All Episodes
Previous Next
March 29, 2022 - Louder with Crowder
21:40
CROWDER CONFRONTED! Rolling Stone "Journalist" Takes a Seat | Change My Mind
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Here's a PubMed, NCBI, and, like, this is a medical journal.
So, I mean... Hold on a second, let me ask you something.
You know what?
Okay, you know what?
Just hold it up for me.
0.0018%, almost 100 times lower than Fausto Sterling's estimate of 1.7.
So, it is because they are talking about...
Can you hold that up for the camera?
Welcome back to part two of our Change My Mind installment, specifically on the topic that biological males should not
compete in women's sports.
Well, at least that's what it was supposed to be.
See, yesterday I sat down and spoke with Isaac, and although we disagreed, we had a productive, almost hour-long discussion.
But in case you've forgotten, civility wasn't exactly on everybody's mind that day.
And these are adults acting this way in college.
At UNT, the Harvard of Denton County no less.
And I had to wonder, why would college students ever think it's acceptable to behave this way?
Enter one of their self-described mentors, Stephen Monticelli.
Monticelli is a contributing writer at Rolling Stone and the Daily Beast where he specializes in leftist talking points and attacking college students.
Oh, there you go. Here, I'll have it on you.
Your name is Steven?
That's right, Steven.
Monticelli is a contributing writer at Rolling Stone and the Daily Beast, where he specializes
in leftist talking points and attacking college students.
He's even made an appearance on CNN's New Day.
Also, this noted Inspector Gadget impressionist who cosplays as Indiana Jones enthusiast had clearly been waiting for Change My Mind to come to UNT, the harbor of Denton County, for quite some time, and he just couldn't hide his enthusiasm.
All right, good.
Do you spell it P-H or V?
The V. Same way?
Very nice.
Fewer letters means a cooler name.
Last name?
Monticelli.
I'll spell it for you.
Okay.
M-O-N-A-C-E-L-L-I.
So... German.
Boy, missed all of that one.
Missed it by that much.
Just a little bit, but you know, both of those countries have a certain history for a certain type of politics, but we're not here to talk about that today.
Yeah, no, I know.
I don't know how I got that one wrong.
It's almost like, almost like I wasn't even trying.
Oh look, the sense of humor mobile!
It's not stopping here.
So, Steve.
Steven, Steve, how do you prefer?
Steven.
By the way, I like this jacket.
Is it a raincoat?
It's just like a cotton jacket, I guess, surplus.
So, Stephen, I don't know how familiar you are at all with what we do with this kind of installment, but it's basically a way where we can hopefully rationalize our positions on controversial topics.
A lot of the times People can have somewhat rational conversations on topics that maybe don't evoke an emotional response and then it all goes out the window.
As you've seen here on college campuses with dancing Yoda and people throwing milkshakes and screaming and all these kinds of things which we generally like to avoid.
Now, spoiler alert, this is about to go sideways very quickly.
So, today's topic is one obviously we planned for a while, but now it's in the news because of Leah Thomas.
I don't believe that biological males should be allowed to compete.
With women.
Biological females in women's sports.
If you disagree with me, I'm more than happy to hear your case and let you change my mind.
So, I guess before we get into it, what is your definition of the term biological female?
Is that something that would include people who are assigned female at birth that were born intersex?
So this is interesting that you're bringing up this point, intersex.
You're talking about the 0.01% of the population.
It's about 1.5, 1.7, because there are surgeries that are done to babies when they're babies, when they're born, and then they assign them a gender.
So let me address two different points here.
Sure.
First off, what I'm seeing with biological males and females is the overwhelming majority of people, of course, across the globe since the beginning of time, who are born So, like, if there's a hundred people here?
Okay.
Sure.
chromosomes, what's secondary sex characteristics?
So like, are there 100 people here?
Hold on, let me finish. And then I'll address your second point.
Okay.
Is that fair?
