Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

July 24, 2018 - The Matt Walsh Show

19:55

Ep. 68 - Child Abuse In The Guise Of 'Gender Neutral Parenting'

Trendy liberal parents are raising their kids "gender neutral." They even have a name for gender neutral kids: theybies. This is not only illogical, ridiculous, and insane -- it is also child abuse. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Maybe you have heard about the new trend in terrible parenting.
	It's called theybes.
	This is the label that certain white upper-class liberal parents have given to their children who they want to raise gender-neutral.
	They want gender-neutral children without gender labels.
	They said, down with labels, no more labels.
	And then they proceeded to invent a new label, which is TheyBeast.
	So, nope, we don't want any labels whatsoever, except for these over here that we've just invented off the top of our heads.
	There's an NBC article about this trend, and it's gotten some attention.
	It focuses especially on the stories of Nate and Julia Sharpe, Well, actually, I'll read a little bit from this article, just so you understand what we're dealing with here, to kind of set the stage a little bit.
	Let me read from this article on NBC. It says, Three-year-old twins, Zyler and Kaden, scurried around the boy and girl's clothing racks of a narrow consignment store filled with toys.
	Zyler, wearing rainbow leggings, scrutinized a pair of hot pink and purple sneakers.
	Zayden, in a T-Rex shirt, fixated on a musical cube that flashed colorful lights.
	At a glance, the only discernible difference between these fraternal twins is their hair.
	Zyler's is brown and Caden's is blonde.
	Is Zyler a boy or a girl?
	How about Caden?
	That's a question their parents, Nate and Julia Sharp, say only the twins can decide.
	The couple from Cambridge, Massachusetts, of course.
	Represent a small group of parents raising theybes, children being brought up without gender designation from birth.
	Nate Sharp told NBC News, a theybe is, I think, different things to different people.
	For us, it means raising our kids with gender-neutral pronouns, so they, them, their, rather than assigning he, she, him, her from birth based on their anatomy.
	Let's pause right there for just a moment, okay?
	I don't mean to interrupt Mr.
	Nate Sharp, but They, their, them, those are pronouns that you have assigned.
	So you're saying, well, we're not going to assign he or she, so instead we're going to assign they and them?
	You've still assigned pronouns, you nitwit.
	It's exactly what you're doing.
	You just assigned different pronouns.
	And actually, he and she are not assigned by anyone any more than your biological sex is assigned.
	This whole idea of assigned sex.
	What do you mean assigned? Where is sex?
	Where is that happening?
	Okay, it's not like you've got a bunch of ambiguous, neutral babies being born, and then they're all laying out in a nursery, and then you've got doctors that come by and go, we're going to assign him boy, make that one a girl.
	Two girls over there, we'll do that one a boy.
	Actually, let's make that one a girl, that one a boy.
	All right, so then we got two girls.
	No, that's not what's happening. There's no sex assignment ward in the birthing center of the hospital.
	See, what happens is you've got Boys and girls who are born, and then the doctors will look at them and say, oh, that's a boy.
	Or, oh, that's a girl.
	And then linguistically, there are certain pronouns that come attached to that naturally as part of our language.
	It's not a sign. What you're doing here, Nate Sharp, is you are actually assigning artificially a pronoun that would not otherwise, that is not natural to the child.
	Going back to the article, parents in the US are increasingly raising children outside traditional gender norms, allowing boys and girls to play with the same toys.
	I love it how these enlightened liberal parents, they think they're the only ones to ever dream up this idea of allowing boys and girls to play with the same toys.
	Like, what do they think the rest of us are doing?
	Do they think that we, if your son picks up one of your daughter's toys, or if your daughter picks up one of your son's toys, do they think that you're going, hey, put that down!
	No! No! Put it!
	Drop it! Drop it right there!
	Drop it! Drop it, son, or you'll turn into a girl!
	Put it down! Is that what they think's happening?
	No, because kids playing with all the same toys, that happens in every house in America.
	That has always happened.
	It's a totally normal thing.
	So you didn't come up with that concept.
	Most of us normal folks, normal parents, we have always been fine with our kids basically playing with whatever toy they wanted to play with, but that never caused any confusion for us.
	If we had seen our daughter pick up a Tonka truck We would say, oh, our daughter's playing with a Tonka truck.
	That's fine. We didn't then say, she must be a boy.
	No, we didn't do that.
	We just said, oh, that's a girl who likes Tonka trucks.
	And then we continued on with our life.
	Actually, I won't go back to the article.
	Anyway, you get to the point. You get the point.
	There is one other detail in this article that I should mention.
	So Nate and Julia, part of this Davies thing is that the parents hide the biological sex not only from society, but they hide it from the kids themselves.
	They don't tell the kids what they are.
	So they, the kids, are aware of their own body parts, obviously, but they have not been told what those parts mean.
	They don't know their own identities.
	Nate and Julia are keeping that secret under lock and key until the kids get to the point where Nate and Julia have decided they're old enough to decide their own gender, which I think is most of these parents will say around four or five is when they can decide their own gender.
	So at the age of four, they're still not old enough to make a peanut butter and jelly sandwich by themselves.
	They probably don't know how to tie their shoes.
	They're certainly not old enough to stay home alone by themselves.
