TRIGGERnometry - Teacher Cancelled by Eton for Controversial Lecture Speaks Out

Episode Date: April 18, 2021

Will Knowland is the Eton English teacher who was dismissed from his job for refusing to remove a lecture entitled 'The Patriarchy Paradox' from his YouTube channel. Join our exclusive TRIGGERnometry community on Locals! https://triggernometry.locals.com/  OR Support TRIGGERnometry Here: PayPal.me/triggerpod https://www.subscribestar.com/triggernometry https://www.patreon.com/triggerpod Bitcoin: bc1qm6vvhduc6s3rvy8u76sllmrfpynfv94qw8p8d5 Buy Merch Here: https://www.triggerpod.co.uk/shop/ Advertise on TRIGGERnometry: [e-mail] Join the Mailing List: https://www.triggerpod.co.uk/sign-up/ Find TRIGGERnometry on Social Media:  https://twitter.com/triggerpod https://www.facebook.com/triggerpod https://www.instagram.com/triggerpod About TRIGGERnometry:  Stand-up comedians Konstantin Kisin (@konstantinkisin) and Francis Foster (@francisjfoster) make sense of politics, economics, free speech, AI, drug policy and WW3 with the help of presidential advisors, renowned economists, award-winning journalists, controversial writers, leading scientists and notorious comedians. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Hello and welcome to Trigonometry. I'm Francis Foster. I'm Constantine Kitten. And this is a show for you if you want honest conversations with fascinating people. Our terrific guest today is a teacher who is dismissed from Eaton over a controversial lecture. Well, Nolan, welcome to Trigonometry. Thank you for having me. It's great to have you on. I've given you the brief introduction and we'll get into the story itself. But before we get into, just tell everybody a little bit about who you are, how are you where you are, and where do you work out?

So interesting question about how I ended up where I am. After studying English at university, I knew we wanted to be a teacher. So I just constantly been working in schools since then. A mixture of schools, so secondary modern school in Kent, and then other end of the spectrum, which is Eaton. Between that, Highgate School in London for a few years as well. And I've always been very passionate about the importance of balanced debate in education, open, rigorous discussion. And it's because of that, that when I was asked to not only allow the cancellation of a lecture intended for a hot-button controversial issues debating course at Eton, to be cancelled at Eton,

but also to remove it from my private YouTube channel, that I am where I am now. I ask questions about why this debate couldn't be had. If not at Eton, why not allow people to explore the issues online in their free time, especially because I'd agreed with Eaton to put a disclaimer on the channel when I set it up, saying it was nothing to do with Eaton's personal views. So I was a bit puzzled why students weren't allowed to practice the importance of independent critical thought, at least in their own time, if it wasn't allowed at the college itself. Yeah.

We'll get into the story itself, but we have a large international audience as well. And most people, even in this country, haven't been to Eaton. I don't know if you've been to Eaton, France. Yeah, I won't. They fucking loved me. I have been to Eden just as a visitor. And I just tell everybody a little bit about what is it like? What is this institution about?

Who are some of the people that it's produced? What is the point of Eaton? Because I think that is actually an important piece of this. Definitely. So it's got a long and very rich history of debate. All boarding schools have a room in them called debate. There's a testament to that. is also a purpose-built debating hall, where often speakers who might be no platformed elsewhere,

such as George Galloway, Jermaine Greer, have come to speak and the boys have engaged with their ideas. Students also run their own societies, independent from normal lessons, and they might invite external speakers, could be sometimes politicians or CEOs or prominent authors, to come and stimulate the kind of argument that the school is famous for. So when there was a sense that the range of ideas was being narrowed. That made me feel that something very important at eaten and precious to it was at risk. And so you say it was something important and precious, and I agree with you. What were these issues that were controversial that you were talking about? Well, the course is the college's flagship debating course called Perspectives,

and it is for boys in Lower 6th, so about 16, 17-year-olds. And the theme for this term was identity. So the ideas that might be to do with sex, for example, or race or class, all the kind of issues that come under the umbrella of identity politics, you could argue. And obviously these are all controversial topics in the media and culture at large, so it's important for boys to be engaging with them. And over the last few years, what I'd noticed is that some of these were being treated in the way that, in my opinion, was partisan. and schools have a duty to be non-partisan in the presentation of political topics.

Can I just stop you there? What do you mean by partisan? So one-sided. So taking one particular line and not exposing students to consider the strongest arguments from the opposing side. As an example of that, one of the students was complaining that he felt that gender theory was being presented as fact in PSHC lessons. and I had found that in trying to encourage wider debate around that, resources which were described as excellent were being blocked in case it caused upset. Now, it's difficult to see why a resource which, on the one hand, the person blocking says is excellent, shouldn't be allowed to go ahead for the purpose of stimulating student discussion

just because it might cause upset to somebody. Freedom of speech involves the freedom to upset, and also the freedom to receive information that might upset. So it goes to the heart of what education is all about, really. So you created this lesson, right? You then went to teach these lessons, and then what happened? Well, it's important to give a bit of background about what creating the lesson involved. No.

