0:00

And I had never heard that

0:02

so that is misogyny. And I thought,

0:04

what is that? She said, think

0:06

about it, think It's the ultimate

0:08

penetration of our bodies by men. of

0:10

our just calling And just this

0:12

group of lesbians

0:15

just just People were

0:17

basically harassing my boss. my And

0:19

my poor boss, she's in

0:21

her late 60s. She's She's very

0:23

old There There are these

0:25

little micro -cancelations happening all over

0:27

America around this exact topic.

0:30

Yours is a good example. good

0:32

know, for Matt Walsh to make

0:34

the movie, to make a Woman,

0:36

I'm glad he did it. Women

0:38

seem to be much more

0:40

complicit in going along with this

0:42

crap than men. These very

0:44

wealthy men are colonizing sex make

0:46

make it disappear. And so And so

0:48

they'll just call you transphobic and

0:50

shut down the conversation completely. California

0:53

state law has the most the

0:55

most definition of the word sex

0:57

sex I've seen anywhere in the

0:59

country. country. Oh,

1:03

All right. with I'm with

1:05

Kara Danski, everybody. Welcome to Walkins. So

1:07

good to have you. good to have

1:09

thank you for having me. having

1:11

me. really wanted to talk to

1:13

you talk I noticed that you

1:15

wrote a book wrote a book and it

1:18

seems to true in this come

1:20

true in this election cycle. book.

1:22

Tell us us about your book. Tell us

1:24

about why you wrote it and to then I want

1:26

to get into of of how you're feeling now now.

1:29

So wrote wrote one book called

1:31

The Abolition of Sex, how the transgender

1:33

agenda Women and Girls and November, in

1:36

2021. 2021. And my point with

1:38

that book was to sort

1:40

of sort of mainstream Democrats,

1:42

moderate leftists vocabulary to

1:44

use in talking about

1:46

issues around sex and

1:48

gender, in particular women's

1:50

sex -based rights. rights. And

1:53

about a year and a half later I

1:55

was in touch with the publisher the I

1:57

told him I told need to write another

1:59

book book because it's working, right? The Democrats

2:01

in power are not listening to

2:03

ordinary rank and file Democrats. They're

2:06

not listening to the feminists like

2:08

me. I'm a lifelong registered Democrat.

2:10

And I just told him they're

2:12

not listening and I need to

2:15

write another book and it has

2:17

to be about a reckoning, the

2:19

reckoning that's coming in 2024 if

2:21

they don't start listening to their

2:23

own constituents. And so that was

2:26

published in November, 2023 one year

2:28

ago. Wow. And what was the,

2:30

what was the, like, impetus to

2:32

write your first book? So I

2:34

have been a turf, if you

2:37

like. We can break that down.

2:39

Break it down. Break it down.

2:41

Um, okay. So I started paying

2:43

attention to all the ways in

2:46

which so-called gender identity harms women

2:48

and girls as a sex class

2:50

in 2014. when a woman who's

2:52

a radical feminist lesbian told me,

2:54

she schooled me in it and

2:57

she said everything about this is

2:59

totally anti-woman, it's anti-feminist and it's

3:01

all grounded in misogyny. And I

3:03

was like, whoa, that's interesting. I

3:05

was sort of a good liberal.

3:08

I spent nearly 20 years working

3:10

in the criminal justice system in

3:12

the fight to end mass incarceration.

3:14

And I was kind of going

3:16

along doing the good liberal things

3:19

that all good liberals do, and

3:21

I had never heard that so-called

3:23

trans is misogyny, and I thought,

3:25

what is that? And I asked

3:28

her to elaborate, and she said,

3:30

and I will never forget this.

3:32

She said, think about it, Kara.

3:34

It's the ultimate penetration of our

3:36

bodies by men. And I was

3:39

like, whoa. So I did my

3:41

research, and I figured out what

3:43

she was talking about. And in

3:45

2015, I joined an organization called

3:47

the Women's Liberation Front, or Wolf,

3:50

which I know you've talked about

3:52

in your podcast. And they've joined.

3:54

What was that? And they've come

3:56

on to the podcast. Awesome. Yeah.

3:59

So I joined. in

4:01

2015. I joined the board in

4:03

2016. That organization sued the Obama

4:06

administration in 2016 for redefining sex

4:08

to include so-called gender identity under

4:10

Title IX. As far as I

4:12

know, that's the first time that

4:15

happened, but it wouldn't be the

4:17

last. And I stayed on the

4:19

board of Wolf until 2020. And

4:21

at around that time, women's declaration

4:24

international a global organization that fights

4:26

to protect the sex-based rights of

4:28

women and girls was being launched.

4:30

The US chapter launched sometime in

4:33

summer of 2020, and I got

4:35

more involved in that. And so

4:37

in 2021, Women's Declaration International US

4:39

Chapter, which had a different name

4:42

then, but anyway, it's WDI USA

4:44

Now. It incorporated and formed a

4:46

board of directors, and I joined

4:48

the board of directors, which elected

4:51

to be president. and I served

4:53

in that capacity from 2021 until

4:55

2024. And at one point in

4:57

early 2017, I went on Tucker

5:00

Carlson, which was a very controversial

5:02

thing for me to do because

5:04

I'm a lifelong liberal and a

5:07

radical feminist, and a lot of

5:09

people got very angry at me

5:11

for doing that, but I wanted

5:13

to do it because I wanted

5:16

people to understand that there is

5:18

a left-leaning feminist critique of so-called

5:20

gender identity. So I went on

5:22

to be on his show on

5:25

Fox before he lost his job

5:27

there. I think a total of

5:29

nine times. Wow. And one of

5:31

those times, the publisher caught the,

5:34

you know, my attention or I

5:36

caught his attention. And he contacted

5:38

me and he said, wow, you

5:40

have a really interesting critique. I

5:43

really want you to write this

5:45

book. And so that was the

5:47

impetus for the abolition of sex

5:49

in 2021. So, gosh, there's so

5:52

much. Okay, can you just define

5:54

what turf is for people who

5:56

don't know what that term is

5:58

and who aren't terminally online like

6:01

we are? Yeah, so at some

6:03

point, and I don't know when.

6:05

gender activists, I'll just call them,

6:07

coined the term turf to mean

6:10

trans exclusionary radical feminists. And for

6:12

many years, women who are considered

6:14

terfs just rejected the term and

6:17

considered it a misogynistic slur, and

6:19

that included me. I considered it

6:21

a misogynistic slur for a long

6:23

time. That is, until October 2021,

6:26

when Netflix released Dave Chappelle's special

6:28

on Netflix called The Closer. And

6:30

in that special, he talked about

6:32

JK Rolling, who's been very outspoken

6:35

on this topic. He said, it's

6:37

quite reasonable for women not to

6:39

want men in women's bathrooms. And

6:41

he announced that he is on,

6:44

quote, team turf. And at that

6:46

point, I thought, okay, this term

6:48

turf now has some political salience

6:50

because we are leftists. We are

6:53

radical feministsists. We don't actually try

6:55

to exclude all people who call

6:57

themselves trans, because there are all

6:59

sorts of women who call themselves

7:02

trans, who are always welcome in

7:04

women-only spaces. The group of people

7:06

that we want to exclude from

7:08

women-only spaces, sports, prisons, etc. are

7:11

men. So in any event, by

7:13

October 2021, I was like, all

7:15

right, this term turf has political

7:17

salience, I'm just going to reclaim

7:20

it for myself and I'm going

7:22

to start calling myself the turf.

7:24

And that's what I did. So

7:28

It's funny because I've been

7:30

doing this bit for online,

7:33

probably since I think the

7:35

tweets go back to 2017,

7:37

2018, where I say patriarchy

7:40

so crafty. And this was

7:42

my first. experience of

7:44

being called a turf because online

7:46

I would see something like a

7:49

male and woman's prison just all

7:51

of the examples of men taking

7:53

encroaching in women's spaces and I

7:55

was like the patriarchy so crafty

7:57

they'll turn themselves into a woman

8:00

and stay on top. Now, I've

8:02

been trying to turn this into

8:04

a stand-up bit, which is a

8:06

much harder needle to thread, depending

8:08

on the audience. And I do

8:11

a show where it's all lesbians.