	They can't Drive a car.
	They can't vote. They can't do anything for themselves at all.
	I mean, they can probably barely even manage to get their shirts on in the morning without help from their parents.
	Yet, we're going to give them this enormous power to come up with their own genders.
	Right. That makes a lot of sense. Now, of course, we run into some logical problems here.
	There are a lot of logical problems, but let's just focus on a few of them.
	We talked about this on a show last week.
	I forget in what context, but let's go back to it for just a second.
	If biological sex is meaningless, and gender is just a social construct, then what does it mean to say that someone is choosing a gender?
	What does that mean? What are you choosing?
	Gender is art. We all agree that you cannot choose sex.
	I hope we agree with that.
	Biological sex cannot be chosen.
	But you can choose gender.
	Yet you're saying that gender is an arbitrary, invented thing.
	So what does it mean to choose it?
	What exactly are you choosing?
	What's the meaning of choosing this meaningless thing?
	On what basis is the choice being made?
	So if a boy chooses to be a girl based on his affinity for girly things, because in every case I've ever heard of, when you hear these parents who say, oh yeah, he was born a biological boy, but he's my daughter now, and then they start to tell their stories, the reason that they give Or the indications that they give for, oh, this is when we realized that he was a girl.
	It always involves, oh, he liked to put on dresses, or he liked to play with Barbie dolls.
	Every single time, that's what it is.
	They discovered in their son an affinity for traditionally girly things.
	So if you decide or your child decides that he's a girl based on his affinity for girly things, have you not just reinforced the very societal construct that you're supposedly trying to abolish?
	And if the child makes the decision that he's a girl based on nothing, Based not even on an affinity for girly things, then hasn't the word girl lost all meaning?
	Isn't the word girl now just another word for boy?
	I think if someone is going to say, oh, I am a girl, then they have to be able to follow that up with a because.
	So I'm a girl because fill in the blank, right?
	And if you can't fill in the blank with the because, then I'm a girl means absolutely nothing.
	But if you can fill it in with some kind of because, some kind of reason, then the word girl has to have some kind of meaning.
	But if the word girl and the word boy do have meaning, then the choice must be based on something objective and meaningful.
	You can't have it both ways.
	And if it's based on something objective and meaningful, then gender is not a societal construct.
	It is, in fact, something ingrained.
	You see what I'm saying here?
	This doesn't make any sense at all.
	No sense. Also, another problem.
	If you haven't told your children Anything about boy and girl, and they haven't learned to associate those words with anything in particular, then what in the world does it mean for them to choose between the two?
	They don't even know what that is!
	So, little Zeiler...
	This poor kid has no concept of boy and girl at all.
	He's none. He doesn't have any idea what those things mean.
	And then at the age of four, the parents are going to go to them and say, what are you, a boy or a girl?
	And he's going to say, whatever he says, it means nothing.
	You may as well go up to him and say, hey, Zyler, what are you, a gobbledygook or a blooperty-blah?
	Which one? Oh, he says he's a bloopity-blah.
	That's his identity.
	His identity is bloopity-blah.
	Everyone respect it.
	This is his natural identity.
	He's discovered it.
	But I could go on for hours with the logical fallacies here.
	But the real problem is not one of logic.
	It's one of just basic ethics and morality.
	There's a very serious moral problem here, where Nate and Julia, in an effort to show off to their liberal friends, have deprived their children of identity.
	And I really do believe this is...
	I would like to say, for their benefit, to be generous to Nate and Julia, I would like to say that they are just crazy, insane people who are not intellectually capable of understanding the logical contradictions that I have just outlined.
	But no, they are mechanical engineers, upper-class mechanical engineers.
	These are people with brains in their heads.
	And they must possess the ability to understand logic and understand how ideas and things all fit together.
	So they must be smart enough to understand that this whole thing makes no sense whatsoever.
	They're just trying to show off.
	It's for their own sake.
	It's selfishness. These parents that do this, it is total selfishness.
	And that's all it is.
	They're using their kids as like these fashion statements.
	And they're saying to all their friends, aren't we so fashionable?
	We have gender-neutral children.
	We're so fashionable.
	Yeah, you're very fashionable.
	And the price of you making a fashion statement is that you are destroying and ruining your kids on an elemental level.
	Like you're getting right down to the core of who your kids are and just obliterating it.
	That's what you're doing. You're not freeing them from artificial cultural influences by raising them neutrally.
	Rather, you are overriding those influences by imposing a much more artificial, much more confusing, and much more damaging one.
	So, look, it's easy to kind of laugh at something like babies and to laugh at these parents, but it's not really funny what's happening here.
	This is psychological child abuse of the most demented kind.
	This is deranged.
	They're robbing their children of identity.
	They're robbing their children of even the most basic knowledge of their own selves.
	Knowledge that they need in order to decide what they want to do and who they want to be and where they want to go in life.
	They're taking that away from them.
	You may as well refuse to tell your children what species they belong to or what planet they live on.