So I asked a few people senior to me, would this be a good idea for a topic, to talk about the concept of toxic masculinity and, patriarchy in a way that isn't often touched on. And he said, that would be interesting. Good to stimulate debate. So then I did some reading. Made sure everything in the lecture was referenced fully, because I wanted to keep it to high standards,

which is what the Eaton Boys expect, and honoring the academic prestige and scholarship of the institution. So there are over 40 academic references in the lecture, places like Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard, Yale. So I wanted to give the boys a fairly heavyweight reading list. to go and pursue in their own time. The expectation was that they would disagree with the lecture.

On perspectives, every single lecture is scrutinized, and boys are encouraged to do that. So the idea isn't that you just listen and sit there and say, what lovely points, I agree completely. The teachers ask the students to pick it apart. So this would be a good opportunity for them, I felt, to be able to try out some of the ideas they've been hearing about patriarchy is in its entirety, a social construct, involving the

oppression of women by men. But after I produced the video, the request came through to upload it onto the college's internal intranet system, which is what is normally done when you distribute resources. So I agreed to do that. It was sent around to the teachers on the perspective's course. And before it was ever shown to students, their complaint came in, saying that according to the complainant, merely to allow students to critically discuss this amongst themselves, would place that member of staff in a hostile environment. Now, to me, that was something very different from saying, for example, that particular teacher didn't want to have a discussion with me or a debate with me on stage about it.

I had asked for that, would anybody like to present alongside with me or give a live counterbalance as I'm making points? Nobody wanted to do that. That was disappointing, but what was more disappointing was that the boys themselves weren't allowed to think for themselves about the material. And what was it that you were presenting as this challenging course? I understand you weren't saying, this is the truth,

they're supposed to push back against it and work out, what they think for themselves. But what was the, were you saying, you know what, patriarchy is great and we need to bring back more of it? Is that what it was? Well, actually, it was a presentation of the standard view from evolutionary anthropology, which is that patriarchy is at least partly rooted in biology. That's why we see it in other mammalian species, not just human beings. So it's difficult to see how it's purely a social construct, unless we've also somehow socially constructed it in other species as well, which seems doubtful to me. But this is a lot of the This wasn't a particularly radical position.

It's the canonical position in the whole body of mainstream science. It's just one that boys don't often hear because you get the view of the social scientists instead, which is purely social constructivism. So you uploaded it, the complaint came through, what happened next? So it actually gets cancelled, and I let the school know that it was already before the complaint had come in on my personal YouTube channel as well,

with the agreed disclaimer. Now, why did I even have a YouTube channel? Why did I put that particular lecture online? Well, Eaton is a charity, and it aims at providing educational public benefit. And one of the things I was doing with the YouTube channel was just uploading some videos on the set poems and texts for GCSE boards

to help students in other countries who might not have access to, in some cases, high quality teaching or had missed lessons through illness, things like that. It's good to have extra resources to help people out. I'm getting a lot of positive feedback from kids in Malaysia, Africa, all over the world saying, thanks, you help boost my grade for my literature exam.

So that meant a lot to me. I'd also notice through running a school for state school students during my summer holiday at Aitem to help give them a push, normally for Oxfordge application. A lot of students were coming in with this, in my opinion, quite myopic view about the application of patriarchy theory to some classic texts. To the extent that even if they hadn't read some particular works, they almost already knew what it was about,

because everything is just about patriarchy. It's all just men oppressing women. Now, there's some truth to that, but it's also the case that you should think about things on purpose in a way to challenge your ideas. So I thought it would be good to get people. trying to undermine their own viewpoints if that's what they're so entrenched in. So a video to shake them out of it.

Some people watching this might be thinking, well, what Will was actually doing is he was trying to sneak his particular opinion about this under the guise of creating debate. Is there some truth to that? Are you quite strongly against the idea of the patriarchy being, you know, about oppressing women and women have been historically oppressed and all of that? Do you have a personal view on it? The video overlaps with my own views.

And if you look at the conclusion to the video, the main points, which is that men have traditionally been valued for procreating and then providing for women and children, protecting them, I think those are all fairly solid, basic family values. There's also the message that masculinity, because of those three traditional values,

is essentially the antithesis of paedophilia. I don't think that's particularly controversial either. and there is overlap. I would say the video is slightly more hardline Darwinian than my own view of culture and society. But Darwinism is something the boys cover in science lessons. Why not see it brought to life with a couple of examples from history and video clips

and quotations from poems and books? Were you not worried, Will? Because you'd already had one complaint against it. You weren't allowed to teach this course. Were you not slightly worried about uploading it to a YouTube channel to the public, which could be construed, let's be fair, as a two fingers up to your employers. Well, it was already on YouTube before I even received the complaint. And once I heard that the lecture was cancelled at Eton, I thought, I'd better leave this thing up

unless I'm given a really good reason to take it down, because there's going to be an investigation into this, and I'd like people to see what I'm being investigated for. And I'm thankful I did leave it up, because if you heard that someone's going to be an investigation into this, and I'd like people to see what I'm being investigated for. If you heard that someone had been sacked for a video and then you're wondering what might have been in that, could lead to some questions. But most people can go away and watch it and think, all right, there are some punchy points, but nothing that extremely intelligent six-formers wouldn't be expected to engage with sensibly. So you did it, and then what happened?

Well, in the end, after saying, if you tell me what's wrong with the video, I'm happy to edit out particular bits. I think it should go ahead. I think it honors our tradition of debate. and getting no response about any particular bits that were problematic. It was just the entire thing had to come down. I was given the ultimatum of take it down and then you'll be investigated without being suspended. Or if you leave it up, you'll be suspended and investigated.