8:13

It's run by a lesbian, and

8:15

it's lesbians. Sometimes the lesbians are

8:17

older and a little bit more

8:19

based, as you would say. the

8:21

other night I bombed trying to

8:24

do this bit just because I

8:26

said I opened with you know

8:28

I was never really a feminist

8:30

this is this is like something

8:32

that I was I was a

8:35

feminist but I was always like

8:37

it seems sketchy to me like

8:39

guys don't have to open doors

8:41

and they don't have to work

8:43

this seems I was like paid

8:45

this seems like it benefits men

8:48

in a lot of ways and

8:50

I was you know a little

8:52

skeptical of some of the waves

8:54

of it and then And I

8:56

said, and then I saw men

8:59

taking like women's places and sports

9:01

and just calling them men made

9:03

this group of lesbians just recoil

9:05

because they've been trained to be

9:07

like, no, you can't call them

9:09

men. That alone is an offense

9:12

that's like just too far gone.

9:14

And so then they were just

9:16

not on board with me at

9:18

all. It's wild to me. It's

9:20

wild to me that lesbians don't

9:23

in particular don't see how disruptive

9:25

this has been to many of

9:27

their communities in general and like

9:29

dating apps and all this stuff.

9:31

So my that's what like radicalized

9:33

me over the years and I

9:36

too am like you a very

9:38

left leaning person. There were many

9:40

things that radicalized me. to be

9:42

like questionable questioning of the left,

9:44

but that I think was the

9:47

biggest one. And you seem to

9:49

be one of the people who

9:51

rightfully identified this shift and then

9:53

wrote about the reckoning. How is

9:55

the response? your first book and

9:57

then, I mean, obviously that inspired

10:00

to write your second book. How

10:02

is a response to the second

10:04

book? So it was interesting because

10:06

it came out in the fall

10:08

of 2023 when a lot of

10:11

things were happening and dominating the

10:13

new cycle. So it didn't get

10:15

the kind of publicity that I

10:17

was hoping it would get. It's

10:19

gotten around only through word of

10:21

mouth. A lot of feminists in

10:24

the UK have read it. And

10:26

so that's good. I would say

10:28

in terms of publicity, it hasn't

10:30

done nearly as well as I'd

10:32

wanted. And in terms of actually

10:35

accomplishing its mission of convincing the

10:37

Democrats to knock it off already,

10:39

it definitely didn't accomplish that mission

10:41

at all either. But the mission

10:43

was twofold. One, it was to

10:45

convince the Democrats in power that

10:48

they've got this issue totally wrong.

10:50

But I knew at the time

10:52

that even if it didn't do

10:54

that, that it provides a record

10:56

of what they've done, because what

10:59

I worried about at the time

11:01

and still worry about is that

11:03

the Democrats in power are going

11:05

to memory hold this. They're going

11:07

to pretend like it didn't happen.

11:09

They're going to pretend that they

11:12

never supported men and women's sports.

11:14

they're going to pretend that they

11:16

never wanted to harm children with

11:18

puberty blockers and opposite sex hormones.

11:20

And I didn't want them to

11:23

get away with that. And you

11:25

know, remember, this is my party

11:27

we're talking about. I still haven't

11:29

left the Democratic Party, even though

11:31

plenty of people I know have

11:33

done so over this issue, and

11:36

as you say, over many other

11:38

issues. I have chosen not to

11:40

do that as hard as it

11:42

has been. But in any event,

11:44

I wanted to make the record.

11:47

so that they can't pretend that

11:49

this never happened. So many women

11:51

have been harmed by this already,

11:53

that even if they walk back

11:55

their policies, have to hold themselves

11:58

accountable for what they've done to

12:00

women and girls. And in that

12:02

sense, I'm very proud of the

12:04

book and I think it's accomplished

12:06

what I wanted it to accomplish.

12:08

So can I ask a question

12:11

and you don't have to answer

12:13

it because I realize this is

12:15

very personal? If you are somebody

12:17

in your place who isn't hasn't

12:19

left the Democrats because I haven't

12:22

given up on them but I

12:24

had to I chose to vote

12:26

against them for these exact reasons

12:28

how do you square voting for

12:30

Kamala? who is part of undermining

12:32

and totally eroding Title IX. I

12:35

don't know if you did vote

12:37

for her or not, but how

12:39

do you how do you square

12:41

that? Are you still voting Democrat?

12:44

No, I didn't. So I

12:46

had my absentee ballot sitting

12:48

on my kitchen table for

12:50

weeks leading up to the

12:52

election. It was just sitting

12:54

there and you know, it

12:56

was taunting me, right? And

12:58

I was like, what am

13:00

I going to do? Because

13:02

I did not have it

13:04

in me to vote for

13:06

Donald Trump. I didn't do

13:08

it in 2016. I didn't

13:10

do it in 2020 and

13:12

I could not bring myself

13:14

to do it this year,

13:16

notwithstanding this issue. I just

13:18

couldn't do it. But no,

13:20

I couldn't vote for Harris

13:22

either. I very reluctantly voted

13:24

for Biden Harris in 2020

13:26

because by 2020, backing

13:29

up in 2016, I knew how

13:31

devastating gender identity is for women

13:33

and girls. As I mentioned, I

13:35

figured that part out at the

13:37

end of 2014. So I knew

13:39

that. What I didn't know at

13:41

the time was just how far

13:43

Democrats were going to take this.

13:46

So I very enthusiastically voted for

13:48

Hillary Clinton in the general in

13:50

2016. I don't want to get

13:52

it. I don't want to re-litigate

13:54

with anyone the primary fight between

13:56

Hillary and Bernie. That's old news.

13:58

Regardless of how anyone voted in

14:00

the primary. enthusiastically voted for her

14:03

in the general because I just

14:05

didn't know how far the Democrats

14:07

were going to take this. By

14:09

2020, I was so fed up

14:11

with them, and I should also

14:13

say, I've never liked Joe Biden.

14:15

I've been angry at Joe Biden

14:17

since Anita Hill testified against Clarence

14:20

Thomas for his Supreme Court nomination.

14:22

So I never wanted to vote

14:24

for him at all. Anyway, but

14:26

I especially didn't want to do

14:28

it in 2020. But at the

14:30

end of the day, I did.

14:32

I just, I ticked the box.

14:34

I threw my ballot in the

14:37

mail in advance and just washed

14:39

my hands of it. But this

14:41

year, I just couldn't do it.

14:43

Yeah. I just could not do

14:45

it. After four years of what

14:47

the Biden Harris administration has done

14:49

to women and girls, nope, absolutely

14:51

not. So I wrote in a

14:54

candidate. Okay. There was, I think,

14:56

some sense of, oh, Biden's going

14:58

to be moderate. He's going to

15:00

do, he's going to, you know,

15:02

bring the party back from the

15:04

brink of this kind of radical,

15:06

these radical policies and lurching into

15:08

this kind of madness, and that

15:11

wasn't the case at all. It

15:13

just went further and further. So

15:15

I think a lot of people

15:17

who felt maybe he was like

15:19

the Democratic, you know, that was

15:21

part of the reason that I

15:23

think he won the primary was

15:25

he was supposed to be the

15:28

moderate influence. And I feel like

15:30

I've heard from a lot of

15:32

Democrats who are quite disappointed at

15:34

how radical he was, particularly on

15:36

areas like this. And I mean,

15:38

I'm using he loosely. I don't

15:40

know that this was him making

15:42

these decisions. or just a radical

15:45

young staff who was pushing this

15:47

all through? I mean, I think

15:49

most people have no idea, because

15:51

how could you possibly know? Then

15:53

Vice President Biden was saying, quote,

15:55

transgender discrimination is the civil rights

15:57

issue of our time in 2012.

