Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey - Ep 967 | 'Vanderpump Rules' & the 'No Baby Daddy' Tragedy

Episode Date: March 13, 2024

Today we're discussing the latest drama surrounding Lala Kent, a star of Bravo's reality show "Vanderpump Rules." Lala recently decided to have a child via a sperm donor, claiming that this child's "baby daddy doesn't exist," and we weigh in on the controversy and moral issues surrounding this decision. We also dive into a disturbing New York magazine article that argues in favor of sex-change surgeries for all, at any age. Unsurprisingly, its author is a man who identifies as a woman and has quite a disturbing history. Plus, we discuss troubling leaked files from WPATH that shed light on the pseudoscience behind "gender-affirming" care. --- Timecodes: (01:04) Introduction & merch (02:46) Vanderpump Rules' Lala Kent on sperm donor (31:20) New York Magazine article (52:10) Psychological issues and gender transition (54:48) David Reimer and Dr. John Money (01:01:03) Chu & porn addiction (01:09:40) WPATH --- Today's Sponsors: Jase Medical — get up to a year’s worth of many of your prescription medications delivered in advance. Go to JaseMedical.com today and use promo code “ALLIE". We Heart Nutrition — nourish your body with research-backed ingredients in your vitamins at WeHeartNutrition.com and use promo code ALLIE for 20% off. Range Leather — highest quality leather, age-old techniques and all backed up with a “forever guarantee." Go to rangeleather.com and use coupon code "ALLIE" to receive 15% off your first order. Good Ranchers — Go to GoodRanchers.com and use code 'ALLIE' when you subscribe to get a FREE Easter ham and $25 off any box! --- Links: New York Magazine: "On the Cover: Andrea Long Chu’s Moral Case for the Right of Anybody, at Any Age, to Change Their Sex" https://nymag.com/press/2024/03/the-right-of-anybody-to-change-their-sex.html --- Relevant Episodes: Ep 966 | Where in the World is Kate Middleton? https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/ep-966-where-in-the-world-is-kate-middleton/id1359249098?i=1000648959055 Ep 932 | The Shocking Truth About Pornhub | Guest: Arden Young https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/ep-932-the-shocking-truth-about-pornhub-guest-arden-young/id1359249098?i=1000641346030 Ep 886 | Donor-Conceived, Lesbian-Raised, & Born Again | Guest: Ross Johnston https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/ep-886-donor-conceived-lesbian-raised-born-again-guest/id1359249098?i=1000630733945 Ep 702 | The Pedophilic Underbelly of Transgender Activism | Guest: Genevieve Gluck (Part 1) https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/ep-702-the-pedophilic-underbelly-of-transgender/id1359249098?i=1000584994678 Ep 636 | How BDSM, Porn, & Pedophilia Are Tied to Transgender Ideology | Guest: Genevieve Gluck https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/ep-636-how-bdsm-porn-pedophilia-are-tied-to-transgender/id1359249098?i=1000568333166 --- Buy Allie's book, You're Not Enough (& That's Okay): Escaping the Toxic Culture of Self-Love: https://alliebethstuckey.com/book Relatable merchandise – use promo code 'ALLIE10' for a discount: https://shop.blazemedia.com/collections/allie-stuckey

Hey, this is Steve Day. If you're listening to Allie, you already understand that the biggest issues facing our country aren't just political. They're moral, spiritual, and rooted in what we believe is true about God, humanity, and reality itself. On the Steve Day show, we take the news of the day and tested against first principles, faith, truth, and objective reality. We don't just chase narratives and we don't offer false comfort.

We ask the hard questions and follow the answers wherever they leave, even when it's unpopular. This is a show for people who want honesty over hype and clarity over chaos. If you're looking for commentary grounded in conviction and unwilling to lie to you about where we are or where we're headed, you can watch this D-Day show right here on Blaze TV or listen wherever you get podcasts. I hope you'll join us. Vanderpump rule star Lala Kent has announced that she is pregnant via sperm donor. There are many facets and layers to this story that are important for us to think through as it comes to the rights of children. Also, speaking of children, the cover of New York Magazine. is an article arguing that all kids, no matter their age, should be able to, quote, unquote,

change their sex. We have found out some really disturbing details about this author and his background and the motivations for pushing the sick and depraved ideology. Really important for us to know about this and make sure that we are prepared to fight against it. This episode is brought to you by our friends at Good Ranchers. Go to Good Ranchers.com. Use code Allie at checkout. It's good ranchers.com code Alley. Hey guys, welcome to relatable.

Happy Wednesday, halfway through the week. Hope everyone's having a wonderful week so far. Okay, y'all, like, I'm still going down this rabbit hole with Kate Middleton. There's been more that I've seen over the last 24 hours. We don't have time to get into all of the new stuff that I'm seeing. We'll have to do a follow-up. on it though. Maybe sometime next week. It seems like you guys were really interested in that too. Wow, wow. Wow. The internet's amazing. Like the internet and the people on the internet and how they

spend their time. Sometimes it's kind of sad, but it's also very impressive. I've got more questions. So I'll work on that. Then I'll come back to you with an update sometime soon. Go listen to yesterday's episode or watch it if you haven't already. Mind, mind blowing stuff and also very concerning. I find myself very genuinely concerned about Kate and just hoping that she and her family are okay. Okay. Before we get into today's episode, just a reminder, we've got some new merch. It's so cute. Probably my favorite design ever.

You're not enough on the front and then on the back, but Jesus is another great opportunity, I think, for an evangelistic conversation. Same thing with our last month's drop, which was self-love won't save you. These are just conversation starters. We've got two hats. One of them is a cord hat, the one in brown. We've got these crew neck sweatshirts as well as the comfort colors t-shirts. So cute, right in time for Easter, which is coming up. You're not enough, but Jesus is go to alleymerch.com for that new stuff. All right, let's get into this story. This is about Lala Kent. Now, a lot of you know who Lala Kent is. I say that name and you're like, yes, I know exactly who. you're talking about. I had no idea who this person was, but last week I started getting several messages from you guys sending the post that she has been putting up about her new pregnancy, which came about via sperm donation. And so we're going to talk about some of the stuff that

she has said about her pregnancy, said about her child and some of her background that she's shared that makes this story, I think, really relevant and helps us just, again, think through this issue. When someone announces their pregnancy, it's so easy to just say, yay life, yay babies. And of course, those things are worth celebrating. But as we've talked about many times at this point, we have to be a little bit more thoughtful about how babies are conceived and how they're treated. And this particular story has several layers to it that I think are worth us talking about and thinking through. Now, La La Cente, she is a star on the show Vanderpump Rules. And I'm going to have to bring in pop culture expert, Bree, to talk about Vanderpump Rules because I don't know what it is,