So I felt that given that the investigation was happening, I was going to leave it up because I didn't feel there's anything wrong with the video. And then suspended from the college while the investigation was on. ongoing and then after a long process of appeal during which there was a large open letter set up by the students signed by nearly 3,000 people saying that we filled this debate should have gone ahead. I was dismissed. What I find strange is that if the ideas you were presenting were controversial but they're part of this debating thing that you do at the school, I find it very odd that they just wouldn't find someone who would present a count.

a narrative. Do you have any sense of why the school fell? Did you have other complaints about you in the past where people, you know, upset with you over something else? No, so this is one of the things that I find chilling about it is that my disciplinary record up until now has been perfect. And it's held in quite high regard as a teacher by parents and students and by colleagues as well. So something about this particular video really hit a nerve. and my thought is that perhaps it is a traditional defence of masculinity at an all-boys school and I think all-boys environment increasingly nowadays is quite sensitive and nervous about that, almost embarrassed to be an all-boys institution.

But there's a funny irony about that because why are you one then? If everybody working there wants to push this viewpoint that there's something terrible about masculinity, why are you running an institution which discriminates against girls at the point of entry? I mean, it's a very, very interesting point that you made. So the thing that I find really, really worrying about this is that what it is saying is that some viewpoints are just not acceptable. It's not even that we can't even, you know, support them. We can't even say them.

What do you think that has for education? are the impacts of this? Well, for one thing, it is not in the spirit of the actual government legislation. The Equality Act, which was initially what the college claimed that I had breached, specifically excludes curriculum content. So this means that teachers are free, in theory, to discuss with classes any ideas no matter how controversial. the argument was that although this might apply to students, so students are exempt if they make a

complaint that they think that being asked to explore particular material constitutes harassment or discrimination, members of staff aren't exempt. Now if you think what kind of precedent that sets, you can reduce it to absurdity. So let's say that a particular teacher feels like being asked to allow students to discuss a fellow or to kill a marking bird creates a hostile environment. Well, that's harassment then, and that text has to go. And once you start down that route of one person being offended by being asked to allow students to study curriculum material, it's difficult to see where you end. And you were talking before that you felt the job was disappearing before your very eyes. I don't mean to misquiet. I think that's what you said. Yeah.

that's part that what you've just said is part of it. What else do you mean by that? Well, I went into education and to Eaton in particular because I like the excitement of rigorous discussion of debate. I like challenging not just other people's viewpoints, but my own as well. And this is why free speech is so valuable because it enables that kind of discussion that means that the rough edges can be taken off ideas. And one question people often have is, well, do you think everything in the video is completely true? The whole point is that I'm not actually really sure, and the discussion should be had, so we can all learn more from it. Like the proverb says, the pearl is formed by abrasion. We need the marketplace of ideas to be able to actually find out which one stand the test of that

kind of conflict. That makes sense. And I don't remember. exactly, but I remember reading something from a parent at the school who'd made a few comments about the general atmosphere and particularly the leadership. What was it like working at Eton and what was the overall sense around some of these issues? Look, I spend a lot of time telling you what's wrong with the world, so let me tell you about something that's actually right. Sleep, specifically getting more of it, better quality, the kind where you wake up and feel like a human being rather than someone who's been thrown down a staircase. Most of the Most mattresses are just layers of synthetic foam and crossed fingers.

You're spending a third of your life on the thing, and most people have no idea what's actually in it. Avocado green mattress is different. Their mattresses are certified organic, built from natural materials, designed to actually support your body properly rather than just hold you in one position until morning. The craftsmanship is real. These are mass-produced objects. Someone has put thought into them. I'll be honest.

I'm not the person who thinks carefully about where he sleeps. My dating history will tell you that. I'm the person who's been on the same mattress for eight years and called it fine. But the older I get, the more I notice that fine isn't actually fine. Your body tells you, if you're going to invest in anything for your home, your bed is the one that pays you back every single night. Avocado products are made, not manufactured, and thoughtfully crafted with real materials to deliver lasting comfort and support.

Go to avocado green mattress.com slash trigger. to check out their mattress and furniture sale. That's avocado greenmatress.com slash trigger. Avocado green mattress.com slash trigger. It's been described by other members of staff as a stifling monoculture. And the idea is that although we're not told explicitly what kind of viewpoints might not be allowed,

people know and they will tend to self-censor. When a hot topic comes up, you know what the particular viewpoint you're supposed to take on it is. Otherwise, you might find yourself in similar situation to I am now. And what is the monoculture, if you were to summarize it? Particular strands you could pick out would probably be what you see elsewhere in institutions that are given, in my opinion, a fairly craven response to this encroaching council culture. So students would be unlikely to hear, for example, any kind of. kind of counter-arguments to the viewpoints that characterise the Black Lives Matter movement. Unlily to hear any kind of counter-arguments to the view that trans women are women, for

example. Unlikely to hear any counter-arguments, in fact, the one I tried to give was just cancelled, to the idea that the fundamental relationship between men and women is one of men-oppressing women as something called the patriarch is a social construct. It's quite ironic, really, that a lot of these views are... espoused by the left. And yet Eaton is the most elitist institution, arguably in the country, isn't it? Isn't there something in Congress about this? Interesting question. And I do think that one of the reasons Eaton is so sensitive about this and didn't even want boys to be seen to have the opportunity to hear these views and maybe even say why they were wrong, is that there's this

sense that because it's eaten, it's always worried that someone's going to come at it with those kind of claims about being too elitist. So it's deliberately gone for the exact kind of views as the branding that it thinks will stop people being able to say that. So go further left in case people think that you were too far on the right. Hey, Constantin, how are you feeling? Good. And your mental health? I'm from Russia. We don't have mental health. Well, in the civil world, we talk about our mental health and how we're feeling about our place in the universe. In the words of my Uncle Vlad, that is why we will crush you. Well, he's two months away from a breakdown.