16:00

his record on this goes

16:02

back to 2012. Wow, okay.

16:04

And there's no reason for

16:06

anyone to know that. I

16:08

happen to know it because

16:10

there's a political article from

16:12

2012 that talks about it.

16:14

But I also happen to

16:16

know that that was the

16:18

same year that a guy

16:20

named Tim McBride, whose name

16:22

is now Sarah McBride, was

16:24

the president of the student

16:26

body at American University and

16:28

announced that He's a woman

16:30

named Sarah, and he's very,

16:32

very good friends with the

16:34

Biden family. He worked directly

16:36

for Biden's older son, Bo,

16:38

who tragically died, I think,

16:40

in 2015 of a brain

16:42

tumor. So we're not talking

16:44

about Hunter here. It's a

16:46

different son. But McBride worked

16:48

for him directly. And there's

16:50

this whole thing that happened

16:52

around 2015, 2016. Back up,

16:54

McBride also interned at the

16:56

White House immediately upon graduating

16:58

from college in the Obama

17:00

Biden White House. And then

17:02

fast forward to 2015, 2016,

17:04

you've got Jill Biden giving

17:06

speeches at the Human Rights

17:08

Campaign talking about her very

17:10

good friend Sarah McBride. You've

17:12

got President Biden mentioning Sarah,

17:14

Tim McBride in his interview

17:16

with Dylan Mulvaney. I don't

17:18

know if you know about

17:20

Biden's interview with Dylan Mulvaney,

17:22

but in any event, this

17:24

is just to say that

17:26

a man who calls himself

17:29

a woman named Sarah, who

17:31

was from Delaware and is

17:33

now serving in Congress as

17:35

of, well, Will, starting in

17:37

January, he was elected. He

17:39

was the one who won.

17:41

Oh, that's the same person.

17:43

Yeah. Oh, wow. Okay. So I

17:46

mean, I can understand why people

17:48

would think that Biden has no

17:50

idea, right? He strikes us or

17:52

struck us as a pretty moderate

17:54

politician. And, you know, we all

17:56

know that he's got some cognitive.

17:58

going on. So I can understand

18:00

thinking that maybe he just doesn't

18:02

know and this is just some

18:04

crazy thing being pushed by a

18:06

staffer, but I just don't buy

18:08

that because I know too much

18:10

about things he said and who

18:12

he knows. Okay, well that makes

18:15

more sense. I think it's easy

18:17

to, I think it would be

18:19

easy for, yeah, I think the

18:21

majority of people don't know any

18:23

of this. They don't know, I

18:25

mean, even I have a hard

18:27

time articulating it because I did

18:29

a podcast with Winston Marshall recently

18:31

and he was asking me about

18:33

this and I said you know

18:35

title 9 because I follow all

18:37

of it closely but when he

18:39

asked me to break down when

18:42

title 9 went into effect why

18:44

did it all of a sudden

18:46

start encompassing like the me too

18:48

stuff how did it start encompassing

18:50

the gender stuff I was like

18:52

I'm not a lawyer you know

18:54

I mean I have some idea

18:56

of how this happened but I'm

18:58

not somebody, it was challenging for

19:00

me to answer a lot of

19:02

those questions without sounding like a

19:04

moron. Sure, I mean, it's totally

19:06

understandable because, you know, people don't

19:08

know this. I mean, I do

19:11

understand a lot of these things

19:13

in part because I am a

19:15

lawyer and Picard because this is

19:17

all I ever do anymore. You

19:19

know, in 2019, I basically turfed

19:21

myself out of a career. in

19:23

criminal justice law and policy. And

19:25

ever since then, this is all

19:27

I do. So when someone asked

19:29

me what I do, I say

19:31

I'm a full-time unemployed turf, which

19:33

is true. What does that mean

19:35

turf to yourself out of a

19:38

career? So my first lawyering job

19:40

after clerking in federal court was

19:42

as a public defender, and I

19:44

did lots of things in the

19:46

criminal justice arena. One of the

19:48

things I did was work as

19:50

a senior counsel on criminal justice

19:52

policy at the ACLU. from 2012

19:54

to 2014 and around 2015 I

19:56

started doing consulting work and I

19:58

was working with various criminal

20:01

justice agencies on ending mass incarceration,

20:03

ending police militarization, doing some stuff

20:05

with drug policy. So from around

20:08

2015 to 2018, I was doing

20:10

criminal justice stuff to pay the

20:12

bills while on the side I

20:15

was volunteering with Wolf and being

20:17

very outspoken about women's rights. I

20:19

ended up getting a job at

20:21

a city agency in Washington DC

20:24

in 2018 and stayed in that

20:26

job until the end of 2019.

20:29

And the main reason I left

20:31

is that over the course of

20:34

2019, people were basically harassing my

20:36

boss and my poor boss, she's

20:39

like, she's in her late 60s,

20:41

she's very old school, she doesn't

20:43

understand social media, she's very offline,

20:46

and she doesn't understand this issue

20:48

at all. So people were like

20:50

sending her email messages, one random

20:53

person. sent a tweet,

20:55

I'll just say tweet and Twitter,

20:57

even though we know those aren't

21:00

words that we use anymore, but

21:02

tweeted. I'm not letting him trans

21:05

that brand, I'm sorry. Some random

21:07

person tweeted at a member of

21:09

the DC City Council and the

21:12

tweet contained a photo of me

21:14

sitting on a panel that I

21:17

had been sitting on talking about

21:19

women's rights. And this person tweeted

21:21

this DC City Council member and

21:24

said, why is there a turf

21:26

on staff at that city agency?

21:29

And so the city council member

21:31

got very angry and he reamed

21:33

out my boss in his office

21:36

and told her to fix the

21:38

problem. And she had no idea

21:41

what was going on. She somehow

21:43

thought that that

21:45

I had somehow brought women's rights

21:48

advocacy into the work I was

21:50

doing at the agency, which I

21:52

hadn't at all. The panel I

21:55

was on was during non-work hours.

21:57

So she was totally confused. Understandably.

22:00

And I kept my job, but

22:02

over the course of 2019, she

22:05

was just getting email message after

22:07

email message complaining that there was

22:09

a turf at the agency. And

22:12

every time that happened, she had

22:14

to bring it to me. And

22:16

then it just became a distraction

22:18

from the work of the agency.

22:21

And I was like, all right,

22:23

I can either keep this job

22:25

and shut up about the sex-based

22:27

rights of women and girls, or

22:30

I can quit. So I quit.

22:32

And my last day at that

22:34

job was at the end of

22:37

2019. So that's what I mean

22:39

when I say I turfed myself

22:41

out of a career. Because if

22:43

you talk about these things in

22:46

public, if you say that men

22:48

aren't women, you're not allowed to

22:50

have a job. You know, basically.

22:52

Bananas! It makes, I mean, this

22:55

is why I've been screaming on

22:57

my show, women, and we literally

22:59

sold hoodies that just say women

23:02

on them for five years. I've

23:04

just been saying women! Because it

23:06

is bonkers, you can't even use

23:08

that word in certain spaces anymore.

23:11

This is even more insane because

23:13

I'm a moron on YouTube who's

23:15

just doing comedy. You actually are

23:17

a lawyer who's trying to do

23:20

criminal justice and now you can't

23:22

really practice because you believe that

23:24

a man who puts, you know,

23:27

is in a woman. Like that's

23:29

wild to me. That's crazy. This

23:32

is what I meant when I

23:34

said for years, I said, we

23:37

don't hear about people like you.