Bree. I've heard Vanderpump Rules. I've heard that many times. I don't know where you watch it. I don't know what it's about. Is it reality? Is it fiction? Is it drama? I'm guessing what I've deduced is that it is reality, right? It's a reality show. Yep. Okay, tell us what is Vanderpump Rules. Yeah. So Vandermpump Rules is a spinoff of one of the real housewives show. So one of the real housewives is like a restaurant mogul. However you say that. Yes. And she has a bunch of restaurants that she then hires staff at, obviously. And the show is about them. Her name is Lisa Vanderpump. Hence the name of the show. show. And so the show is about the staff, the young, attractive staff at her restaurant in L.A. I had no idea. I thought it was more like Sunset Boulevard or selling sunset type thing. I guess is it in the same style? Yeah. Okay. Kind of. Yeah. And how long has this been going on?

This has been going on for 11 seasons now. They're on their 11th season. Yeah. It's been very successful because it is very traumatic. Where do you watch it? It's on Bravo. Okay. Which is where all the other housewife shows are. And you watch Vanderpulb. I do.

Have you been watching all 11 seasons? I have now seen all of them. Oh, my goodness. Some people might know this. Last year, actually, this show was in the news quite a bit because a scandal happened on the show. And it became, I think, the most talked about, like, scandal in reality show history. What? What?

What? Just one of the people on the show. cheated on their partner of 10 years with her best friend. I feel like that's normal in that world. I know it feels like very normal reality TV, but this was very dramatic and people reacted who weren't even watching the show very in a very extreme way. And so it was in the news and still is. So a lot of people, that's why a lot of people have heard of this show and maybe not other

like reality TV shows. Okay. So it's trashy reality TV basically. And did you watch the Real Housewives? No, I've never. which this has spun? No. Okay. You did it. You just started to pick up on Vaynerpumperl. Someone told me it was really dramatic and interesting and so I started watching it. Sign me up. I was like, yep, say no more. Okay. So who was Lala Kent? Can you tell us a little bit about her?

Yeah, Lala Kent came on the show in like season three or four, I think, so a little bit later. And she very immediately was like not a likable person on the show. She came on and was very secretive. and people blamed her a lot for not revealing what was actually happening in her life when the rest of them were putting it all on camera. There were rumors when she started on the show that she was dating this rich man who people thought was married. And she denied it to the end. She was like that, no, he is not married. He is not married. But she wouldn't tell anyone who it was.

And now we know he was actually married when she was dating him. and he left his wife and married her. And we'll get into that, I'm sure. But yeah, now she's just a series regular. And that's kind of how she entered into it. And she's a very dramatic person on the show. Now is she a well-liked person? Because I know that everyone kind of gets their favorites in any of these shows.

I don't think that, I think the charm, if you will, of Vanderpump rules is that no one really is likable on it. Except for the person who was cheated on in this scandal. And so they're all kind of like, they're morally questionable. Yeah. So, yeah. Okay. So it's not that surprising that she has now come out and said, I'm using a sperm donor for this next pregnancy. It's not like we thought that she had the same worldview as us.

But because this is being widely celebrated, I even saw some people that I, I follow liking her post announcing that she is pregnant via sperm donation. It is worth talking about. Okay, here's the summary that I have. Breed did a great job of telling us who she is. Let me give you a little bit further information. La La Kent joined the hip Bravo reality series Vanderpump Rules in 2014. It follows the lives of young staff members. Okay, we don't need to go through all that. Her father unexpectedly died in 2018. This deeply affected her. She publicly mourned this, of course. She was close to her father.

That is an important point that we will raise just a little bit. Then she later started dating filmmaker Randall Emmett while he was married. They became engaged in 2018. They postponed their wedding due to the pandemic, but they welcomed their daughter, whose name is Ocean, in 2021. Later that year, they ended their engagement, so she and the previously married guy and separated amid cheating allegations. Randall is currently in the midst of accusations of sexual abuse and offering acting jobs in exchange for sexual acts. Uh-oh.

Many are calling him B-List Harvey Weinstein. So the cheating allegations in this, B-Bree, it's being those are the allegations against him, not against Lala. Right. Although she has also admitted on the show that she also has cheated on him. Terrible situation. Yeah. Chaotic, godless situation. So the couple right now, here's the deal. They're in the midst of a custody battle for their daughter, Ocean. Kent announced last week that she is pregnant with a baby consumed via sperm donor. And this is why. She said so that she will always have full control of that child. She will be able to say this child is fully mine.

No one else can ever take ownership of this child because she is now realizing the trauma of going through a custody battle with your child. And she is having to share her child with someone who she no longer loves. She doesn't live with. She doesn't have a commitment with anymore. This child is being used as all children always are in these divorce situations being used. used as a pawn and she wants another child but she doesn't want that situation again so she is using a sperm donor so here she is announcing this on instagram a lot of people have been wondering who is the baby daddy and i just want to say the best part about my baby daddy is that he does not

exist. I have been pretty open about wanting to really have full control of, I guess not my child, but having them around me all the time. I believe in love. I know that I will find love again, but for me, my child will never be up for grabs again. Okay, so full control over the time spent with her child. That's why she wanted to use a sperm donor. Obviously, I've got a lot to say about that. And I'll get to my commentary in a second. Hey, this is Steve Day. If you're listening to Allie, you already understand that the biggest issues facing our country aren't just political. They're moral, spiritual, and rooted in what we believe is true about God, humanity, and reality itself. On the Steve Day show, we take the news of the day and tested against first principles,

faith, truth, and objective reality. We don't just chase narratives and we don't offer false comfort, we ask the hard questions and follow the answers wherever they leave, even when it's unpopular. This is a show for people who want honesty over hype and clarity over chaos. If you're looking for commentary grounded in conviction and unwilling to lie to you about where we are or where we're headed, you can watch this D-Day show right here on Blaze TV or listen wherever you get podcasts. I hope you'll join us. So Lala says in that video, which was on an Amazon live, and I saw that clip on on Instagram. She says the best part of my baby daddy is that he does not exist because she used a sperm donor. However, that is a lie. Her baby's father does exist. He is just a stranger.