Sure.
So, doctors, for example, fill out male or female. Now we're talking about sex, right?
We're not talking about identified gender. I'm assuming that you would agree that sex
is a biological term and gender is a social...
There's a difference between...
I understand that's how gender theory is presented, certainly in gender studies on college campus.
With intersex it's about 0.01% of the population and the vast majority of them, the vast majority of them don't require any kind of a sex change.
That's actually not an accurate statistic.
I did an accurate statistic.
I don't make all the references available.
Right now it's 1.5%.
1.5% of the population is not intersex.
Well, they're born that way.
And even then, a very small percentage of them are improperly assigned with a primary sex at birth.
They usually have primary sexual characteristics, okay?
So... So primary sexual characteristics, and very few have to end up going with some kind of a sex change operation later in life.
Would we agree on that?
Because it's often done when they're children or when they're babies.
Right, or they're assigned male, female at birth, even if they're intersex.
So, yeah, I guess that's what I'm trying to get at.
Are you talking about people who are assigned... So what I'm dealing with, if we separate that, intersex, okay?
So let's say we allow intersex... Well, why should we?
No, I'm saying let's say we allow intersex.
To compete in the division they choose.
How do you prove that?
How do you even get to that question of are you or are you not?
Are you asking then that there has to be a box that people have to tick?
That they were intersex?
I'm confused by you presenting the argument here because you asked me about intersex.
Yeah, yeah.
So what I'm trying to say is there are edge cases here that I don't think that your presentation actually encompasses.
I just encompassed it.
So, if people are allowed so that someone who is born with both female and male sex characteristics... There you go, now you've got it.
Yeah.
So.
Yeah.
And then there are surgeries that are done to them.
You just check the box.
But someone would have to ask them that.
Yes.
So are you proposing that people are asked that?
What I'm saying is if someone is intersex, let's allow that to be an exception.
So how do we know that that is the case?
Let's say that someone who is intersex can compete in any division they want to.
How do we know that... They would have to declare if they're intersex.
So you're asking... And they would obviously be examined by a doctor just as the women are in women's sports and men are in men's sports.
Just as they have to submit to not only blood sampling for drug tests, hair follicle sampling, often nail strippings, right?
We both know that physicals are conducted in all sports.
To separate for what?
Sex, right?
To separate for weight?
To separate for height?
When I was playing sports when I was a kid, no one ever inspected my genitals.
Really?
No.
You never had to turn your head and cough?
Well, that wasn't for doing sports.
That's called a physical.
That's a medical thing that was separate from being able to do sports.
Yeah, so you never had to do a full medical?
I mean... So you must not have played sports at a high level.
They weren't really concerned about... Because they do.
Everyone has to pass a medical.
You do realize that at Division One Sports you would have to pass a medical, you know why?
So the medical would be a description of your genitals?
It would include it.
It would include a written description and a verbal description?
Yes.
Really?
Really.
It's a medical examination, yeah.
It would include the description of your vitals, of your health parameters.
So I guess now that we've gotten through that, what is the reason that you're... We haven't gone through that.
So if you're less concerned about intersex people, then why are you so concerned about transgender people?
Again, I was answering your question.
You asked about interest rates.
They both get surgery.
Sometimes they both need hormone treatment.
What's your position against it?
If you're okay with one, why are you not okay with the other?
Here's exactly why.
First off, you're taking an extreme example to make a point, misrepresenting those statistics.
It's not 1.5% of the population.
You won't find a single position in the country.
Well, according to experts, 1.7% of the population is born with intersex traits.
Pause a second.
Let's analyze his Googling technique.
I'll just Google it.
It's fun.
You won't find a single condition in the country.
A two-click Google search.
It's almost as if he had the whole thing planned out.
Poorly.
1.7% of the population is born with intersex traits.
That's from amnesty.org.
I mean, yeah, I mean, I can just, like, keep, keep, I can go to... It's from amnesty.org.