For the rest of us, there's a number one mental wellness app called Calm that helps you to negotiate the tricky modern world. It's okay to need help sometimes, and Calm can provide support. Calm has been really useful for me. You can clear your head with guided daily meditations, improve your focus with Calm's curated music tracks and drift off to Dreamland with Calm's imaginative sleep stories narrated by soothing voices like Killian Murphy and Stephen Fry.

Oh, Killian Soothe me. Man up. Drink vodka, feel better. If you go to Calm.com slash Trigger, you get a limited time offer of 40% of a Calm premium subscription, which includes hundreds of hours of programming. and new content is added every week. Over 1 million people around the world use Calm to take care of their minds. Yes, Trigonometry fans get special limited time promotion, 40% of premium subscription. Take advantage of this amazing offer. Go to Calm.com forward slash Trigger for 40% of unlimited access to Calm entire library.

That's cam.com forward slash trigger. I find that really odd because, you know, I'm from Russia, if I said to someone in Russia, in the far east of Russia, who doesn't speak English, never seen foreign news, whatever, Eton, people would instantly know what it's about. They would associate it as the place which produces the great prime ministers, the generals, the CEOs. Not Boris Johnson, mate.

The people who really shape the destiny of Britain and have shaped for centuries. To think, I think it was a shock to a lot of people. that an institution of that caliber had been as captured as it clearly has been, according to your view, by this mentality. It's quite a shock to a lot of people. Did you find it having worked elsewhere? Did you find that culture strange?

Well, I think there's a bit of a divide there between the way the boys still want to operate and the way some members of staff want the place to go. I think the boys, by and large, are very much still in favour of the tradition of debate. And most of them wanted this talk to go ahead. They tried to invite interesting, sometimes controversial speakers. What we're seeing more and more is that that's getting shut down, and the Overton window is moving because of the demands of some members of staff. I find out very odd, not least because the boys presumably have internet access, right?

They do. So they could watch our interview with Posey Parker or another conversation. So it's not like they're going to be insulated from these ideas. So to me, not allowing a lecturer or talk or to be in a debate is not really about protecting the boys from quote-unquote bad ideas. It's about protecting the reputation of the institution. Would you agree with that? I think one of the main fears about my particular lecture being on YouTube,

even with the disclaimer, was that it would somehow bring Eaton into disrepresent. Now, given that its reputation is for debate discussion, and as part of its aims, it actually says that we aim at promoting independent, broad-based, critical thought. It's difficult to see how just having a debate can bring you into disrepute. But, of course, it's really about the branding. It's not about the reputation for debate at all. But isn't it also as well?

I mean, let's be honest. This, to me, screams of weak leadership from the headteach. Because surely, as a head, your job is to say, look, this is what we're going to do. This is our tradition. And if you don't like it, and if you get upset, well, number one, you're entitled to do that. But you're not going to dictate what can and can't be taught or said in the college, surely. I think there is an institutional loss of nerve involved. And I think the leadership should have given a more robust response to the threat posed by one person saying this whole debate,

has to stop because it makes me feel sad. The boys should have been allowed to go ahead with it. And we see this right the way through education, don't we really. It's not just in Eton. We see it at universities. I think it's established fairly well now that universities are supporting this kind of council culture because there's about 10% of people who are strongly in favour of it. if the academic gives a viewpoint that is offensive or controversial, then they should be sacked. And then the majority of people, even if they weren't strongly opposed that view, are quite happy just to watch it go along. And you get the same people, especially these elite schools like Eton,

coming out of that university environment and perpetuating the same kind of culture in schools. So it's that trickle-down effect, just as the ideas tend to start in universities. and then they slowly percolate in secondary schools. I think we're seeing the same kind of institutional shift as well. And I'm curious why you felt strongly enough, because I imagine, I don't know, but I imagine for a teacher working at Eton is the pinnacle of your career, I would have thought, right?

So you've given up quite a bit to make this stand. Why did you do that? Well, it comes back to the comment that I made earlier about feeling that I didn't really have a lot to lose because the job had already changed so fundamentally from what it was when I applied for it. And what was important to me about it was really wrapped up in this whole dispute. So if we're not going to do the exciting critical discussion on the full range of topics, even if some of it is offensive to some people, then that sucks a lot of the fun out of

what I feel is valuable about the job. And to be honest, I think it also goes to the heart of what has traditionally been the essence of a Western liberal education. All the way back to Socrates with the starting point that I'm not really sure I know that much actually, and we should be very careful and critical on how we engage with each other. So to say that one particular argument expressed in a lecture is just not worth hearing whatsoever, as if you know for sure that there's no truth in it is a real challenge to that. And it was best expressed by John Stuart Mill on Liberty, saying that it's very rare in the course of human affairs

that one side is completely right and the other is completely wrong. And that's why it's so essential that we have that give and take. It's vital that we have this give and take. I'll be honest with you, Will, when I was reading about your case, I was completely horrified. Because I think if you've been in education, you can see the way it's going, you can see the way it's moving. It's not just your case.