23:39

We hear about these big cancellations

23:41

or somebody might get cancel, you

23:43

know, these, but I was like,

23:45

there are these little micro cancellations

23:47

happening all over America around this

23:50

exact topic. Yours is a good

23:52

example. But even like the people

23:54

getting kicked out of mommy groups,

23:56

you know, I would hear from

23:58

somebody, people would email me and

24:00

say, well, I push back against

24:03

a man on our like an

24:05

opposed and all the moms kicked

24:07

me out of the group. It

24:09

is crazy. What has your experience

24:11

been, you know, so in your

24:13

book, which I think really did,

24:16

I think the numbers reflect that

24:18

you, your warning should have been

24:20

heated, particularly with suburban moms, you

24:22

know, breaking for Trump. What

24:25

are you hearing now? What

24:27

are you hearing? Are you

24:29

hearing stories from people about this?

24:31

Is there any momentum? Does

24:33

it seem like the tide

24:35

is turning? So there are

24:37

two Democratic congressmen, to the best

24:40

of my knowledge, only two, who

24:42

have said since the election,

24:44

look, we need to talk

24:46

about the issue of male

24:48

athletes in women's sports. So that's

24:51

good. As far as I

24:53

know, they are the first

24:55

and only democratic officials at

24:57

the federal level to take a

24:59

stand. And at least one of

25:01

them hasn't backed down. one

25:04

of his staffers had a temper

25:07

tantrum and walked out. And he's

25:09

been called, the congressman has been

25:11

called on to apologize. And he's

25:13

like, no, I'm not apologizing. All

25:15

I said is that we need

25:18

to have a conversation. Americans clearly

25:20

want to have this conversation. So

25:22

I was very encouraged about that.

25:24

Since the election, I have submitted

25:27

three op-eds to various major papers

25:29

basically trying to have this conversation

25:31

and saying, look, we need to

25:34

talk about this. And one of

25:36

them outright rejected me and the

25:38

other two simply ignored me. So

25:41

I'm somewhat encouraged that at least

25:43

two Democratic lawmakers have spoken up

25:45

and I'm discouraged that in the

25:48

course of the past week and

25:50

a half, I

25:53

haven't been

25:55

able to

25:58

get into

26:00

media has been totally complicit in

26:03

being a mouthpiece. for the Democratic

26:05

Party's support for so-called gender identity.

26:07

And they paint all opposition to

26:10

it as being from, you know,

26:12

right-wing, homophobic bigots. And I just

26:14

know that they're lying because over

26:17

the course of the past several

26:19

years, I cannot tell you the

26:21

number of op-eds and letters to

26:24

the editor that I have submitted

26:26

to the New York Times, the

26:28

Washington Post, etc., etc. and they

26:31

just always go ignored, which is

26:33

fine. I should say, you know,

26:35

major papers ignore letters to the

26:38

editor all the time. They have

26:40

no obligation to publish them. But

26:42

I can't believe that they just

26:45

don't know that there is a

26:47

leftist radical feminist critique of gender

26:49

identity in this country. And certainly,

26:52

it is undeniable. now in light

26:54

of the presidential election. As you

26:56

say, so many suburban moms broke

26:59

for him. I don't know how.

27:01

the media can ignore that. I

27:03

mean did you see the other

27:06

day there was that guy they

27:08

were trying to have a panel

27:10

and I'm not I think it

27:13

was CNN I believe it could

27:15

have been an MS NBC and

27:17

somebody brought it up and said

27:20

you know we've got the women

27:22

and he was like I'm not

27:24

going to have somebody through this

27:27

fit saying I'm not gonna I'm

27:29

not going to hear transphobia on

27:31

this panel I won't be a

27:34

part of it and so they'll

27:36

just call you transphobic and shut

27:38

down the conversation completely. I had

27:41

a friend who was tweeting about

27:43

how he believes you'll start seeing

27:45

them publishing these critiques and trying

27:48

to give the Democratic Party an

27:50

off-ramp because they need one. They

27:52

have been all in on this.

27:55

And with the gender affirming care,

27:57

so he believes you'll start seeing

28:00

more pieces about the dangers of

28:02

the sex, you know, opposite sex

28:04

drugs, the hormone replacement there, or

28:07

whatever it is, the cross hormone

28:09

drugs. And he'll start seeing them

28:11

try and give them some kind

28:14

of way to back out of

28:16

this, but I. haven't really seen

28:18

it, and it doesn't sound like

28:21

they're listening to you. What were

28:23

you doing? Okay, a couple questions

28:25

to back up. Who sends all

28:28

these emails like to your, when

28:30

you were working on the council?

28:32

Who, is it activist? I assume,

28:35

but they're anonymous. So I don't

28:37

know. You know, so much of

28:39

this gender activism comes from tech.

28:42

And Tech

28:44

is not my strong suit, right? Like

28:46

I can write a decent legal brief.

28:48

I can write a good article or

28:50

an op-ed, but Tech, I have no

28:52

clue. So people would just send these

28:54

anonymous emails and she would have no

28:56

idea who they're coming from. But yeah,

28:58

they would just say things like, you

29:00

know, you need to fire her, she's

29:02

a turf. And my boss would just

29:04

be like, who are you and what?

29:06

What's a turf, yeah. I still, I

29:08

mean, I still have to remind. you

29:11

know, the boomers in my life

29:13

who are liberals, what turf even

29:15

means, they'll ask me, they don't

29:18

know. It's like they need a

29:20

glossary of terms when it comes

29:22

to this stuff. They don't know.

29:25

There's a whole language that's popped

29:27

up around it. And it's, you

29:29

know, native to the younger generation,

29:31

but certainly not to Gen X

29:34

who aren't very online and older.

29:36

And I think they just sense

29:38

like there's a visceral reaction to

29:41

not being able to say things

29:43

like men and women are different

29:45

or having that language policing or

29:48

having to walk on eggshells. And

29:50

even if people can't explain what

29:52

or why, they're just like, no,

29:54

I'm not going along with this.

29:57

Even if they can't articulate what

29:59

they're not going along with or

30:01

why they're not going along with

30:04

it, which is. of the older

30:06

people that I've talked to. And

30:08

a lot of the older people

30:10

will sort of, I think, make

30:13

a concerted effort to go along

30:15

with it. You know, older liberals

30:17

will want to go along with

30:20

it, but then they'll try to

30:22

use the language and they'll use

30:24

the phrase transgender man to mean

30:26

what they think of as a

30:29

man. Transgender woman. Right, exactly, but

30:31

they don't understand. Because it's confusing.

30:33

They don't understand that if you

30:36

use the phrase transgender man, you're

30:38

actually referring to what the gender

30:40

activists think of as a female

30:42

person. Right, right. It's intentionally confusing

30:45

though. Yes. So what were you

30:47

doing in 2014 that you became

30:49

aware of this? I

30:53

was just working in criminal justice. I

30:55

was literally sitting in my living room.

30:57

I was at the ACLU at the

30:59

time. I had no idea at the

31:01

time how all in the ACLU was.

31:04

But I was sitting in my

31:06

living room with my friend and

31:08

we were just talking about politics.