He is just a man who will never know his child and a man that this child will never know. This child will long for a father. This child will wonder where she comes from. whose nose does she have? Whose personality quirks does she have? She can have half of that answer. She'll never have that full answer. Because Lala is purposely creating a fatherless child because she wants a child whose time she can control.

And so she understands the difficulty of custody battles. She understands the trauma that that can create both for her and for her child. She understands that it's going to be very difficult for her daughter to have to split time between her mother and her father. And yet she is forcing her second child into an equally tumultuous and an equally vulnerable position by saying, you can't even have, you can't even have half of the time with your father. At least her first daughter knows who her father is, can see her daughter's, can see her father's face. and can see herself reflected in him. At least she can spend time with her father sometimes,

even if it's just on the weekend or every other week. But this second child will not have the privilege and will not have the opportunity to do this. And this is coming from someone, Lala, who mourned the death of her own father, who realizes the significance, the unique importance that her father played in her own life, in her own development, both as a child and as an adult.

And yet she is robbing her child of that opportunity. Why? Because she wants to. Because she wants another child. And she wants a child whose time she can fully control. It's all about her and what she wants. And yes, the desire to have a child can be a very noble one. We love babies.

We love life. We love creation. And I'm sure that she loves her children very much. I'm not doubting that. I'm not even doubting her ability. in some ways as a mother. I am saying, though, that this form of conception, this way and method of bringing life into the world is inherently selfish.

Because you're saying, I do not want you to have the privilege that I did of having a father, of being able to know your dad, knowing where half of your DNA comes from, half of your family history, half of your medical history, I am going to take that away from you, child, and purposely create you as fatherless. And that, to me, is very sad. It's extremely self-centered. She goes on to say, I just feel like going the donor route is the right decision for me. For me, she says, for me, not for the child.

I want an absolute with this baby, no matter what, this is my baby. No one can ever come in and take it from me. I don't have to share on Christmas Day. It's just mine. Do you know like how childish this sounds? It sounds like you're talking about a toy. It sounds like you're talking about an object. No, this is mine. I don't want to have to share. Now, I understand because again, she's realizing the repercussions of a broken parenting relationship with the father of her first child and she doesn't want to go through that again. But, you are still introducing this child into a traumatic life. And what's going to happen, as she mentions, there's a possibility that she'll have a boyfriend, that she'll get married one day. You're just introducing strangers into your child's life. They are going to forever be seeking their father. They're going to have that father hunger. They are going to be looking for the person to whom they belong, the father to whom they belong. They will at the very least be looking for that father figure. And as she goes through boyfriends, as she goes through her relationships, as she potentially goes through marriages,

that child is going to be re-traumatized. We've heard from so many children that are born via sperm and egg donation that they are longing to know to whom they belong and from where they come. that is a question that all of us seek to answer in a spiritual way like why are we here what is our greater purpose where do we come from is there some higher power of course that's found in the god who created the universe who rules over it is found in Jesus Christ but we also long for that in a physical way in a much more tangible way i i don't think that any of us who have had the privilege of being raised by two biological parents understand the security and the stability that that has given us. I don't think that it can even be fully quantified, but we do understand

that there is a primal wound. Even in the beautifully redemptive process of adoption, there is a primal wound there. Now, people, I get some pushback when I talk about this, but I have talked to many adoptees and many adoptive parents who have gone through this wonderful process. I mean, wonderful, not in the sense that it's always easy and it's not always happy go lucky, but in the sense that it's redeeming a broken situation. And they will confirm to you that yes, there is a primal wound there. Even if everyone is happy and healthy their whole lives, The fact that you are taking a child away from his or her birth mother is going to create some kind of trauma and some kind of separation there because it is a departure from the ideal. The ideal situation for every child is to be raised by a married, loving mother and father.

Their biological married mother and father. That is the ideal. Now, we live in a fallen world. And so the ideal isn't always what happens. Sometimes there is a pregnancy out of wedlock. And that mother feels that she cannot take care of that child. And so there's another loving couple that comes in and says, let us help you. Let us raise this child. And there is a brokenness there. But adoption is redemption of that brokenness. I'm not saying that all adoption situations are perfect or superfect. or that no one takes advantage of that situation. We know that there is corruption, even in that industry and even in some of these exchanges. And so I'm not denying that. But in general, in principle, adoption is the redemption of a broken situation, whereas sperm and ag donation and surrogacy is the creation. These are the creation of a broken situation. And so that is the difference. That's the difference. Yes, there is some kind of trauma that occurs even in adoption, whether or not that child feels that growing up, they may not. But it is not intentional trauma. We are not intending to create the trauma by forcefully separating the child from his mother. It is making a better situation out of a less than ideal situation.

But in every case of sperm and egg donation, you are purposely creating a child with the intention of taking them away from their biological mother or father. And of course, as we've talked about many times in the case of surrogacy, you are taking that child away from the woman that he or she has bonded with for nine months. There is a physiological, psychological, and emotional bond that is created there that is necessary for the healthy development of the. baby like neonatal development and the physiological bonds that are created there. Like these have all been studied by science. And so we have no idea what we're doing with all of these kids that we are creating in a lab that we are creating via sperm and egg donation. It's really sperm and egg selling because these people are making a lot of money from

that. We have no idea what we're doing through surrogacy. we are simply doing exactly what La La Kint is doing and saying, well, I want a child. Me, me, me. I desire this. I want this. And so I'm going to do it. And if it causes some pain seen or unseen in my child, well, it's worth it because that's

what I wanted to do. So we are forcing children to make a sacrifice on behalf of parents wants. And that is disordered. And there will always be consequences to it. Now people say, oh, it's no big deal when you have a child who is purposely created to be raised by two men or purposely created to be raised by two women or purposely created to be raised by a single dad or a single mom. But we're just assuming that because it's uncomfortable to know what we're really doing. We're just assuming that because it's inconvenient to say that we're inflicting this purposeful, very primal pain on a child. and we're just convincing ourselves of that because children don't have the power and ability

to articulate the loss that they feel. Remember Lance Bass, the singer from Insink, who is gay, and he is with his partner, and they use a surrogate to create their children, and he told the media, probably not even thinking of what this actually communicates that he was so sad because in the first couple of years of his kids' lives, they wouldn't cuddle with him. They would only cuddle with his mom. Yeah, because you robbed these children of their mother. And every child deserves, has a right to a mother and father. When we read in scripture about fatherlessness,