We've seen Batley Grammar School. with what happened, their refusal to stand up for a teacher, again, when they were talking about controversial issues. Do you think we've now reached a point where that battle is actually lost? And do you think, as Eric Kaufman, who we had sitting in your seat, said that what we need is government intervention at this point, in universities, but probably also in schools as well? Yeah, I know there are people who argue that it's lost.

Jordan Peterson is saying now, send your kids to trade school. I don't think it's maybe that extreme. I think the US has gone further than we have. I think that there's still a chance to turn things around in the UK. And the reason this particular point of principle meant a lot to me is that it's never been litigated. So the Equality Act has never been used in this way before. So when I found out that this was both a novel and activist interpretation of the Equality Act, no teachers ever fallen foul of this idea of curriculum content being fine for students but not for staff, I thought it was one that would be worth pushing because so much is at stake. In the spirit of this abrasion in order to

create better understanding, let me try and imagine some counterpoints. I'll be honest, it's not easy for me because I agree with almost everything you've said. But if I try, surely there are certain things that should not be taught in school. Would we agree with that? Well, you would once you think about the fact that curriculum content is excluded by law, so that would seem to give a kind of carte blanche, but nobody actually really thinks that. It's got to be age appropriate. You've got to have it in the correct kind of context.

But the thing for me is, if the flagship debating course of one of the country's leading educational institutions, which has a debating hall, and every boarding house has a debate room in it, isn't the appropriate context, then what is? Agreed. And, I mean, I'll give you another one. I'm really struggling him, and help me out.

I would say that... So you sometimes get people who say, look, I'm all for free speech, but it's different in schools. Teachers are in a position of authority. And you have to be very careful about what ideas you are being seen to give the noddle of approval to.

What would your response be to that? I can think of one. Well, I mean, in this case, it's a debate, right? And you're encouraging the kids to push back and to work out what the truth is. for themselves. So you're not presenting them with this as fact. You're saying when you go out into the big bad world, and by the way, there's going to be a year from now or two years from now, right, you're going to be confronted by these ideas and it's helpful to you to have actually thought

about them before and considered them and rejected elements of them so that you know what you bloody think. Yeah, knowing what you think through engaging with the other side is certainly a very strong justification for being challenged. I think also, if you really dig down to what that objection is driving at is, okay, so there are some dangerous ideas out there. Which are the viewpoints that we must be very careful that teachers aren't being seen to personally uphold? And once you ask that kind of question and get those ideas explicitly laid out, then I think what you'll find is it starts to move towards very much the woke direction. Those are the official viewpoints that institutions are willing to give the seal of approval to

and teachers who question them or want boys to at least consider arguments for and against a scene as undermining the institutional project. Well, I wonder, I'm a big fan of history, how do you teach the history of World War II without educating boys about the motivating factors behind Nazism, for example, right? And in order to teach them that, they have to understand. Now, by teaching them about Adolf Hitler, you're not approving of him, right? But if you were to present a lecture on how the Nazis came to the viewpoints that they did,

I suppose in this case it could be seen by somebody as a hostile environment. Because, you know, as my great-grandparents died in the Holocaust, well, I could claim it's a hostile environment for me. So this is a slippery slope that I think goes to hell very, very quickly. Exactly. Taking that example, you could have a history teacher who, by being asked to allow students to study my encamp and critically evaluate its arguments says, hostile environment for me, I refuse to teach this book and the students won't be studying either. So that's why the fact

that it's a teacher saying it's offensive to that particular teacher to let students weigh up the pros and cons of the arguments is really what the heart of this is. It's not students saying we think it's offensive. The government advice is clear there. It doesn't matter if you think it's offensive. But it's this claim that that only applies to students, not staff. So there's not whose personal sense of offence gets to determine what curriculum content is, because I'd be willing to bet a lot of money on the fact that if I took offence to a forceful presentation of patriarchy as merely a social construct, as offensive to me as a man, I don't think that would achieve very much.

I'd love to see that. Straight white male teacher from Hinton. But this is the asymmetry, right? Yeah, of course. I'm not trying to shut down anybody's views. I think they should all be heard, and the more the better, because it gives people more arguments to get their teeth into. And why is there that asymmetry?

It seems to be a kind of... I think it's ultimately a kind of lack of belief in reason and debate itself. It's also lack of belief in your own argument, I feel. They feel that their arguments are weak, and the only way to get them to be embedded in all these institutions is that no one ever gets to challenge them. I think that's a lot of it. I honestly do.

I think that is certainly an important factor, but remember that one of the main tenets of postmodernism is actually that truth itself is a kind of social construct. Now, you can explode that fairly quickly by saying, well, so is it true there's no truth? And then it starts to fall apart. So it's necessarily false. but if you honestly don't believe there is such a thing as truth,

then why have the debate? If it's all just about power, then just stop the narrative you don't like being heard and reduce its power. So I think there's that element to it as well. Isn't it also part of it as well? Is that even, I don't know how old you are, Will? 35.