I mean, it's from, there's, there's Wikipedia, there's, there's plenty of... Yes, amnesty and Wikipedia, okay.
There's a PubMed, NCBI, and, and, like, this is a medical journal, so, I mean... Hold on a second, let me ask you, hold on a second, you know what?
Okay, you know what?
Just hold it up for me.
Hold it up for me.
Because you just brought up PubMed and it didn't reflect what you just reflected.
So, Abjay... 0.0018%, almost 100 times lower than Falso-Sterling, estimate of 1.7.
So, it is because they're... Can you hold that up to the camera?
Can you hold that up to the camera?
Can you hold it up to the camera?
There's a debate about this, which is what we're having.
Pause!
Now if you notice the shift, and I mean increase, in my enthusiasm, it's because I was intensely familiar with the PubMed paper he was attempting to cite, and by cite I mean blatantly misrepresent, and by blatantly misrepresent I mean lie about, and this is the real value of Change My Mind in the conversations being included in their full context unedited.
It's one thing to be able to lie about numbers to unsuspecting students in order to score political points, it's another to face accountability in real time.
So, let's rewind and zoom in and enhance on his screen.
Unfortunately, the tech isn't good enough to get a crystal clear picture, but here's the actual PubMed article abstract.
If the term intersex is to retain any meaning, the term should be restricted to those conditions in which chromosomal sex is inconsistent with phenotypic sex.
or in which the phenotype is not classifiable as either male or female.
Applying this more precise definition, the true prevalence of intersex
is seen to be about 0.018%, almost 100 times lower than the Fausto Sterling estimate of 1.7.
Can you hold it up to the camera?
There's a debate about this, which is what we're having.
Yeah, you can... No wonder the social justice warrior slash handler of Curious George shoved his phone back in his pocket faster than a crack pipe at the Bordello of Biden.
Yeah, you can Google... But you didn't present it as a debate.
You can get different views.
Hold on a second.
Let me finish here, because...
You just brought up Amnesty.org and Wikipedia.
The only legitimate medical publication that you brought up said exactly what I said.
What number did I give you?
So then let's put it in numbers.
If there are a hundred people here or a thousand people here, there's still going to be at least one person.
Look, if truth doesn't matter to you, this isn't going to be a productive conversation.
I'm actually giving the numbers.
What number did I give to you?
So you gave me 0.1%.
0.01%.
0.01%.
What is that number from PubMed say?
0.0% what is that number from PubMed say let's see it says point
point zero eight zero one eight percent point zero 1.8%?
Yeah, that's the number I gave you.
So let's see what PubMed just said.
That is PubMed.
You just showed the PubMed.
Yeah, I'm just going to pull up the same blog.
Now you're going back to NSE.org, you're going to Wikipedia.
So my point is, look, you sit here and you spout numbers that are inaccurate.
When you go to one legitimate medical journal, it says that it's actually a thousand times lower.
So do we want to have a conversation about the topic at hand, or do you want to keep embarrassing yourself with wrong numbers?
If you're going to accept that there are people in this world, no matter how rare that you think that they are, that you're going to allow to participate in sports... No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, Of course, I believe it's .018% according to... So there are people in this state, in this city, who would fit that categorization, and just because there are a small number of them, you're going to just kind of disregard the example?
And what number of them require some kind of sex change?
What number of them require... Why is that so threatening to you?
It's not threatening to me.
It seems like it is.
Well, what's bothering to me is your dishonesty.
So, I'll grant your number, and my argument is still the same.
So what's the number of people there who are not accurately defined at birth by their primary and secondary sexual characteristics?
It's about .2% of .01.8% of the population.
And what's the percentage of people that are competing in sports that are transgender?
What's that number of the population?