here I'll go again, doing the hardest part of my job, which is looking up a verse on Bible Gateway as I continue to talk. When we look at the category of fatherlessness throughout scripture, we always see it exclusively as a category of vulnerability, a category of people whose cause we need to take up, who require the defense of the advocacy of the powerful. We see that God is a God of the fatherless, that he cares about them because he knows they are more vulnerable than everyone else. What does that say about fathers, by the way, how necessary they are for our protection? but God says, no, I will defend the fatherless. For example, Psalm 685, Father of the Fatherless and protector of widows is God in his holy habitation. Again, that tells us the necessary role of a husband and a father that God would have to say, you know what? These two categories of people don't have a defender, the fatherless and the widow, because they don't have a husband, they don't have a dad. Men are inherently protective. God is going to take up their cause. And you see throughout the law giving to Israel, for example, Exodus 22, 22,

you shall not mistreat any widow or fatherless child. Also, we see this in the form of a curse that fatherlessness is wrong. He says, my wrath will burn and I will kill you with the sword and your wife shall become widows and your children fatherless. So it is a sign of not just vulnerability, but in some ways, like in this case, he's saying that this is a curse. This is something bad that could happen to you as a consequence. Now I'm not saying that today that fatherlessness is a consequence that children are bearing because of their own sins.

I'm just saying it is always talked about negatively throughout Scripture. We see that throughout Deuteronomy. We see that in the book of Job. We see that throughout Psalms. We have to do justice to the fatherless and the oppressed. Fatherless that is a form of oppression according to the God of Scripture. Psalm 68 5, 5, Father of the Fatherless, Protector of the Widows, is God in His Holy Habitation. And it goes on and on.

We could go throughout Scripture, we see how important it is to God that we show justice, that we show protection, that we give support to the fatherless. And throughout Scripture, of course, the fatherless child is fatherless by happenstance, typically. his father would have died. Maybe there were sinful abandonment there. Maybe there was some form of adultery where this child was conceived out of wedlock. All of this would have been egregious to the Lord. It is egregious to the Lord today, but it is always spoken of as sad. It is always spoken of as a tragedy. It's always spoken of as a form of vulnerability and oppression. So for us to be purposely creating fatherless children is to purposely create oppressed children. Like in a world that is so obsessed with liberating people from oppression, supposedly,

we are purposely manufacturing fatherless and motherless children and the name of empathy. It's cruel. It's cruel. And I feel for this, child who is being created in service to selfish wants. Christians who are called by scripture to defend the fatherless need to be speaking out about this. Isn't that interesting? Christians over and over again called to speak up for the fatherless. How many Christians do you know are talking about the evils of sperm selling and

sperm donation. And motherless, same thing, wasn't talked about in scripture because it's such a historical aberration because it's so rarely happened because mother so rarely abandoned their children. But now it's happening through egg selling, through surrogacy. So if we're called to take up the cause of the fatherless, I guarantee we are called to take up the cause of the motherless. That means speaking out against two moms raising a children, two dads raising the children, two dads raising to children, a single mom, a single dad, purposely creating children to take away one of their biological parents. That qualifies as the call to, us speaking out about that, qualifies as the call to stand up for the fatherless. And yet how many pastors, how many Christians, how many

Bible teachers do you know who are willing to say that? I think that we are not fulfilling God's command to protect the fatherless because we are unwel. willing to speak up about this because it's inconvenient and uncomfortable. And yet, these children are worth it. They're people made in the image of God and children deserve a mother and a father, period, end of story. All right. Let's get into this next story.

Crazy, crazy, crazy, crazy town. We've got to bring clarity to chaos and confusion in this world. That is one of the responsibilities of the Christian. That is one thing that I am always trying to navigate myself and bring you guys along for the ride with me as we. dissect the chaos of this world. Okay. So I came across this article and it's just like we are just plumbing the depths of depravity in

this country and we deserve everything that's coming to us. I mean, I pray for God's continual mercy. I pray for the continual protection of believers and just courage to keep speaking up about the things that matter. but it is hard for me to even put words to what we are seeing normalized and made mainstream, especially when it comes to children. What do we always say? Children are always the unconsenting subjects of progressive social experiments,

whether it comes to sperm and ag donation, surrogacy, all kinds of reproductive technology, whether it comes to the rearrangement of marriage and the family, whether it comes to COVID policy, universal masking mask mandates, virtual learning, whether it comes to abortion, whether it comes to really any of these policies, children are disproportionately and primarily affected. So it's not just progressive social experiments, it's just progressive policies, but we are called to lay children on the altar of them. And of course, one of the greatest examples of this is gender affirmation or gender transition, as it were. Of course, just to clarify, you cannot transition your gender. You can't change your gender. There is no category

of gender as independent from sex. There is some disagreement about whether or not we should even use the word gender at all. I'm okay with using gender as long as it's understood. It is interchangeable sex. There's no scientific category of gender. And it's important to define those things as we go into this story. New York Magazine cover. This came out March 11th. The moral case for the right of anybody at any age to change their sex at any age. Okay. New York Magazine. So for all of your little friends, all of your fellow moms at preschool pickup who think that, oh, that kind of stuff isn't really happening. You're just making a big deal out of nothing. It's not going to happen here. That stuff is not going to come to our school district.

That's not going to affect our family. That's not going to be in the shows that we watch. That's happening in some crazy tiny segment of the population in Portland or San Francisco. That's certainly not going to happen in Alabama or Georgia or Texas or Florida. Don't worry about that. I just want to bury my head in the sand and watch Vanderpump rules. Just kidding. I just don't want to worry about what's really going on because it's too scary. Look, I get that. I can relate to that. But it's coming for you.

All right? We've had parents on this podcast in conservative states who have lost custody of their children because they refuse to go along with so-called gender transition for their child. We have to know about what's going on. So this is mainstream major media outlet New York Magazine cover. the moral case for the right of anybody at any age, any age, any age, didn't give a cut off to change their sex. And again, I just want to emphasize there the language that they're using because you'll hear trans activists say, well, gender and sex are independent. Some more reasonable will say it's not possible to change your sex.