You're 35, right? But if you remember when we grew up, our generation, right, I'm playing age 35 and 28. You're a bit older, mate. I'm nearly 40. I'm fine with it. He's very fine with it. I'm very fine with it.

But there was a rough and tumble aspect to our childhood that I think being a teacher is going to make me sound old has been lost from our society. We want to wrap kids up in cotton wool. We want to protect them. And that may be they want to protect them from physical harm,

but we also want to protect them from psychological harm. Do you think that's part of it as well? Well, I don't think anybody, at least at the outset, was trying to protect kids from any kind of psychological harm. It was an adult saying, I can't possibly cope with allowing kids to discuss this. For me, one of the markers of adulthood is actually being willing to seek out intellectual and emotional challenge. And I think people retard their own development if they don't deliberately seek that out,

because you just stay in your comfort zone continually. That's seen as a bad thing in many walks of life. I think in intellectual life, it should be the same. You should be taking sides against yourself in order to find out fully what you really think. if you do say that kids always need to be kept safe then the counter argument would be just as with avoidance with anxiety actually entrenching anxiety

I think it just means that the range of ideas you're willing to explore and able to explore narrows and narrows and narrows and what do you think is look I'll be honest with you my wife and I talking about having kids and this is something that terrifies me because you bring a child into the world

you raised them for six or seven years, and then you send them off to an institution that's going to indoctrinate them with a bunch of crap. What, if you're a parent of young kids or you're thinking about, what's the answer to this? What do you do? Well, there are certainly some parents and people in the old Etonian community

who felt the same way. And some of the emails of support that came in for me were quite heartbreaking. to read. There were people saying, this man needs to be reinstated or I'll never be proud to be an old Italian again. There are parents saying that they hadn't expected to send their kids there for this. And they thought that that tradition of debate and the aims of independent critical thought and broad-based discussion really meant what they said on the tin. So the reason I think I've gathered so much support from the community is that people do think there is something

really precious here that's at risk. And if you've got kids coming to the world, I've got five, a sixth one coming soon, I think it involves more people having to actually make a stand and not tolerate what's being done to the education system because a lot of people disagree with it but just won't say anything. And do you think a lot of it is this monoculture, but also as well, do you think the unions are giving enough support to teachers who have the different views? Or do you think, like in the case that we saw with Patley Grammar School, whether any EU did nothing? I think that was a weak response. More needs to be done at all levels. So I think the government needs to keep an eye on what is happening in secondary schools. There's been studies on

how free speech is imperiled at university level. And in theory, at least, six-form education colleges are supposed to be having particular regard for the importance of freedom of speech. and it's easy for institutions to make excuses and say, well, yes, we do believe in freedom of speech, but here it was about the reputational risk, for example, or we also have obligations to the particular member of staff who complained. But I think ultimately that it's just having a confused hierarchy because freedom of speech needs to come first. Yeah, and it seems that it's rapidly evaporating from our schools. Do you think it's worse in the private sector because they want to be seen to be woke, because they want to be seen to be more moral because the fact is, you know,

it's a fee-paying environment? Do you think the state sector is as bad? From what I've heard, I don't think the state sector is quite as bad. I think there's this peculiar tension between how private schools are traditionally seen and what it's actually like to work in them nowadays. And you can see this happening in the same. You can see this happening in states as well. So the more elite the institution, the more likely it is to have gone the whole hog with the woke viewpoint. Partly, that's about concern that people will criticize them if they don't. Partly, as the medieval theologians used to say, the corruption of the best becomes the worst. So the more complex, I think, the more elite the institution. The worse is when it goes wrong.

And what do you think the impact of this will be over time where essentially the people who go to the best schools, particularly, but everybody really, is being indoctrinated with this particular mindset over time? What does that lead to, in your opinion? Well, the boy's letter in supported me said that it erases much of what has traditionally constituted a liberal education. I think the line they used was young men and their ideas are formed through conflict. So we want people to be robust intellectually and emotionally when they leave these institutions and go on to be, in the case of Eaton, certainly,

leading figures in all kinds of areas of public life and business. If anyone thinks that they're somehow going to have an easy right where people tip-toe around their feelings when they leave Eaton, I think they're going to be very severely, disappointed. It does feel, and look, maybe it's just me, maybe it's, you know, I've got my conspiracy hat on. Do you sometimes feel like, it's starting to feel like an attack on masculinity almost? Well, if you watch the video and ask yourself what kind of viewpoints here are really problematic, is it the idea that some of the traits that are now called toxicically masculine?