31:10

We were just talking about race

31:13

politics, class politics, sex politics, and

31:15

I just mentioned something about transgender

31:17

rights. I was never particularly a

31:19

trans activist. I just went along

31:21

because I thought that's what we

31:23

were supposed to do is good

31:25

liberals. And she just stopped me

31:27

and she was like, nope, I've

31:29

got to educate you on this

31:31

topic. And she did. Because I

31:33

think the radical feminist critique of

31:35

this is precedes anything that came

31:37

from the right. I see a

31:40

lot of this online, you know,

31:42

you'll see the people being like,

31:44

we owe this to Met, Walsh,

31:46

and all these people who have

31:48

brought the conversation to the mainstream

31:50

in a way that I don't

31:52

think the radical feminists were doing,

31:54

but to act like radical feminists

31:56

and women weren't silenced and fighting

31:58

this and in the. for

32:01

like a decade plus before

32:03

is also completely ridiculous because

32:06

most of the women I

32:08

know have suffered a lot

32:10

of even yourself included. It

32:13

seems like you're pretty well

32:15

adjusted and you just made

32:17

a choice. I feel like

32:20

you weren't. I

32:22

really identify with exactly the

32:25

position that you found yourself

32:27

in because I found myself

32:29

in a similar one where

32:31

I looked at my cousin

32:33

and said I can shut

32:35

up and not make these

32:37

jokes and not say these

32:39

things that I want to

32:41

say and we'll still work

32:43

in Hollywood or I can

32:45

I can speak up and

32:47

and push these obvious jokes

32:49

at this low-hanging fruit insanity

32:51

that's coming from our party

32:53

and we probably won't be

32:55

working in Hollywood. And so

32:57

it was a choice, but

32:59

I mean, I got unceremoniously

33:01

let go from Playboy. It

33:03

was, and it was, it's

33:05

hard when in my position

33:07

being freelance, it's not like,

33:09

and probably similar to you,

33:11

you don't really know. It

33:15

wasn't, it's like you don't know why

33:17

doors, doors just won't open. And you

33:19

don't know if it's because they're just

33:22

not opening, like, oh, it's just an

33:24

op-ed, people can say no to that,

33:26

or if it's because you're touching some

33:29

third rail and they don't want to

33:31

be associated with it. Yeah,

33:34

exactly. How do you navigate it?

33:36

You know, how do you not,

33:39

because I think a lot, I've

33:41

seen it drive a lot of

33:43

people insane and become quite paranoid.

33:46

And I understand that. I understand

33:48

how it's like, are they not

33:50

responding to me because I'm an

33:52

untouchable or is it because, is

33:55

it just because they're busy? Right.

33:57

I mean, it is hard. I

34:00

have a sub stack and

34:02

I often use my sub

34:04

stack just to sort of

34:06

unload on what's going on

34:08

with the political science aspects

34:10

of this movement and I

34:12

have a sub stack and

34:14

I often use my sub

34:16

stack just to sort of

34:18

unload on what my thinking

34:21

is and at this point

34:23

I'm pretty sure the reason

34:25

the major papers don't want

34:27

to platform the radical feminist

34:29

critique of so-called gender identities

34:31

because they just don't want

34:33

to hear it and they

34:35

don't want to acknowledge that

34:37

they've been complicit in, as

34:39

I said, being the mouthpiece

34:41

for the Democratic Party's support

34:43

for this stuff. And just

34:45

going back to what you

34:47

said about the conservative men

34:49

taking credit. Yeah, it's really

34:51

infuriating. And it's true what

34:53

they say that radical, and

34:56

as you said, that radical

34:58

feminists have not gotten this

35:00

before the mainstream. And that's

35:02

partly because we don't have

35:04

any money. Right. Right. So

35:06

like, you know, for Matt

35:08

Walsh to make the movie,

35:10

what is a woman, you

35:12

know, I'm glad he did

35:14

it, you know, don't get

35:16

me wrong. I'm glad he

35:18

did it. But, you know,

35:20

that's a daily wire. publication

35:22

with a lot of money

35:24

and a lot of fancy

35:26

fancy production. Yeah. And we

35:28

just don't have that. So

35:31

yeah, it's quite annoying when

35:33

the conservative men take credit

35:35

for this when women have

35:37

been doing this since forever.

35:39

Since I will say 1979.

35:41

Yeah. You know about what

35:43

happened in 19... Okay. So

35:45

you know about... I don't

35:47

know. So Professor Janice Raymond.

35:49

who is a lesbian radical

35:51

feminist, she published a book

35:53

in 1979 called The Transsexual

35:55

Empire and it's all about

35:57

how this is ultimately going

35:59

to be the undoing of

36:01

women's rights and she republished

36:04

it in 19. Can you

36:06

still get it? What? Can

36:08

you still get it? It's

36:10

available online. Oh, okay. Oh,

36:12

okay. Everyone can download it

36:14

for free. The Transsexual Empire

36:16

by Janus, you said? Yep.

36:18

Raymond. Raymond. Okay. And

36:21

so she republished it in

36:23

1994 and she wrote a

36:25

new introduction to the 1994

36:27

edition and the introduction says,

36:29

hey everyone, look out for

36:31

this word transgender, it's coming

36:33

and it's going to confuse

36:35

everyone and it's going to

36:37

entrench sex stereotypes. in society

36:39

and she said this is

36:41

terrible for women and girls

36:43

in 1994. So yeah, feminists

36:45

have been at this for

36:47

a while. And did she

36:49

get canceled or anything or

36:51

she just wrote it and

36:53

was like whatever by? He

36:55

has a tenured professor status

36:57

at the University of Massachusetts

36:59

and I think in 1994

37:01

you could probably get away

37:04

with that and fly under

37:06

the radar. But by

37:08

the same token, by flying under

37:10

the radar, it didn't get mainstream

37:12

attention. Right. I mean, that is

37:14

the thing, like, I'm glad that

37:16

this, these, I also think, and

37:19

I don't like it, I don't

37:21

like to say these things, but

37:23

I do think a couple things.

37:26

Women seem to be much more

37:29

complicit in going along with this

37:31

crap than men. So I do

37:33

think it's good that a man

37:35

or men brought this to the

37:38

attention of men, which brought it

37:40

to the attention of the mainstream

37:42

because places like YouTube and Twitter

37:44

and politics are generally More male

37:46

dominated they just are even YouTube

37:49

when you look at the numbers.

37:51

It's just men are spending more

37:53

time just ingesting this stuff and

37:55

they spend more time about it

37:58

and it's just a fact women

38:00

are watching true crime. I had

38:02

the funniest conversation with a woman

38:04

on a plane and she told

38:07

me she's like oh you have

38:09

a podcast what's it about and

38:11

she was like oh I just

38:13

really like true crime and I

38:15

asked her why I was like

38:18

yeah that doesn't surprise me that's

38:20

most women and I said why

38:22

do you think women really like

38:24

true crime more than men and

38:27

she said because the men are

38:29

busy murdering. Some funniest

38:31

answer from this old lady. I

38:33

was laughing so hard. I think

38:35

about her all the time. But

38:38

so I think there's that. It's

38:40

good. It's part of the reason

38:42

it brought it mainstream is that

38:44

there is that. And I also

38:47

just think women go along with

38:49

this crap. There. They're

38:51

the ones who are kind of

38:53

allowing it. I hate, and I

38:55

get outraged all the time about

38:58

the fact that now you're seeing

39:00

teenage girls have to literally not

39:02

compete against a team and forfeit

39:04

their game or their season or

39:07

whatever else they're forfeiting in order

39:09

to stand up to this because

39:11

none of the adults are doing

39:14

it. This is crazy to me.

39:17

Yeah, absolutely. And a lot of

39:19

people don't know this, but you

39:21

know, first of all, kudos to

39:23

those young women who were waycotted

39:26

and and forfeiting their games. They

39:28

absolutely should not have to do

39:30

that. This is going to impact

39:32

their careers and it should not

39:34

be on them. to have to

39:36

do this, but you know, mad

39:39

props to them for doing it.

39:41

And a lot of people will

39:43

say, well, why did the Penn

39:45

women's swim team, why did they

39:47

stand for allowing Leah Will Thomas

39:50

to compete on their team? Well,

39:52

the answer to that is that

39:54

back then in 2021, all those

39:56

young women, they're in college, right?