That's biological. That goes down to your gametes and chromosomes and all of that. that's innate, that can't be changed, but your gender can be changed. You can identify as something other than what you biologically are. But now they're saying something different, and I've seen this take for the past few years, that no, you're actually changing your sex. Your sex is something that you are up here. It's a spectrum, biologically and mentally. And by changing your body, you can actually change your sex or you can just identify as the opposite sex and you are that thing. It is very two plus two equals five. It is very Orwellian. It's really no different than Winston being

forced at the end of 1984 to say two plus two equals five. It's the same thing. So this article is written in New York magazine by a man who identifies as a woman. Andrea Long Chew is what he goes by. sure his original name. It's probably something like Andrew, but this is a man, looks very much like a man, sounds very much like a man if you see pictures and videos of him. But he says that he's a woman. I won't even say believes that he's a woman because I don't actually believe that most men who pretend to be women have gender dysphoria or are confused at all, as we will get into with this particular author. I very much think that for the majority of men at this point, it's a sexual fetish. It's a humiliation fetish. I think that's what's going on here. And they have very much.

very, they are invested in the gender transition of children because it's actually something that they are, I'm sorry this is disturbing, but it's true sexually aroused by. I think it's very important for us to just speak clearly about that because, again, you'll be empathy shamed even by people who profess to be Christians to affirm someone's self-identification in the name of loving them or being winsome. You just need to know who you're dealing with here. you are dealing with some of the worst, most depraved perverts in the world who get off on the idea of butchering the genitals of kids. Okay, we've talked about that before with Genevieve Glock and how we have looked into W-Path, which is the organization that is setting the standards for transition, especially for minors,

where they've gotten their research. They get part of their research from online pedophiles who are a part of chat rooms, who write fantasies about mutilating the genitals of minor boys to force them into transition. Okay? I just unraveled that really quickly for you. You can go back and you can listen to that whole conversation here where exactly she gets her research. But all of this is very important as we go into this particular article and talk about this particular author. So this article is somewhat of a review of Judith Butler's new book, who's afraid of

gender. Now, again, Judith Butler's been around for a long time, a champion of queer theory, and she has also, in so many words, been an apologist for sexual parapherias such as pedophilia. That is the through line. That's the commonality that you will run up against time and time again when you are looking at any subset of queer theory is at the very least, a soft acceptance. if not an outright acceptance of pedophilia. Okay? I just want you to be really aware of what's going on here. So here's what Chu argues.

It is, so she says, sorry, he says, that the so-called transgender narrative of differentiating between sex and gender has weakened the case for transgender rights. So this is what we were just talking about. It has hung trans rights on the thin peg of gender identity, a concept clumsily adapted from psychiatry and strongly influenced by both gender, gender studies and the born this way tactics of the campaign for marriage equality. And so he's actually kind of insightful there. I agree that that's kind of part of what's going on here.

This is one of us modest gains at the level of social acceptance, but we have largely failed to form a coherent moral account of why someone's gender identity, so called, that's what they refer to it as, should justify the actual biological interventions that make up, so called, gender affirming care. So he is trying to give another approach, rather than saying gender and sex or something different and we should affirm how someone identifies in their mind. He's saying, no, we shouldn't differentiate those two things anymore. Instead, he tries to establish the idea that we already have normative quote unquote sex

affirming care, arguing that a teenage boy who identifies as a girl who goes on estrogen is no different than a menopausal woman receiving hormone therapy. So he's saying we should really regard a boy who identifies as a girl. He would say a trans girl as a woman and then give this boy. It's so confusing with the different pronouns that I use, which are corresponding with someone's biology and that this person would use, which is corresponding with someone's fantasy and their head. So just bear with me.

So he's saying we should just treat people according to their sex and their sex. sex is whatever they say it is. He blames, of course, the religious right and turfs, trans-exclusionary radical feminist, but especially the liberals or the Tarles, trans-agnostic reactionary liberal for their skepticism and outright opposition to so-called transgender equality. Chu concludes by arguing for the ultimate freedom of choice for children who should be able to consent to puberty. And so they're changing it rather than saying, because I would say the liberal approach here, the reasonable liberal is, sure, children can stop their puberty with hormone blockers if they truly consent to it. Or some may say, well, they can, but when they turn 18. Of course, I think all of that is unreasonable. I don't think that a child ever, ever, ever, ever,

should even be socially affirmed as the opposite sex, should ever be called they or them, or if it's a girl, he, him, or if it's a boy, she, her, or be able to dress like the opposite sex, I actually think all of that is a form of abuse. And it is psychologically traumatizing to a child. You are setting them up for all kinds of just confusion and making them ripe for abuse. It's just awful in every sense. But this person is taking it a step further than what the liberal of the day would take it. They are saying, no, it's not actually that children should just be able to consent

or that people should just be able to consent to hormone blockers or puberty blockers. And by the way, that's chemical castration when it comes to boys, chemical castration. And just awful. That causes sexual sterility and possible lifelong infertility and all of that, as we've talked about many times. But this person is saying, no, you should have to actively consent to puberty. So the default should actually be, this person is arguing, that you go on hormone blockers, that you go on puberty blockers. But you should have to consent actively to going through the puberty that is natural to your body. Okay?

he says if we are to recognize the rights of trans kids there's no such thing by the way we will also have to accept that like us they have a right to the hazards of their own free will but if children are too young to consent of puberty blockers then they are definitely too young to consent to puberty which is a drastic biological upheaval in its own right you stupid freaking idiot evil evil evil demonic person that is something naturally that we go through. Are you saying that we need to consent from going from a newborn to a toddler or a toddler to a big kid or a 35 year old to an elderly person? Wait, is there some kind of trick where I can not consent to getting wrinkles and getting old? Is that a possibility? This is

news to me. This is brand new information. You're telling me this for the first time. So why is it just puberty that someone has to consent to? Why don't we then have to consent to every stage of life? No, of course, this person again, he has a political interest, but I think also a sexual interest, in this fantasy of arresting the development of kids. When you arrest the development of kids, the physical development, you stop their puberty, you are placing their body in a prolonged childlike state, not just their body, by the way, but their brain.

You know that puberty is necessary for brain development, right? For brain maturation, not just bodily maturation. We go through puberty naturally because it is what is necessary for us to become thinking adults, for that frontal lobe to develop. Now tell me what benefit, what benefit does it give to an adult to create this class of childlike adolescence? to arrest the development of children, to stop the puberty of young people, to keep them in a prolonged state of juvenileity, of making it more difficult for their frontal lobe to develop so they can't really think through consequences, they can't really give informed consent.