I think according to the American Psychological Association, it's stoicism, dominance, aggression, competitiveness. And what I did just to encourage looking at those from a new angle in the video was say that, well, actually, men have been valued for these things traditionally in many societies and cultures across history. You don't get many cultures which value men who are cowards, for example. Now, why is that? A lot of this stems from war and the necessity of self-defense and the protector role, and that is rooted in biological essentialism. So the difference is between men and women, which I think people are uncomfortable talking about now,

because they're seen as social constructs. Maybe they do have real consequences for how societies are organized. We talk a lot about patriarchy as a social construct, but anthropologists haven't discovered a single genuine matriarchy. Now, why is that? That's the topic for people to discuss. But to say that the view of masculinity as being partly rooted in the protector role and providing for women and children as being beyond the pale for discussion, I think that's quite bizarre. Do you think we're struggling as a culture and as society to adjust to the fact that? that our roles have changed, technology, the pill,

the creation of all sorts of domestic appliances, other technological changes now mean that basically men in that conception are less necessary, let's say. There's less of a need for men to protect. Women can earn their own living in the world. They're not forced to be stuck at home looking after children because we have the ability now to sort of outsource that mostly to technology and stuff like that.

and we are as a society feeling our way through these changes, and that is where a lot of the tension comes from. Do you see what I'm saying? Yeah. So I think that would have been one of the topics that would have been great to discuss after the video. T-shay. So thanks for bringing it up.

Very interesting. The thing that really addresses, I feel, is that our biology hasn't really changed much, certainly not in a fundamental way, since that of our Stone Age ancestors. So, yeah, it seems easy to say, well, men don't need to be protective anymore. But the physical differences between men and women are still there. And good luck to any guy who hides behind his girlfriend

if the two of them get mugged walking down the street. I think the expectation of what the traditional roles are still persists. Mate, if we were getting mugged, I'd hide behind you. I'd promise you that. He just looked at him and went, yes. That is exactly how we should. be. But I guess what I'm getting at is this whole conversation, I feel, is become so toxic because, as you said, there's so many, like, don't go there, don't look there, don't touch that,

don't open that box, don't, and why can't we have this conversation in a robust way, but also in a sensitive way, we can also have it that way too. Like, let's look at how society has changed, yes, men are less, we need to be less physically defensive now and women can earn their own way. What's the way we manage that as a society? What do we, you know, if you are of the other point of view and you think, well, maybe men should have more maternity leave so that they can look after kids if that's what you believe, right? Like, let's have that conversation. Why, why do we have to shut down? Why do we have to cut things off?

Why can't we just have the talk? Well, what if it's about ultimately prioritizing emotional safety over any form of intellectual challenge? What if that's the thing that we really need to think about? Is it worth anyone ever getting upset at the risk of getting a complaint and possible legal action being launched? Or should we go ahead because we prioritise intellectual discussion and rational argument? Do you not find it ironic, though, Will, that this society is the safest society there's ever been? and yet all we seem to talk about is keeping people safe. There's a certain irony there, isn't there?

Yeah, this is a case that's full of irony. So one of the views in the video is that men have traditionally been valued for protecting women and children. And that view that women needed protecting was apparently extremely offensive. And yet the headmaster stepped in to protect the complainant from having to face the dangerous video. So there's protection running right. the way through this. So arguably it proves the video's point.

And there's also another element to this, and you get this a lot with comedy, where this person who complained presumably wasn't required to attend the lecture, were they? Well, it would have been due to COVID, supervising boys in a room while they watch the lecture. Right. And then supervising boys critically discuss it amongst themselves. So chairing a discussion. I see. But no one's being kind of called out and targeted. So could this person have asked not to be the person who led this chaired this discussion? Could they have been replaced by someone else?

I don't see why not. Right. So if they felt that it would be a hostile environment for them, surely the solution would have been for them to remove themselves from that situation rather than to deprive the students of the opportunity to hear the argument. Yeah, exactly. And also leaving it on YouTube, right, no one has to watch a video on YouTube. It's the same with comedy.

You get a comedian that does a routine. in a comedy club where people enjoy it or some people enjoy it. And then that gets played on breakfast television or that gets referenced on breakfast television as if the comedian had walked onto the set of Good Morning Britain at 7 in the morning and done a, you know, a pito gag or whatever it might be. And this is someone who is deliberately taking something out of a context into a different situation.

Well, I think it can be easy to interpret. as being merely about taking offence. Sometimes taking offence can be a form of aggression. And I think what it's really about is not wanting anybody to hear the viewpoints at all in case they might believe them because they're not ones that that particular person once aired.

This goes back to what Carl Popper was explaining in the open society and its enemies about one of the marks of intolerance being the refusal to entertain rational discussion. So just say, we're not going to do this at all and we're not going to allow people to hear it either. hear it either. And at that point, you start to wonder how different woke tears are from brown shirts, boots, stomping. I mean, it's a good point. It's a good point.

Listen, man, I want to, like, I've increasingly tried to engage in counter arguments on a show. I'm really struggling here. I really am. It just, it just seems like such an obvious thing that young men or boys should be taught to think and to engage with different arguments as young girls should be. Young people of all fucking hell. Anyway, young people should be engaging with different arguments. It's really as simple as that. And I just find this whole story mind-boggling. I think the vast majority of the public do. I don't think this point of view is widely shared in society. And yet, it's the dominant one. It's a dominant one in our culture. How did that happen? Well, so we know that it's well established that universities in particular very much.

dominated by this particular view of culture and very few academics are willing to oppose it. I don't think academics and teachers as a group generally are famous for their, for their courage and their willingness to make stands on things. But even if it is the case that it's dominated by this viewpoint, well, how did that happen? I think part of it goes back to Plato's idea of philosopher kings and the intellectuals know best. And it's the case that, anybody wanting to hear certain viewpoints really doesn't know what's good for them and they should trust the people who do know what's best

and that includes saying what you're allowed to hear what you're allowed to think about and that's quite chilling I think it is very very chilling and it's not only what happens to people but what do you think is going to be the long-term effects of this if we don't make a stand if more people don't stand up and say this is unacceptable

I think what you'll see is more and more texts getting removed from the curriculum. I was in a meeting where it was suggested that we need to have fewer dead white males on the English reading list. So Shakespeare better be careful. We've seen that in many US schools. So that's one very worrying consequence. I think another is that you'll get people who are passionate about ideas and that teaching means a lot to not wanting to pursue careers in teaching. We see that in academia already.