39:58

And they've been indoctrinated in this

40:01

crap. And if they expressed any

40:03

discomfort. Thomas being in the pool

40:05

or in the locker room, they

40:07

were told they had a mental

40:09

health problem and they needed to

40:12

seek therapy. They were just completely

40:14

psychologically abused and gas lit by

40:16

their own university administrators. We had

40:18

Paul Scanlon on the podcast and

40:20

she also made this really great

40:22

point about how because of where

40:25

it fell. Leah Tom,

40:27

they were worried about it. They

40:29

thought the adults would surely come

40:31

to their senses and then the

40:33

season was canceled and Leo was

40:36

supposed to graduate. So they didn't

40:38

think that it would be a

40:40

big thing. They took a gap

40:42

year or something and then came

40:45

back after not being able to

40:47

swim and they were so grateful

40:49

to be back, they would tell

40:51

them, oh, you're just lucky you

40:53

don't have to wear your masks

40:56

in the pool. This is something

40:58

that people said to them that

41:00

they just also kind of forced

41:02

them to accept Leah on the

41:04

team. because he took

41:06

this gap year and then came

41:09

back. So they thought that they

41:11

would just graduate and then it

41:13

wouldn't be an issue, but they

41:16

decided to take a gap year

41:18

and then come back and compete.

41:20

And so it's like shady thing

41:23

after shady thing after shady thing

41:25

after shady thing and then like

41:27

you said, these poor girls were.

41:29

But she made this point that

41:32

they used the pandemic on top

41:34

of just telling them that they

41:36

had a mental illness for even

41:39

questioning why Leah Thomas was in

41:41

the locker room. They also used

41:43

the pandemic to make them just,

41:46

oh, so grateful to even be

41:48

allowed to swim. Fucking crazy. Yeah,

41:50

it's awful. On the topic of

41:52

women supporting this, that's such an

41:55

important topic, right? Because you're absolutely

41:57

right. So many women seem to

41:59

be actively championing. a cause that

42:02

actively undermines their own interests as

42:04

women. That is absolutely true. And

42:06

I guess I just want to

42:08

say that at its core, this

42:11

whole thing, this whole denial that

42:13

sex is real, this whole denial

42:15

that women and men have different

42:18

kinds of bodies. is very much

42:20

a top-down male-driven thing. There's billions

42:22

of dollars behind it. There are

42:25

very rich men who are benefiting

42:27

financially from it. And there are

42:29

some really creepy fetishistic men who

42:31

have a lot of power and

42:34

a lot of money who are

42:36

driving it. So I think it's

42:38

important to put the onus on

42:41

the very wealthy fetishistic men who

42:43

are driving this whole thing while

42:45

at the same time acknowledging that

42:48

on the ground at the grassroots

42:50

level it is unquestionably mostly women

42:52

who are championing it for sure

42:54

and in the professions. Can you

42:57

name names of these powerful men

42:59

who are doing this and behind

43:01

this? Yeah, so the one guy

43:04

is named Martine Rothblatt. I knew

43:06

I knew that would have been

43:08

my first guess. He was born

43:11

Martin. He's got, I don't know,

43:13

at least millions of dollars. Billions.

43:15

No billions for sure. And he

43:17

has been platformed by MSMBC by

43:20

Oprah Winfrey. He's been on the

43:22

cover of New York magazine. So

43:24

he's behind a large part of

43:27

it. And he runs this company

43:29

called Tarasem, T-E-R-A-S-E-M, if anybody wants

43:31

to look it up. It's all

43:34

right out there. And you know,

43:36

again, sometimes when I talk about

43:38

this stuff, I realize I sound

43:40

like a conspiracy theorist, but it's

43:43

not a conspiracy. He says it

43:45

right out loud. And if he

43:47

were just some weirdo saying weird

43:50

things in his mom's basement, I'd

43:52

be like, okay, weirdo, whatever. But

43:54

he's not. He's very wealthy and

43:56

very wealthy and very powerful. in

44:00

other is called Tim Gil.

44:02

He runs something called the

44:04

Gil Foundation, which is based

44:06

in Colorado. And another one

44:08

is John Stryker, who founded

44:11

the Arcus Foundation, that funds

44:13

a ton of so-called queer

44:15

and trans movements and projects

44:17

all over the country. And

44:20

John Stryker is an heir

44:22

to a medical supply company

44:24

called Stryker. Stryker Medical, I

44:26

think. But his name is

44:29

John Stryker and he founded

44:31

this thing called the Arcus

44:33

Foundation with the express purpose

44:35

of funding these so-called queer

44:38

and trans projects. So those

44:40

are three big ones. And

44:42

then of course there's Jennifer

44:44

Pritzker who was born James

44:46

and is related to the

44:49

governor of Illinois and to

44:51

the former Secretary of Commerce

44:53

under President Obama, Penny Pritzker.

44:55

And he's, I think Wikipedia

44:58

describes him as the first

45:00

openly transgender billionaire in America.

45:02

Anyway, he's ex-military. He calls

45:04

himself Jennifer. Okay. Yeah. So

45:07

those are a few. Yeah,

45:09

I'm pretty sure. There's like a

45:12

very, so the the Rothblatt thing's

45:14

interesting because there's a very, and

45:16

again I sound like a whack

45:19

job whenever I talk to my

45:21

friends about this, but there is.

45:23

Didn't he write a like weird

45:26

thing about transhumanism? He has a

45:28

whole, because there's this theory that

45:30

the transgender movement is really just

45:32

a step to getting to transhumanism.

45:35

If you can just swap genders,

45:37

you know, it makes it that

45:39

much easier for people to be

45:42

like, well, you can just swap

45:44

out an arm for a cyber

45:46

arm and for all is, what

45:49

are your thoughts on this as

45:51

just being a stepping stone to

45:53

some kind of transhumanism? That's

45:56

definitely what Rothblatt thinks it is.

45:58

And yes, he wrote a book

46:00

as you say. book is called

46:03

From Transgender to Transhuman. He's not

46:05

quiet about this. This is absolutely

46:07

what he thinks. He thinks he's

46:10

going to turn us all into

46:12

cloud people, basically, that we're all

46:14

going to exist in the cloud

46:16

and we're not going to have

46:19

any need for human bodies. And

46:21

that's partly why they're going after

46:23

women. In the words of Jennifer

46:26

Billick, who you may know, she

46:28

founded the 11th hour blog, they're

46:30

colonizing our sex. These very wealthy

46:33

men are colonizing sex to make

46:35

it disappear. And then there's a

46:37

lot more to say about relationships

46:40

between trans and the surrogacy market,

46:42

between trans and the fertility market.

46:44

I mean, there's a lot going

46:47

on there and I'm not the

46:49

expert in that stuff and we

46:51

probably don't have time to get

46:54

into it, but it's worth looking

46:56

into if you want to check

46:58

out the 11th hour blog. The

47:01

11th hour blog. I

47:03

should have her on the

47:05

podcast. Yeah, there's so much

47:07

to this that's really interesting.

47:09

And again, I run into

47:11

like horseshoe theory stuff where

47:13

it's on the left this

47:15

radical transhuman, like you said,

47:18

transurgacy, trans fertility. And then

47:20

on the right, I like

47:22

to notice a lot of,

47:24

you know, when I go

47:26

to conference, I just like

47:28

to notice what I'm hearing

47:30

a lot of about in

47:32

tech in general. There's so

47:34

much about embryos and about

47:36

the, you know, population collapse

47:38

and I'm like, I don't

47:40

know, guys. All of this

47:42

is so kind of, there's

47:44

something slightly unsettling about all

47:47

of it where it meets

47:49

in the middle of women

47:51

and women being either erased

47:53

or, like you said, kind

47:55

of colonized. it's, I really

47:57

never thought twice about surrogacy.

47:59

And I still have kind

48:01

of complicated, I'm not sure

48:03

where I land feelings on

48:05

it, but until I had

48:07

a child and saw how

48:09

much she needed me, her

48:11

mother in the aftermath of

48:14

being born. And I was,

48:16

and then when I, then

48:18

I was like, whoa, wait,

48:20

what? I suddenly was like,

48:22

are we taking the kid

48:24

into consideration in this arrangement?

48:26

I'm not sure, but people

48:28

are like, no, they've done

48:30

lots of studies and it

48:32

doesn't matter and I don't

48:34

know. I'm, I'm still not

48:36

sure about any of it.