Their bodies, not growing, not developing in the way that a young person should into an adult. Now tell me why a grown man would like that? Why would a grown man want that? Why would a grown man want a class of young people to stay looking like children and thinking like children for longer periods of time? Just let's think about that. I'm telling you, this is not just ideologically depraved. It is sexually perverse. That is the foundation here.

That is what's going on here. So he says they should consent to puberty, which is drastic biological upheaval in its own right. This is so sick. So here are some more highlights. The anti-trans bloc has in general targeted children because Americans tend to imagine children both as a font of pure unadulterated humanity and as ignorant dependence and capable of rational thought or political agency. Okay, they're not, they don't have pure unadulterated humanity. They're not ignorant dependence per se, but their brains haven't developed. Their bodies haven't developed.

Yes, they're physically in many ways helpless. They do have to be mentally dependent upon their parents. Yes, absolutely. That is why the family exists. That's why they have caretakers. Like, have you ever spent any time around children? Yes, they depend. upon adults. That is why they are so easily taken advantage of. That's why they are so often

taken advantage of. They are the most oppressed, the most marginalized class of people in the world. The most easily abused, the most easily manipulated, the most easily coerced because of their mental and physical weakness. Duh, everyone knows that. Everyone knows that the frontal lobe doesn't even fully develop until you're 25. That frontal lobe is necessary to think through consequences. to self-regulate, to be able to make wise decisions. That's why insurance typically is higher for teenagers, because teenagers, myself included at the time, we were stupid. We made stupid decisions.

But this person is saying, no, not just teenagers, but toddlers. They should be able to make these decisions. 10-year-olds should be able to make these decisions completely autonomously, that they actually do have some sort of, or that they actually do have total. agency, actually, to be able to take permanently sterilizing drugs that will possibly irreversibly damage their bodies and their minds and their fertility. Teenagers, 12-year-olds, preteens apparently, are willing or able, actually, to make these decisions. This author says, in New York Magazine. We will never be able to defend the rights of transgender kids, he said.

as until we understand them purely on their own terms as full members of society who would like to change their sex. It does not matter where this desire comes from. So it doesn't matter if this desire actually comes from the fact that they're autistic and you're far more likely to have confusion about your gender. If you're autistic, it doesn't matter if your desire comes from an addiction to hardcore porn. What's typically referred to as sissy porn, we'll actually get to that in just a second. Does it matter if it is a trauma response from being sexually abused? That's what happens to a lot of girls who then later go on to identify as the opposite sex, it's because they were sexually abused.

They're trying to run from their femininity, which they see as the cause for their sexual abuse. He says it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter, I guess, if your mother has Munchausen by proxy, and she likes the idea of being able to use you as a pawn to get likes on social media, and she likes the idea of you being sick and different

and having to go to doctor's appointments. It doesn't matter where the desire comes from. This person says, If the desire is there, they should be able to chemically castrate themselves. A 12-year-old, as is already happening, by the way, who thinks that she is a boy should be able to cut off her healthy breasts. Who cares if in 15 years she wants to have a child and breastfeed that child, as what happened with Daisy Strongen, who did detransition and can't breastfeed her babies, tragically so. Because she decided at a very young age to get a double mastectomy in the name of trying to be a boy. Listen to her when she tells you how much she regrets that.

But this person is saying it doesn't matter. None of those things matter. Yes, let these children do what they want to do, maim and butcher their own body. Actually, it's not even, it's worse than that. It's not even maiming and butchering their own bodies. What this person is arguing is that, yes, adults should be able to butcher children's bodies and make lots of money off of it. That's the argument here.

That doctors should be able to make millions and millions of dollars off of cutting off the genitals, and rearranging the genitals of minors. That's the argument. This is all in favor of or in service to big pharma, the reproductive industry, and big porn. They all play a role in this, and big government, of course. They're behind this. Joe Biden is in support of this.

His administration is in support of this. They have said that. Health and human services, which is led in part by a man who identifies as a woman, has said children should be transitioned when they want to be transitioned. Remember that, Christian. And you have a friend who says, ah, maybe it's fine voting Democrat. This is the left wing feel that children, no matter how old, should be able to pay a doctor to butcher their bodies. And the name of autonomy and empathy and all of those nice sounding words that have a lot of wickedness behind them.

All right. I've got more to say about this. So he goes on to say, we must be prepared to defend the idea in principle that everyone should have access to sex changing medical care, regardless of age, gender identity, social environment, or psychiatric history. So, well, that's, I mean, that is already happening by the way. Well, it's impossible to change your sex, but changing your anatomy, no matter your psychiatric history. that's exactly what is happening. If you listen to the stories of detransitioners who now realize that they really are their biological sex and present as such, they will tell you they had sexual abuse in their past, they had depression in their past, they had trauma in their past, they had eating disorders in their past, they had different forms of body dysmorphia in their past. And many of them had never really had

any confusion about their gender, but they were kind of goaded into believing that by psychiatrists. and it's easy to do. And then they go to Planned Parenthood. They get their testosterone. Planned Parenthood makes money from it. They go to the endocrinologist. Their endocrinologist sets their dosage. They go to the surgeon.

The surgeon says yes. And they all, like Pontius Pilate, pretend like they can wash their hands of guilt and absolve themselves because they're just doing the politically correct thing. But really, they're just doing the comfortable, lucrative thing. It's not really that they're brave. They don't really care about these people.

They just know that this is what they can do and they can buy their new house and their new Porsche from maiming the bodies of children and that most people aren't going to do anything about it. And that is, of course, why we need to make it as costly as possible, as legally difficult as possible for these doctors to do this. Like I articles like this, if this doesn't radicalize you, nothing else will. But I think that we should ban these surgeries, absolutely. And that doctors that agree to do these surgeries should go to jail. Particularly if you do any of these procedures or stop the puberty of any minor, I think you should go to jail for the rest of your life. I'm not exaggerating.