	This is just the most basic information about themselves, about their relation to the world, about their place in the order of things.
	The most basic information, like the kind of information that non-abusive parents will start with.
	For normal non-abusive parents, one of the first things your kid learns about himself is his sex.
	One of the first things he learns is, I'm a boy or I'm a girl.
	Because that's just basic information that you need about who you are.
	And these parents are taking that from their kids.
	This is a social experiment.
	Like, what if we raise kids through the first part of their formative years without telling them anything about themselves whatsoever?
	What'll happen then?
	And then they're going to just sit back and see, well, let's see what happens.
	Nothing good, I could tell you that.
	The thing is, you could have, especially in low-income areas, this is what really infuriates me, Particularly in low-income areas, you could have Child Protective Services knocking on your door if you so much as spank your children.
	If somebody hears of you spanking your kid or if you yell at your kid in public or something like that, you could have CPS knocking on your door.
	Yet these people are turning their kids into social experiments.
	They're hiding essential biological truths from their children.
	They're depriving their children of identity.
	They are force-feeding mental illness into their kids.
	And rather than a visit from CPS, they're going to get a profile on NBC. It is really unthinkable and awful and just disgusting.
	It's child abuse, and that's what we need to call it.
	I think we need to start putting our foot down about this kind of stuff.
	You and I, as normal human beings, We need to put our foot down and say, it's not just like, oh, we disagree with that parenting style.
	No, you are ruining your kids.
	You are abusive.
	You are unfit parents.
	What you're doing to your children is unthinkable and evil.
	And it should be illegal.
	That's what this should be.
	This is the worst kind of psychological abuse I have ever heard of.
	That's how bad it is.
	And that's what we need to start saying.
	Now, I'm gonna switch gears here.
	So that's, I've said all I can say about that.
	I'm sure we'll revisit again in the future.
	If you listen to the show, you know that I will sometimes deviate from the topic and get into entirely irrelevant rants about subjects that, frankly, aren't even interesting.
	And usually I do that at the very beginning of the show.
	I've decided to move it to the end.
	And so this will be a new segment that I call random things I'm talking about.
	I need to think of a name for it, but anyway, we'll put that on the back burner.
	All right, here's the thing.
	We need to talk about elevators.
	There are some basic things about elevators that I think everyone, I thought everyone in society understands, but apparently they don't.
	I was traveling last week.
	I was staying at a hotel, and I had a pretty horrific experience on an elevator.
	Here's what happened. I boarded the elevator in the lobby, and then another person also boarded.
	And that's not the horrific experience, although that obviously is pretty horrific in and of itself.
	And so the elevator starts going, and this guy's a small talker.
	I'm not a small talker. I'd be fine just standing in stone silence and saying nothing, but this guy's a small talker.
	So right away, he gets on and he says, man, it's hot outside.
	And I say, yeah, yeah, it is hot.
	Yeah, it's really hot. I'm like, I'm sweating hot.
	I'm not very good at small talk, if you can tell.
	And he says, well, they're calling for rain all next week, so it should cool down with the rain.
	And I said, oh, really? Okay.
	And then silence. Okay, I had killed the small talk conversation inadvertently, which is what I always do.
	So the small talk died, and then that's the problem.
	Because if you're going to open the small talk valve, you kind of have to keep it going.
	Because if you don't, if you initiate the small talk, but then you're still with that person for a while after the small talk has died, well, now the silence has become about 10 times more Awkward than it would have been if you had just never said anything whatsoever.
	So the problem is small talk died at about the third or fourth floor.
	We still had 10 more floors to go.
	And then we get to the 10th floor.
	We get off on the same floor and we walk the same direction down the same hallway after all of that weird silence and after the conversation had died.
	So it was just the conversation died, 10 more floors of silence.
	We get off and we walk silently next to each other down the hallway to our rooms.
	And it just made me think.
	This awkwardness could have been avoided if everyone had just observed elevator rules.
	And these are rules that when I am dictator of America, I will instate upon penalty of death.
	And there are two rules, okay?
	It's very simple. The first rule is this.
	No talking in an elevator whatsoever.
	No eye contact, no looking at anyone.
	You can look up at the ceiling or you can look down at the floor.
	You don't look, you don't talk.
	Complete silence. And this is the rule.
	So there's no reason for the silence to be awkward because it's a rule now.
	You have to be silent. And if you don't, you'll be killed.
	Or, you know, maybe you'll go to prison for tenure.
	We'll figure that out. Second rule.
	The company who owns the elevator must have elevator music Whatever happened to elevator music?
	I mean, it used to be you get on every elevator, there's music.
	Now there's no music. It's just silence.
	There must be elevator music and it must be loud and blaring so as to alleviate the awkwardness of the silence and even to rule out the possibility of silence.
	I also think the same requirement should be instated in public restrooms.
	Those are the two places. No talking, loud music, all problems solved.
	All right. Now that we have that established, I've just solved the elevator problem.
	And I've solved the gender neutral problem, so we've solved two problems.
	I think that's pretty productive. Thanks for watching, everybody.

▲