands, and nurturing and growing. Women, men, different. And if you even look today, so for example, Sweden, so they're one of the most egalitarian, I believe, yes, is Sweden and Norway, all of the Scandinavian countries. Sweden is one of the most egalitarian countries in that it has a nationwide commitment to ending the gender wage gap, whatever that means.

they also have equal, equal and very generous, equal and very generous paternal and maternal leave, so parental leave. But what's interesting about that is even with their nationwide commitment to the gender pay, to gender pay equality, even though they have a very generous parental leave program for men and for women, men still work a lot more than women do in Sweden. And women still have more part-time jobs as opposed to full-time jobs than men do. Women still take up 75% of the parental leave allocation. 90% of those who work part-time to care for family are women. And men still make more than women do. And this is in a very egalitarian society where the laws are egalitarian, where the laws are set up to include women at every single level that men are included. And what do we see? We see that men choose different

things than women do, that men still work more than women do, that women still work more than women do, women work less than men do because they choose to stay home. So it has nothing to do with society. It has nothing to do with laws. We're not going to be able to legislate away the differences between men and women. We're just not. Sweden is a very progressive place. It's a very leftist place. And yet what we see is that there is an inherent, there is an innate distinction between men and women that just cannot and will not be overcome. We see in this study by psychological science found that countries that are more egalitarian have fewer women working in the STEM field, despite massive efforts to attract women to STEM. And Professor Sto, someone who was a part of the study

said, it's important to take into account that girls are choosing not to study STEM for what they feel are valid reasons. So campaigns that target all girls may be a waste of energy and resources. what that shows is that women just have different priorities, different inclinations, and at times different talents than men do. The reason they don't choose STEM is because they don't want to go into STEM. It's not because of the patriarchy. It's not because men are holding them back. It's not because they're intimidated. They want to have kids a lot of times. Not staying all the time. But they want to have families. They don't want to have to work all the time. They don't like the idea of having to provide for their family for the next 55 years. Women are just different than men. And again, this is a generalization.

not all women are exactly like this, not all men are exactly like this, but the vast majority of the time, enough to make it a rule that men are different than women. And the statistics show that not just throughout history, but also now, even in the most egalitarian places. In the United States, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics listed the most dangerous jobs of 2017, meaning the most fatalities that occur within a job, logging, fishing, mining, all of those kind of things that are just very precarious, dominated by men. dominated completely, I don't want to say 100%, but very dominated. Some of them had 99, I think it was like fishing jobs, 99.9% men. Now, the left likes to say anywhere that there's a gap, that means there's discrimination. Couldn't be for any other factor. Couldn't certainly be for an

inherent biological factor, no, that sexism. So are you trying to tell me that the fishing industry is discriminated against women, that the fishing industry is leaving out women? You really think so? You think people are tearing down the door to be in the fishing industry? You think the mining industry is turning down women? No, I don't think so. It's because women don't want to do that. We don't want to mine. We don't want to be in the fishing industry. We don't want to do all. We don't want to be loggers. We don't want to be carpenters. We don't want to do that. Why? Because that's just not what women are good at. That's not what we're inclined to do because there's a difference between men and women feminists will not believe that because it ruins, like I said, their whole egalitarian

idea of what the future should be. If we just eliminated these differences, then there will be no abuse, there will be no disparity, there will be no discrimination whatsoever. That's just not going to happen. Now, I don't think abuse is good. I don't think discrimination is good. But the reason those things exist is because men and women are sinful. And anytime human beings are around or involved in something, there is going to be sin. There's going to be abuse of power. And yes, of course, men have abused their power of women. They have abused their physical superiority over women. And that's wrong. But that's never not going to happen. Being a more, quote, egalitarian society is not going to make men less strong. It's not going to make them equal in strength to women. It's just not going to happen.

Men and women will always be different. And so rather than trying to stifle those things, Rather than trying to repress those things, we should teach men how to be good men, how to be responsible men, how to take care of their families, how to take ownership, how to take responsibility, how to stay put when they make choices where their baby mama ended up with an unwanted pregnancy. Like, we should be teaching them to be good dads, to be hard workers. We shouldn't have a welfare system that incentivizes fatherlessness and for the woman to have more kids. we should have a system and we should have a country, we should have a society that encourages responsibility, whether you are a man or a woman, and lifts up the unique strengths of men and women,

because men and women do complement each other. There are so many things that women are better at than men are, and there are a lot of things that men are better at than women are. I'm not the kind of person that says women shouldn't try to be CEOs, that we shouldn't run for office, that we shouldn't be doing things that are at the forefront. Obviously, I believe that I should have a platform, and I'm okay with being outspoken. But at the end of the day, I also know that my priorities and my responsibilities are different than my husband. Now, I don't want to speak for every single marriage out there, particularly if you're not

a Christian because this is a biblical perspective, but there's also sociological and psychological evidence behind this. Like I said, at the end of the day, like my husband is responsible for providing for our family. Like if we both lose our job, he's the one that's going out and getting a job. and if we have kids, I'm the one taking care of our kids. That's just, and again, that's not for every single family. I definitely know stay-at-home dads, there's nothing wrong with that.

But I'm saying at the end of the day, if we had to choose, if the choice was put upon us, he's going to be the one that's responsible for making sure that we have a roof over our heads and that we've got food to eat. That's just how it is. And I'm good with that. Like, I love being a woman because at the end of the day, I know that he takes responsibility for those things. I love working. I love doing what I do. But I'm also very confident in being a woman and having the unique strengths that I have. And I don't want to be a man and I don't want to be like a man. And whether you are a single, whether you are married, whether you are not a mom, whether you are a mom or, you know, if you're a guy and you fill those roles as well, it's not about necessarily being a mother to be more like a woman or being a wife to be more like a woman. It's just owning your unique strengths and not denying them because you think that,

being a woman is weak or being a man that you might have guilt for being strong. It's owning those unique strengths that God has given us and using them to the best of your ability in whatever capacity you can and whatever field you can. Feminists don't want that because they see that as discrimination and inequality. So that's basically all I have to say about all of that, just to dispel all of the gender fluid myths and kind of outline where they came from and how we got here and why they're so detrimental to society. They're obviously anti-family. They're anti-science. They're anti-reality. And it's going to take a number, especially, I think, on our men. And who loses in that battle

of trying to emasculate men, we both do. Both men and women do because, again, it's not good for the family and passive men make for torn apart families and broken down communities, which leads to toward a part nation. So those are the implications for that. If you have any questions, have any feedback, have any criticisms, let me know. Allie at the conservative millennial blog.com, of course, you can message me on Instagram. Don't forget to leave me a five-star review if you like this podcast at all. Thank you guys for listening and I will see you next week.