I think you should go to jail for life. If you cut off the genitals of minors, if you stop the puberty of minors, jail for life. That would be just. And I think that's actually kind of generous as kind of a merciful consequence. Like when you think about what you are doing to innocent children who do not know better. Interestingly, he actually goes into the story of David Reimer. He doesn't really give the complete story. You'll remember that David Reimer was experimenting.

on by this pervert pro pedophile Dr. John Money back in the 60s and 70s. And he was raised as a girl after a botched circumcision because John Money had this idea that it's all environmental, that there's really no innate difference between the sexes. So if you tell someone that they're a girl and you give them something that looks like female genitalia, you raise them as a girl, they'll be totally fine. Well, that wasn't the case. David was raised as a girl named Barbara. He had a twin brother, and he always knew that something was wrong. He was always extremely masculine. He always felt like he was a boy because he was a boy, and his parents finally told him. That's not it. Of course, John Money also sexually abused these boys in front of other doctors as they took notes

and forced them to do sexual acts on each other as children. Like, what were the parents doing? anyway, and both of these men ended up growing up and committing suicide. And so this author of this article does talk about that briefly, but he draws a different conclusion from it. And he doesn't tell the whole story. He says, Reimer's story is popular in the anti-trans literature because alongside the general depravity of the affair, it appears to prove that gender has an inescapable basis and biological sex.

Reimer knew he wasn't a girl no matter what the doctors did to him. This is, of course, the exact conversation many trans kids are having with their parents today. What Rimer's story actually illustrates, he says, is that we are perfectly comfortable with sex changing when we understand it as changing back. No, that's not what we're saying. We are saying that it's impossible to change your sex and what you are born as you always are. And intersex, by the way, I think that's a misnomer. That's a completely different conversation. People who have Turner syndrome or people who have different anomalies when it comes to have,

how their gender or how their sex is presented are not like on a spectrum between male and female. They are always still either male or female. And the exception doesn't rewrite the rule. Just because there are some people who are born with one leg doesn't mean that human beings aren't bipeds. The whole intersex conversation does not belong in the transgender conversation because 99.99.9% of people who are trying to identify as the opposite sex don't have any sort of chromosomal or genital disorder or or obfuscation at all. So it's just a complete red herring. So he goes on to say it should be clear by now that when members of the anti-trans movement argue that sex cannot change, what they really mean is that sex shouldn't change except in discordance with social norms.

No, I actually mean that it cannot. It cannot physically or biologically change. He says sex affirming care has always served someone's moral vision for society. There's no reason it cannot serve ours. I will say that's actually true. It is actually true that the definition of sex is a moral definition of sex. It's not enough to just say that it's biological. Even the atheist I have on this show who agree with me when it comes to sex and gender and transgenderism, they can't tell me why morally it's wrong for someone who is biologically male to identify as the opposite sex. I mean, you could say that it endangers women by putting men in their spaces. It's not fair to women in athletic competitions.

I think that's true. But at the end of the day, why? Why is it wrong to put women in that vulnerable position? He's right. This is a moral worldview saying that a man is a man, a woman is a woman, those things cannot change. That's a moral worldview. I know where it comes from. But unfortunately, even most conservative agnostics or atheists can't tell us why.

that distinction actually matters. So this person is at least thoughtful in that. All right, we kind of have to skip ahead. We can't really go through absolutely everything that he says because I want to. I know this is already going to be a longer episode, but I want to talk a little bit about who this person actually is. So he goes on to basically just say, look, this freedom means that anyone can change their sex, anyone can change their gender, anyone can change their sex again. And let trans girls, of course, those are boys play sports regardless of their sex status. If they excel, this means only that some girls are better at sports than others. That's so ridiculous.

Let people use the gender segregated facilities of their choice. De segregate whenever possible. Do desegregate whenever possible. So just men and women all together, men in bathrooms with girls. There's nothing wrong with that. Give everyone health care, he says. And health care, of course, is chemical castration using opposite. sex hormones, which are horrible for your body, by the way, women are supposed to have that high

of testosterone. Men aren't supposed to have that high of estrogen. So it has adverse effects on your body, on your health, on your organs. Like these are, like, you know that every organ in your body is gendered. It's gendered. It has your chromosomes on there. I mean, there is a reason why there is such strict regulations for who can actually donate organs to another. And so giving all of your female gendered organs, testosterone, is going to deteriorate a lot of those organs. It's going to be bad for you. He makes up this fantasy in his head also that there are teenage girls or that there are women who regret not being able to choose going through puberty, which is so stupid. He says, children don't owe us an explanation.

They're busy taking charge of their own creation. they may not change the world but they will certainly change themselves. Possibility Butler once wrote is not a luxury. It is as crucial as bread. Disgusting. All of this poetic language to just say that we should be encouraging children to worship the God of self and to lay their own bodies on the altar to the God of self. It's not enough for adults to lay children on the altar of progressive experiments.

It is also children who must sacrifice. their own body. So we've reached a new generation of child sacrifice, a new form of child sacrifice, a new stage in the evolution of child sacrifice is that we're actually encouraging children to put to their own bodies. We're actually encouraging children to sacrifice themselves on the altar. And Christians, as ever, are called to speak up against it. Everywhere Christians have gone, we have put an end to child sacrifice. That's why we continue to speak up against abortion today. That's why we continue to speak up against the lie of gender transition today. Not just because it's false.

It is untrue, according to Genesis 127, first chapter of the first book of the Bible, but also because it is harmful. It's harmful to children. All right. I just want to say a couple more things just to prove my point about who this disgusting author is. So let me pause. Let me just tell you about one thing before I get into that very last segment. and Blaze Originals.

Blaze Originals has a new original out. Texas versus the Feds. So this Thursday, March 14th, we're releasing our third installment in the Blaze Originals series available to only Blaze TV subscribers. Texas versus the feds, how the elites use the border crisis against us.

So whatever happened to that Texas border standoff join Jason Butchrell and the Blaze Originals team on a road trip with the take our border back convoy to the front line of the border crisis as they uncover what was really going on in Texas at the time. Go to blazeoriginals.com. Use code border crisis to get $30 off your BlazeTV subscription. Blazorriginals.com code border crisis. Okay, so I'm just going to warn you. We went back and forth on whether or not we wanted to play this clip and we're not going to play you the whole thing. because it is really disturbing. So I'm just warning you right now. I'm warning you that the author of this article is you're going to hear him talk to the New York Public Library about his porn addiction and how he realized, quote unquote, that he's really a woman.