48:38

It, it, we live in

48:40

like such very strange times

48:43

and then if you even

48:45

push back against some of

48:47

the more obvious stuff like

48:49

the, men and

48:51

women's prisons, which I would think

48:53

I would, this is something that

48:55

I don't understand. How is this

48:57

not a left wing fight that

49:00

they're fighting? You know, it's so

49:02

interesting because I mentioned that I

49:04

worked at the ACLU. I worked,

49:06

technically I worked for the New

49:09

York headquarters, but I was physically

49:11

based in the DC office because

49:13

that's where I lived. And I

49:15

was a couple floors. beneath the

49:18

ACLU's national prison project. So the

49:20

ACLU's national prison project is a

49:22

prisoner's rights organization, right? They fight

49:24

for prisoners 18th, or I'm sorry,

49:27

8th and 14th Amendment rights, among

49:29

other things. But they're at their

49:31

core, they're a prisoner's rights group.

49:33

And they had this project, which

49:36

I assume they still have, which

49:38

is a movement to end the

49:40

practice of shackling pregnant. female

49:43

inmates. So prisons will do this,

49:45

right? Like a woman will be

49:47

in prison and if she's going

49:50

into labor, they will literally shackle

49:52

her during childbirth. I do not

49:54

have children. I have never given

49:56

birth to a child. But from,

49:58

you know, you might have opinions

50:01

about that. And from women I've

50:03

spoken to who have given birth.

50:05

just sounds like torture. It is.

50:07

I mean, it's so inhumane. I

50:09

don't even know how it's legal

50:11

at all. So the ACLU has

50:14

been fighting back against it, arguing

50:16

that female inmates have international human

50:18

rights and that shackling pregnant women

50:20

during childbirth is a violation. of

50:22

their not only international human rights

50:25

but also the Constitution and that's

50:27

always their argument and they're never

50:29

confused about what they mean by

50:31

female prisoners right like they know

50:33

what a woman is when it

50:35

comes to doing things like that

50:38

but yeah no and and now

50:40

as you probably know the ACLU

50:42

has intervened in the California case

50:44

that I know you've talked about

50:46

on your podcast where women's liberation

50:48

front has sued the California Department

50:51

of Rehabilitation, the California Department of

50:53

Corrections and Rehabilitation over the state

50:55

law that allows male prisoners to

50:57

be housed in the women's prison,

50:59

and the ACLU has literally now

51:02

intervened on behalf of three or

51:04

four. I think it's four, but

51:06

it may only be three. Male

51:08

inmates for their alleged right to

51:10

be in the women's prison. So

51:12

I mean, yes, I agree with

51:15

you, this absolutely should be something

51:17

for the left to fight back

51:19

about, but it's the left pushing

51:21

it. That's so weird

51:24

to me. I don't understand.

51:26

I don't, I don't know.

51:28

I mean, are they, I

51:30

guess is, it's, it is

51:32

like one of those things

51:35

where I have, you know,

51:37

I had Blair White on

51:39

the podcast and it's like,

51:41

would I want Blair to

51:43

go into Jen Pop with

51:46

a bunch of men? Yeah,

51:48

I mean, so here's the

51:50

thing that comes up frequently.

51:53

If Blair were to be

51:55

incarcerated, yeah, I mean I

51:57

would be fine with Blair being

52:00

in a separate third place.

52:02

nobody on the other side

52:04

of this debate is ever

52:06

okay with that. You know,

52:08

women feminists have been saying for

52:10

years that, okay, just create a

52:12

third bathroom, create a third

52:14

sports category, just stay out

52:16

of the women's, and that's

52:18

never considered to be acceptable.

52:20

Why is that? They always demand

52:23

the women's. Yeah. I

52:25

mean, I made a joke long

52:27

ago. I think it was probably

52:30

2019 when I started dumpster fire

52:32

and people are like, you're always

52:34

covering this topic. This is like,

52:36

I'm getting sick of you covering

52:38

this topic. I'm like, I don't

52:40

want to cover this topic, but

52:42

I was like, we are, you

52:45

know, a couple of new cycles

52:47

away from suck my dick bigot,

52:49

but we're, we're long past that.

52:51

That already happened. I think that

52:53

was 2020. People were literally standing

52:55

with signs saying that. And you're

52:58

considered, I mean, this is, I

53:00

wrote this whole piece for unheard

53:02

about how corrosive this is to

53:04

women because. I grew up in

53:06

the gift of fear time where

53:08

it was like, you didn't question

53:11

that instinct. You were taught, if

53:13

you get on an elevator and

53:15

a guy gets on an elevator,

53:17

you get off. You listen to

53:19

that little voice, you don't second

53:21

guess it. And now women are

53:24

told, if there's a guy in

53:26

the women's room and they feel

53:28

unsettled or unsafe, that they're going,

53:30

oh, that's just me being a

53:32

transfer. This is insane. It's so

53:34

dangerous for women. Yeah, I mean,

53:36

I just, I think, I think

53:39

we have to psychologically get past

53:41

that, right? So like, I was

53:43

in a women's bathroom at a

53:45

restaurant once, one time, washing my

53:47

hands, and this dude walked in,

53:49

and he probably had a few

53:52

too many, and as soon as

53:54

he saw me, he turned bright

53:56

red, and he turned and walked

53:58

away, right? Right. That guy had

54:00

made an honest mistake. I'm not

54:02

mad at that guy. It was

54:05

a woman. know, he just got

54:07

in the wrong one, fine. But

54:09

any man who wants to, wants

54:11

to be in a women's bathroom,

54:13

locker room, changing room, spa, prison,

54:15

whatever, is violating women's boundaries and

54:18

should be seen as inherently suspect.

54:20

I don't care whether that man

54:22

calls himself a man or whether

54:24

he calls himself a woman. Either

54:26

way, any sort of intentional invasion

54:28

by men into women is suspect

54:31

and probably ought to be seen

54:33

as criminal. And we used to

54:35

know that, right? We used to

54:37

know that. But today, the instant

54:39

a man says he's a woman,

54:41

we just hold the doors open

54:43

and let him walk right in.

54:46

I still, like I've done so

54:48

many podcasts talking to people about

54:50

this, I've spoken to, and I

54:52

don't understand how it happened, and

54:54

I don't know how to undo

54:56

it. I feel like maybe there

54:59

is a tide turning, but I

55:01

think that, and then I'm like,

55:03

no, no, then I get kind

55:05

of demoralized and think maybe not.

55:08

I think it all happened in

55:10

stealth, right? Like until I told

55:12

you that President Obama tried to

55:15

redefine sex to include so-called gender

55:17

identity under Title IX all the

55:19

way back in 2016, did you

55:21

know that? No. Yeah. How would

55:23

you? Most people have no idea

55:26

that President Biden was wandering around

55:28

talking about transgender rights being the

55:30

civil rights issue of our time

55:32

in 2012. Like, how could you

55:34

possibly know that? So all of

55:36

this came in really stealthily. California

55:39

state law has a public accommodations

55:41

law. This is how the we

55:43

spa case happened. Are you familiar

55:45

with? Oh, yeah. I'm sure you

55:47

are. Yeah. So for people who

55:50

don't know, just explain it quickly.