What's that percentage?
percentage of the total population yeah, that are competing in sports
as far as the categories that they enter they end up winning about 66%
for example in track upwards of 90% in strength sports
like powerlifting and olympic lifting that's significant
So even though they make up 1% of the population when they enter into female sports, they overwhelmingly tend to dominate, and this is a very small sample size.
So my question to you is, what do we do?
Because you're supposed to sit here and change that.
Are we going to start talking about genetics as it relates to people winning sports?
Is that what you want to do?
Is that what you're asking?
Male and female sports are separated by biology, yes?
I mean, what's the point of sports?
To win.
It don't matter if you win by an inch or a mile.
Winning's winning.
Why is that funny?
It just tells me a lot about who you are.
The point of sports is not to win?
I think a lot of people think there's more than one point to sports.
I mean, so much of sports is like people getting sweaty and like rubbing around with each other.
What's the point to winning an Olympic medal?
I don't know.
I mean, why do we have the Olympics?
to identify who the best is at sport.
What is the historical reason why we have the Olympics?
You mean you want to go back to pancreation?
I mean, do we want to talk about...
No, like the modern reinvention of it.
You want to go back to... OK, so...
Fascist politics, you know, all that kind of stuff.
So you believe that people are competing, for example, in swimming, decathlon, biathlon, because of fascist
politics?
I didn't say it's about representing international dominance.
that sports is about, you know, declaring dominance and that there's some sort of actual value
in like this idea of international representation of dominance in sports.
When did you, did you ever have fun in your life?
Like, you ever have fun playing sports?
I didn't say it's about representing international dominance.
No, what I'm saying is like, you said it's all about winning, so...
I said, what is the point of sports?
What is the point of sports?
I think sports is a lot about having fun and, you know, making relationships with people and camaraderie.
Do you think it's fun to make the Olympic meddling platform?
You think that's fun?
Go on, think.
Is it fun?
No, sir.
No.
No, sir.
Absolutely not?
Zero fun, sir.
All right.
I mean, it must provide a sense of accomplishment.
Why?
A sense of joy, because they worked hard to get there.
And the joy and accomplishment comes from what?
Working hard to get there, I guess.
You're going to great lengths to avoid the term winning a medal.
I mean, hey, if you get second place and you're a spoiled brat about it, I think a lot of people would think you're kind of lame.
Do you think that the Olympic silver medalist who took second place to Leah Thomas, who wouldn't be ranked top 500 in the male division, is being a spoiled brat?
Well, what is your solution?
Would you want to create an entirely separate category for transgender people in sports?
If you want to, we can.
No, that's not what I want to.
I'm asking what you want.
Yeah, I think biological males should compete with biological males.
No, I'm asking specifically about transgender and intersex people now.
Where do you think they should compete in sports?
Well, let's separate transgender and intersex because intersex people don't want to be lumped in with transgenders.
I mean, who are you to speak for them?
Are you intersex?
Are you telling me something about yourself?
I'm letting them speak for them, but I'm sure you'll find statistics that will prove you wrong and bolster what I'm discussing right now.
Intersex people don't want to be lumped in with transgender individuals because there is a biological issue.
There's not a biological issue with transgender individuals.
It is a societal issue.
It's a social issue.
Is it a biological issue that you would never make a basketball team because you can't jump?
Shit!
That I can't jump?
Yeah.
Why are you making that presumption?
I'm just kind of following this logic to where it might conclude.
Are you racist?
No, I'm asking are you?
You're asking am I racist?
Yeah, what I'm saying is if you're so obsessed with certain types of people winning certain types of categories as if there's some sort of biological... Males and females?
Yeah.
So you're an essentialist.
Do you believe it's a statement of my imagination?
You're an essentialist.
Oh, well let's throw that to him.
What do you mean that I'm an essentialist?
That I believe biological males should compete against biological males?
Well, I mean you just talk about biological males and females so much that it essentializes Gender into a binary that doesn't include all these people that we've just been talking about.
And sex into a binary.
And sex.
Yeah.
You said gender.