Again, we've talked about this with Genevieve Glock in the past, that really this is this phenomenon of a bunch of growing. men or teenage men pretending to be women is really derived from an addiction to a all porn is dark but a very, very dark violent form of porn in which women are humiliated and the viewer is encouraged to act, to pretend to be a woman, to be objectified and humiliated. You know, one of the creators of the Matrix, I think both of them now identify as transgender women, but one of them also openly said it is because of sissy porn. This is common. This is common. It is porn addiction that is fueling this, all right? Among men. And here is the author of this article, and you'll see a picture of him if you're watching on YouTube. You can see how feminine and dainty he is.

I'm talking about how his addiction to porn is, is what made him trance. I think as you do and you watch a lot of porn as you start to, you kind of go down these sort of rabbit holes over time. And so it was like, there was this progression from like sort of run-of-the-mill

mainstream pornography to J-O-I videos. This is so funny that I'm describing my porn habits to the New York Public Library. Um, uh, J.O.I. being jerk off instructions. So like where, where, um, the, the woman is telling you what to do, um, like breaking the fourth wall. Um, and that sort of went down a kind of humiliation track until I hit, um, what I wouldn't have even known to call this at the time, but until I hit cissy porn about which I have, uh, written some and which, some of which will be in this, uh, Versa book, actually. which involved lots of trans women. I mean, it's a forced feminization.

All right. Really, really disturbing. He goes on to say that he, that this forced feminization porn, what's called sissy porn, where men are forced to act like women, again, are humiliated, objectified.

He said it's a feminist worst nightmare because of how misogynistic it is and how much it encourages hatred of women, the rape of women. But again, these are men acting like women. He says he describes it actually is very disturbing because it uses the language of brainwashing enslavement, all forms of non-consent. He says that it thematizes like porn addiction, meaning that it demands the viewer to imagine that his porn experience is something that has control over him and is turning him

into a woman. His addiction to sissy porn went on for two years. He said, he said that was the only thing that he could watch, by the way, that he would like. He said that once that was locked in, heterosexual sex was not interesting. Tamman, we've already talked about how Pornhub purposely suggest trans porn and gay porn to men who have typically been only watching straight porn. I'm actually about to do a public debate against Charles Cook for a university about should we ban porn. And my take is 1,000 percent.

we should ban porn. So many of our problems would be gone tomorrow if we banned porn. Actually, it would probably take a little bit for these sickos to wean off of the disgusting depravity that they've become addicted to and that has so rewired their brains and harmed their bodies. But after that, they would become more normal, I think. And again, like, I want you to hear the pedophilic undertones, and that's generous to this. That these men, I know I said that they are pretending to be women in this form of pornography, but really is that they're pretending to be girls, little girls. So when I see people like Dylan Mulvaney calling themselves not a woman even, which is ridiculous in itself, but a girl, and doing 365 days of girlhood and dressing like he did when he dressed up as Eloise as a six-year-old girl, when I see the juvenility in how a lot of these men dress.

And when I see via Redux, time and time again, story after story after story of men who identify as women being sex predators, especially against children and being arrested for the consumption of, the possession of, the distribution of child sex abuse material, I'm just like, yeah, it's a pattern. I know you're not supposed to notice patterns. It's like the biggest thing you can commit. But there's a pattern. I'm not saying that they are the, only ones who commit these crimes? I'm not saying that all of them commit these crimes or even like have or addicted to this kind of pornography. I'm not saying all. I'm not saying only. I'm saying a big enough portion for people to worry to pay attention. I also just want to note

something about W-Path as an aside, that organization that sets the standards. It's a world Professional Association for Transgender Health is what it stands for. That's the standards for gender transition, as it were. According to journalist Mia Hughes, published Monday by Michael Schellenberger's Think Tink Environmental Process, she published a 242 page report that shows that W-Path members demonstrate a lack of consideration for long-term patient outcomes despite being aware of the debilitating and potentially fatal side effects of cross-sex hormones and other treatments. the American Medical Association, the Indocrine Society, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and thousands of doctors worldwide rely on W-Path.

It is considered the leading global authority on gender medicine. They know that they are giving irreversible medical treatments to mentally compromise victims. They understand the inability of minors to comprehend the long-term consequences. They understand that they are putting a gloss on detransition and, post-operation regrets. And they also are pushing the narrative that miners should receive hormones or go under the knife because otherwise they'll kill themselves. It's a popular claim, but it has been debunked many times. Canadian endocrinologist Daniel Matzger noted during an internal W-path panel discussion that most of the kids are nowhere in any kind of brain space

to really talk about fertility preservation in a serious way. And here is, sought one of him saying they can't really take this seriously. Children and young adolescents, we wouldn't really expect them. It's kind of a developmental, it's out of their developmental range sometimes to understand the extent to which some of these medical interventions are impacting that. All of this would be why, in the UK, their top health authority just came out against puberty blockers for children. National Health Service, England, confirmed Tuesday that Myers will no longer be prescribed

to puberty blockers at so-called gender identity clinics. So they understand this. In other parts of the world, there are other parts of Europe who are also saying the same thing. There's just no way you can square that with a promise to do no harm. And yet, in this New York magazine article, Andrea, Chu is saying, yes, more, more, more. more children going under the knife and transitioning. Look, stop, stop having empathy towards this issue. You need to become a lot more aggressive when it comes to this, okay?

You need to become a lot more loving, which might mean being a lot harsher and more truthful about what's going on here because the bodies and the lives and the minds and the hearts of children, children, the souls of people are on the line. For the past 2,000 years, Christians have stood in the way of child sacrifice. It should not end now. Whether it's abortion or whether it is forced fatherlessness and motherlessness, whether it is the reproductive technology that regularly discards the lives of little image bearers, whether it is this so-called gender ideology, Christians stand in the way of child sacrifice.

All right. That's all we've got time for today. We will be back here tomorrow. Hey, this is Steve Day. If you're listening to Allie, you already understand that the biggest issues facing our country aren't just political. They're moral, spiritual, and rooted in what we believe is true about God, humanity, and reality itself. On the Steve Day show, we take the news of the day and tested against first principles, faith, truth, and objective reality. We don't just chase narratives and we don't offer false comfort, we ask the hard questions and follow the answers wherever they leave, even when it's unpopular. This is a show for people who want honesty over hype and clarity over chaos. If you're looking for commentary grounded in conviction and unwilling

to lie to you about where we are or where we're headed, you can watch this D-Day show right here on Blaze TV or listen wherever you get podcasts. I hope you'll join us.