People not wanting to undertake PhD research because they know they're not to get funding for their particular topics. So I think there's a lot at stake and some of the emails of support to me were saying they felt that Eaton's response had brought not only Eaton to disrepute but British education abroad.

I think that's definitely happened. Absolutely. That is definitely definitely definitely. And if I were a parent who could afford to send their kids to Eden now, I mean, I don't know where else I'd send them, but I certainly wouldn't send them to Eaton. Do you know what I mean? It's like I think it has damaged the reputation of the school quite considerably, actually. So what's next for you? Well, at the moment, I've got a lot going on with the legal action against the college.

Are you hoping to be reinstated? I think there's a lot of people in the Old Atonian community, and some of the donors supporting me students and parents who would like to see reinstatement, which they consider would be a just outcome. we'll see what the response is. I definitely do miss the job. I miss the classroom. And it was a pleasure working there.

And I think there's a lot of good people still there who do want to fight back against this but aren't quite sure how. They don't want to end up in the position I'm in now. And to anybody else working at similar schools, whether in Britain or in the US, I would just say, was it the career that you envisioned for yourself

having to self-censor for 20 years or so? and if it is that you're worried about the consequences for your family or your kids, if you're a family man like me, then think what kind of culture you were contributing to by being silent and not pushing back when your own kids are at school when they grow up. I think people do need to actually put things on the line for us to be able to turn anything around. I think about that a lot, man. I think about your kids watching you, I think will be very proud. And I think that probably to you is much more precious than whatever job you had or whatever else.

Yeah, people had some comments like, why did he do this with a family? Why did it because I got a family? And my kids are experiencing the same thing at school. My daughter's 15 and she knows what's happening. And when the request came through to delete it off YouTube as well, I asked my wife, what should we do here? If I don't take this down, this could turn ugly quite fast. And she said, I know how important this is to you.

And I don't want to see you miserable working there, not being able to speak your mind and have the kind of debates you want with the students. So let's do it. And it meant a lot to me that she was behind me. Was there at any point where you regretted it, where you think, I can't, I didn't, I wish I could row back now. No, I don't think so. So much support from people.

And also, it's about something so important. I can't imagine myself still working there, creating resources that get blocked in case someone gets upset. And the thing that really did it for me was that some of the material coming out about Black Lives Matter in the wake of George Floyd's death was so one-sided. And I wanted to share a video by Thomas Solt talking about the history of slavery. Black American economists for people who are not familiar. Talking about the history of slavery and the fact that it's the universal human institution. and what's unique about the British Empire is it ended it.

And that was blocked. That's a surprise. I guess Thomas Sol wasn't the right kind of black voice. Yes. Yeah. Well, we've had plenty of them on the show. There's a whole wall of pictures behind you. Yeah, that's it. Resources from Candace Owens blocked as well.

So to have these usually male upper class, white academics, blocking voices like Candice Owens is that's not right. And Thomas Sol particularly. Listen, man, thanks so much for coming on and talking to us. We appreciate it. Good on you. I've tried my best to come up with counter arguments. I feel like I failed.

That's because I really struggled to see the other side in this conversation, I think. I've really enjoyed this interview, watching and fail, by the way. Yeah, yeah. The big counter argument that they give is that teachers just aren't allowed to give videos like that one, lectures like that one. So I've been referred to the teaching regulation agency, potentially banning me from the classroom for life. and we'll see what their response is.

I think that will send a very strong signal either way to other teachers about the direction of travel for secondary schools. But to all the teachers who have emailed me messages to support, all the parents, all the students, you're welcome. Well, on that note, actually, if people are watching this, do you need support with anything? Where should people go to check out the progress of your case and whatever else.

Yeah, that's kind of you to mention that. So on the description of the YouTube video, there's a link to Donobox, which is my crowdfunding to support the legal cases. But other than that, I would tell people just to keep pushing for exciting, interesting debates because I think that this stranglehold

will just keep tightening unless people set the line somewhere. Agreed. Agreed. Well, thank you so much for coming on the show. We always end our interviews with one question, which is always what's the one thing we're not talking about, but we really should be? I think the crisis of masculinity, especially in all boys' schools, needs to be addressed urgently.

I think these institutions, many of them are embarrassed to exist, and they need to think hard about why that is. If you don't really believe in all boys' education, then I think it's hypocritical to be providing it. And people need to put boys in touch with the past, and the traditions about what it means to be a man rather than rubbishing them and leaving them with some of the main pillars of their identity, as one of the Eaton boys put it, just crushed to dust. Well, thank you so much for coming on. Guys, we hope you've enjoyed this wonderful episode.

If you want to check out our episodes or our live stream, they always go out at 7pm UK time. Take care and see you soon.