55:52

Okay. So this is a spa

55:54

in Los Angeles, a very traditional

55:56

Korean spa where New. expected and

55:58

where nudity is expected they separate

56:00

by sex. So naked men over

56:03

here, naked women over here in

56:05

the place where people are expected

56:07

to have clothes on, it's fine

56:09

to be mixed sex. So this

56:11

man just wanders into the women's

56:14

section of the nude spa with

56:16

an erection in front of women

56:18

and girls and the women were

56:20

horrified and the spa basically said

56:22

they couldn't do anything about it

56:24

and they were right. The spa

56:27

was right because California state law

56:29

has You're fine with swears

56:31

on your own. California state law

56:33

has the most batship definition of

56:35

the word sex that I've seen

56:37

anywhere in the country. It's California

56:39

civil code section 51 if anyone

56:42

wants to look it up. But

56:44

it is absolutely insane. And it

56:46

basically says that any man can

56:48

have access to any female only

56:50

space if he calls himself a

56:52

woman or if he says he

56:54

has a gender identity. And so

56:56

people were very angry at the

56:58

spa for letting this man be

57:00

naked with his erect penis in

57:02

the naked women's section of the

57:04

spa, and I get why, but

57:06

the spa wasn't wrong. They were

57:08

following the law. So anyway, so

57:10

I forget why I brought that

57:13

up, but I guess just to

57:15

say that state laws on this.

57:17

are really nuts and California is

57:19

probably the worst. So I mean

57:21

that's really the place to go.

57:23

Go to your state legislatures and

57:25

say we don't want this. There's

57:27

a similar case that happened outside

57:29

Seattle. This is an all female

57:31

only spa called Olympus Spa and

57:33

by practice it's all female. Again

57:35

traditional Korean spa nudity is expected

57:37

and a man demanded membership and

57:39

they said no and so he

57:41

sued them and so he sued

57:44

them and so that case is

57:46

ongoing. And Women's Declaration International

57:48

USA submitted a friend of the

57:50

court brief in the case and

57:52

I was the author of that

57:54

brief and so to do that

57:56

I had to look up Washington

57:58

state law on public accommodations and

58:00

it's almost bad shit as California's.

58:02

So this is what we're dealing

58:04

with. Yeah. I mean, this was

58:06

like the whole thing up in

58:08

Canada where he was suing this

58:10

Bob because they wouldn't wax as

58:12

balls or whatever. And I think

58:14

the spot ended up winning, right?

58:16

And he, yeah, he had to,

58:18

that was, which was surprising in

58:21

Canada, because Canada seems quite lost

58:23

to me. On this topic in

58:25

particular, they're really, which weirdly enough,

58:27

I think like Rothwatt has a

58:29

company up there too. I feel

58:31

like I went down some rabbit

58:33

hole one night where I was

58:35

like, oh, you have a science

58:37

company up there or something? I

58:39

don't know, maybe it was. You

58:41

could be right. I don't know

58:43

about that either. I don't know,

58:45

I have to double check. I

58:47

could be just making things up

58:49

and was in some fever dream.

58:51

But I feel like I read

58:53

something about that because they don't

58:55

have like quite the same bioethics,

58:57

you know, rules that we have.

58:59

So there's a lot of stuff

59:01

going on in Canada around everything.

59:03

Yeah, this is, I don't know.

59:06

This is where. Yeah,

59:08

I'm not sure. I'm not sure.

59:11

I'm not sure what the... I

59:13

have a piece that literally just

59:15

dropped online right now, I think

59:18

as we're podcasting, and it's all

59:20

about really how the Democrats budlated

59:22

their brand, and it is. It

59:25

is this issue among many other

59:27

things, but also just weirdly erasing

59:29

men out of there, you know,

59:32

not talking to men at all

59:34

either, and at the same time,

59:36

like norm, normy men. So it's

59:39

a very strange dynamic at play,

59:41

and I'm not sure how it

59:44

all kind of resolves. I'm hoping

59:46

there's so much money in like

59:48

the gender affirming care in the,

59:51

in the, the surgeries, that's why

59:53

I feel like I think Europe

59:55

and the UK seem to be

59:58

a little more on us of

1:00:00

this, but they also have socialized

1:00:02

health care. So there's an incentive

1:00:05

to kind of actually follow the

1:00:07

science and do, do what's right

1:00:09

for the general population. But here

1:00:12

it's just, it would be like

1:00:14

a crazy money grab. Totally. But

1:00:16

there's a case coming before the

1:00:19

Supreme Court very soon where these

1:00:21

issues will be front and center

1:00:23

before the Supreme Court. That'll be

1:00:26

a good thing, I think. It's

1:00:28

called United States versus Scrometti. So

1:00:30

that'll be before the Supreme Court

1:00:33

for oral arguments on December 4th.

1:00:35

And you know, those of us

1:00:37

who have been in the trenches

1:00:40

of Turfing for all this time,

1:00:42

we're not going to stop. And

1:00:45

so I don't know how much

1:00:47

longer we're going to talk, but

1:00:49

there's some noise happening in my

1:00:52

apartment, which is why I say

1:00:54

that. I, you know, we're just

1:00:56

going to keep going. We're just

1:00:59

going to keep fighting this and

1:01:01

people will get angry at me

1:01:03

because sometimes

1:01:07

when I think it's a good idea

1:01:09

to do it. I'm not going to

1:01:11

stop doing that. You know, we're just

1:01:13

going to keep fighting and we're going

1:01:16

to keep fighting for women and girls

1:01:18

as a sex class. And as you

1:01:20

say, this affects men too. And as

1:01:23

a feminist, my primary concern is for

1:01:25

women and girls, but absolutely, you know,

1:01:27

I wrote the abolition of sex because

1:01:29

I'm gravely concerned. If our society continues

1:01:32

to deny that sex is real, that's

1:01:34

going to have massive impacts that I

1:01:36

don't think people have really thought through.

1:01:38

Yep. What's your biggest defective character? We'll

1:01:41

wrap it up with my last two

1:01:43

questions. My biggest defective character is that

1:01:45

I am naively optimistic, almost always to

1:01:48

a fault. But if I weren't, I

1:01:50

wouldn't be able to keep doing this.

1:01:52

I wouldn't just throw it in the

1:01:54

towel a long time ago. And

1:01:57

what, yeah, go on. No,

1:02:00

I I I I am not really optimistic

1:02:02

to a fault. Yeah, that a fault. Yeah,

1:02:04

like you would need that. that. What's your your

1:02:06

biggest asset? I I mean, I guess

1:02:08

that would be an asset an asset too. Yeah, how

1:02:11

about that? Yeah, how about that? Can I

1:02:13

say that too? Yeah, I mean, for

1:02:15

a lot of people, you know, it's a

1:02:17

double a sword. sword. Like the

1:02:19

that is our biggest weakness

1:02:21

is also what makes us

1:02:23

strong and brave and brave and

1:02:25

to go on. Wow,

1:02:28

well I'm grateful grateful for your

1:02:30

books. You really, I I everybody

1:02:32

to go read them. read them

1:02:34

and I think, they selling? Like are people

1:02:36

they selling? them are people finding

1:02:39

them now? They haven't

1:02:41

they're selling steadily. by haven't made

1:02:43

so please sales any means. So

1:02:45

please go buy the books.

1:02:47

But they're selling steadily. And

1:02:49

after the the election, there was

1:02:51

a spike in sales for

1:02:53

the reckoning. Okay, great. Well,

1:02:55

where where can we find

1:02:58

you and your your sub stack? Yep, please

1:03:00

please me out on at Kaydansky

1:03:02

and on on Facebook Kaydansky and Karodansky.com where

1:03:04

.com, where I write a

1:03:06

sub -stack called I love Report. you so

1:03:08

love it. Thank you so

1:03:11

much for your work and

1:03:13

for your time. you, Thank

1:03:15

you, I Bridget. I appreciate it.

1:03:17

it. I appreciate you you out

1:03:19

there and the turf on the front

1:03:21

the front lines. with Bridget and

1:03:23

Cousin Maggie can now be

1:03:26

found at fetacy .com. now It's

1:03:28

been titled at fetacy.com. It's been titled now

1:03:30

in video. with has been

1:03:32

Walk -In's Welcome with Bridget Fetacy.

1:03:34

now Bridget Fetacy This you're welcome.

1:03:37

welcome with Bridget Fettice. I'm

1:03:39

Bridget It's the

1:03:42

dumbest you're welcome.