And sex.
Yeah.
I didn't mention gender.
I mentioned sex.
Well, I'm talking about both.
But I'm not.
Well, then let's just focus on sex.
You are creating an essentialist binary.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Okay, so if you are saying that it is not binary, sex, then you are suggesting there should be a third division.
Not necessarily.
What's your solution?
I'm saying we should maybe stop taking sports so f***ing seriously and let people compete and create structures for competing that aren't so f***ing politicized.
How about that?
How about no?
Okay, great.
So women should just shut up and take it.
They're taking it too seriously.
Women are taking it too seriously.
I don't think that's what... I think you're taking it too seriously.
No, I'm saying women out there are taking it too seriously.
Talk to a woman.
There's plenty of women here.
Talk to a woman.
Yeah, I have.
I've spoken with many women.
What did she say?
What did they say?
They of course don't want biological males to compete in women's sports.
All right, so I'm going to give up my seat now.
Is there a woman who would like to speak to him?
Pause.
It's funny he should ask.
Because we just so happen to have talked to a female athlete, one of Leah Thomas' teammates, peers, if you will, at UPenn, to be exact, and here's what she had to say.
That guy, Monticelli, seems to be uneducated.
I would say that the way the rules are set up right now straight up deny women from equal educational opportunities in sport and discriminate against women by not recognizing the physical differences between men and women.
And women shouldn't be forced to take a backseat in their own sport.
Any women?
Female athlete.
Alright, cool.
Hey, it's been nice, Steve.
Thank you very much.
Take care.
I appreciate it.
So no solution, no dog in the fight, just wrong sources.
Every other conversation's been very productive.
I'd say, have fun making it your career to go talk to college students who don't want to talk to you.
Don't be an a**hole your whole life.
Now, given what's transpired, one might think that Mr. Monticelli would take the L and never speak of this embarrassing performance again.
But that's not what insane people do!
Instead, he took to Twitter to declare victory and attempt to dox our car.
It looks like someone might be getting a little obsessed.
Why are you so obsessed with me?
This is the kind of delusional behavior which can only be exhibited by people who've evaded accountability or being beholden to any form of truth throughout their entire lives.
That's long form for professional journalist.
So, I mean, he pulled out some statistics.
But what kind of behavior would you expect from someone who was fired for reporting fake news and is currently facing a defamation lawsuit?
Now, granted, Mr. Montesmelli is innocent, until proven guilty, but he's also been accused of, and admitted to, making inappropriate sexual remarks to random women.
Shit.
That's true.
But hey, we all make repeatedly the same mistakes, right?
They all do.
I don't know, am I just being too harsh?
Comment below and let Mr. Monticelli know what you think of his time in the spotlight.
Now, luckily for the country, not everyone is like Mr. Monticelli over here, and in the final installment of our three-part series on this topic, we'll be able to get back to the basics of Change My Mind with some folks who were happy to take part, sit down, have conversations, and honestly made me glad to have done it.
So come back Monday, April 11th, to check that out if you aren't already tuning in to The Daily Show at 10 a.m.
Eastern.
Steven, we were actually able to get the Zoom and Enhance completed on Monticelli's phone.
Oh, really?
Were we able to get it?
We'll bring it in.
That's Jason Bourne.
Hey, if you liked this video, click one of these other videos.
Playing in a box, hit the notification bell, or just, you know, hit the share button with your friends if you didn't like it.
Do all those things as well, or boycott our sponsors.
I'd highly recommend it.
Send your email to Crowdershop.com, where this shirt is available, and Dave Landau's shirt.
Ooh.
Right?
They should boycott Crowdershop and send their email there.
They should.
They should also.
I will send them this exact shirt with my smell on it for an extra ten.
Also, we have a DNA scraper filled with dead skin cells from Dave Landau.
The thing is, if you want to send your complaint and boycott letter at Crowdershop.com,
▲
Export Selection