James Barr, Paul LaRone, and Tyrus dissect the Mother's Day portrait controversy involving Prince William and Catherine, debating whether digital edits concealed illness or resulted from amateur manipulation. The conversation shifts to Harvard epidemiologist Martin Kulldorf's firing for challenging pandemic mandates, which Tyrus labels a "woke mind virus," before addressing the UK's ban on puberty blockers for under-18s. While Barr condemns the practice as child abuse, Tyrus defends it based on personal experience, highlighting deep societal fractures over medical ethics and truth. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|
Time
Text
Kate's Troubling Royal News00:14:59
Wherever you stand on Kate's spirit, there's no doubting its impact on the reputation of the British royal family.
The Mother's Day portrait, apparently taken by Prince William last week and later badly edited by Princess Catherine, has taken lurid gossip about the monarchy into the mainstream.
This was the late show with Stephen Colbert last night.
Here's something for those of you who are royal watchers, and I know you are, Lewis.
I'm afraid I've got some troubling news about England's royal family.
I know this is your life's passion, Lewis, and I'm sorry.
As we were talking about on this show yesterday, the kingdom has been all flutter by the seeming disappearance of Kate Middleton.
Well, he went on to make an extraordinary allegation about the state of Prince William and Catherine's marriage, which we're not going to repeat now.
And this was John Oliver, who is British.
This was him talking to you about it.
There is a non-zero chance she died 18 months ago.
They might be weekend at Bernie's in this situation.
Non-zero.
I'm not saying it happened, right?
Right, but non-zero.
I'm saying it's non-zero.
Until proved otherwise, until you see her with a copy of the day's newspaper.
I mean, she's been pretty ill.
Is that funny?
The controversy has even made it to the floor of the White House pressroom.
Does the White House ever digitally alter photos of the president, vice president, first representative when they release?
Digitally altered?
Not that I know of.
I would say no.
Why would we digitally alter photos?
Are you talking about, are you comparing us to what's going on in the UK?
Well, to be clear, there's no factual basis that we know of for the rumours about the state of the marriage of the Prince and Princess of Wales, nor indeed about all the speculation about Kate's health and what's happened to her.
But the US tabloid press is packed full of it anyway, as are the mainstream TV shows now.
It's easy to understand why, isn't it?
Because Kensington Palace chose to release a photograph with editing errors so obvious that major news agencies had to delete it from their systems entirely.
And in doing so, they chose to mislead the press and the public at precisely the moment in which they were trying to establish clarity.
And that was dishonest.
The result is more questions than answers.
Why don't they share the original photograph and just let us see what it was?
Was it actually taken last week?
They say so, but can we believe that?
What could have been so badly wrong with just a straightforward picture of the family perhaps from the archives?
And if it was so awful, why not simply publish one of the many other photographs that they've ever released?
Why is Princess Catherine recovering from abdominal surgery spending her time anyway, hunched over Photoshop, making amateur edits to official portraits?
She's got literally servants to do that.
And most bafflingly of all, why not edit in the missing wedding ring?
It's quite likely that she's taken it off, perhaps because her hands are swollen from medication.
Who knows?
But that would be normal.
Not a big deal.
But just about everything else in the photographs being edited to improve it, why would you not include through editing the one thing that is likely to dampen the flames of conspiracy rather than fuel them?
The royal family is going through a hell of a lot at the moment.
I have enormous personal sympathy with both Princess Catherine and her family, especially, of course, the King, who's battling cancer.
Attacks from the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been personal and bitter.
That one have helped.
And they're still reeling as an institution and a family from the deaths of Prince Philip and Queen Elizabeth II.
Kate needs a break.
On that, I agree.
But it was their decision to release his photograph to quell the rumours.
And it's left instead a massive self-inflicted bruise and even more conspiracy theories.
Well, join me now to debate this and much more tonight's PAC, podcaster and alleged comedian James Barr, lawyer and commentator Paul LaRone Adrian from New York, the host of maintaining with Tyros on Outkick, the great Tyrus.
Well, Tyrus, given you're my resident royal expert across the pond on this one, what do you make of Kate's spiracy?
Why do you do this to me?
I thought we were going to talk about the fight, man.
Okay, cool.
Listen, come to the I'm huge on the royal family.
I got Queen Elizabeth tattooed on my chest.
Listen, just show the photo, okay?
Like, parents, we all make mistakes.
I just feel like whenever they augment anything, I'll just take it over in the States.
Whenever you change anything, I don't even like people.
If you send me a picture with a filter on it, I'll send it back to you.
Like, this ain't you, this is a lie.
So that annoys me.
So I just feel like when it comes to children and stuff like that, for some reason, high... high aesthetic or elites or royalty, they never can be like normal.
Like, yeah, something happened and we dealt with it.
You know, it's always, it's always, it's always a cover-up when it shouldn't be.
Yeah, it's also, I think, that if I was trying to think of the equivalent in America, it would be like the president's, if the president's wife was sick and did a similar thing of releasing a family picture to dispel rumors that she was seriously ill and made herself look really healthy.
If it turned out that she had made 16, 17 different edits to that picture and deceived the White House press team and said it was genuine and they put it out to the media and then it came back rejected by everyone as fake.
I mean, that would be a big story in America, wouldn't it?
But hold on.
But that is literally in every household.
That is being a normal, yep, I'm a sexist, I know, a normal woman with pictures.
Like when I take a picture and you take a picture, it's like there, there you go.
I don't even look at it.
Okay, but my wife would literally look at that picture, edit it, filter it, screen it, flip it, change the colour.
That's what, that's just how behavior is sometimes with photos.
It's not a conspiracy.
It's just somebody, we worry about how we look too much.
And for some reason, the picture of the picture is that you worry about that a lot more than we do.
Yeah, but here's where I would put a slight spanner in that argument, which is that the whole purpose of them releasing that picture was after the TMZ shot a few days earlier of the princess looking pretty unwell, actually, in a car.
It wasn't published here in the UK because we have an arrangement with the royal family not to do pictures like that.
But it was published everywhere else, including America.
So they then put out this picture to dispel the conspiracy theories raging about what may be wrong with her.
And of course, if you then manipulate the picture, in that circumstance, it ceases to be harmless and becomes a massive barrel of gasoline on the conspiracies.
Okay, let me throw a conspiracy back at you, though.
Isn't every picture they take augmented and changed and fluffed?
Maybe.
Every picture?
Maybe.
Like, King Charles skin looked that good all the time?
Well, yeah.
I'm just saying.
It may be.
I mean, I think, look, let me come to you guys here.
I mean, James, on a serious point, when I saw it, I thought, great, she looks really well, healthy, right?
Everything's, okay, crisis over.
The moment you hear that it's been manipulated to the extent that agencies in the most extraordinary thing, I've ever seen it.
Return it, reject it, kill it.
It just sends the conspiracy theories off the dial.
Because then, I mean, I'm asking myself, as a former newspaper editor, I'm being a bit cynical about it.
Was that picture of her from last week?
Because it bore little relation to the picture of her in the car.
Well, you mentioned the wedding ring and talking about swelling.
Why is she wearing skinny jeans?
There's lots of questions here.
I don't think that she was in that photo.
That's my opinion.
If she was, then she plastered an old photo on top.
But did she do it?
Clearly not.
This is the palace.
We know how this works.
Do you really think Kate has an Adobe subscription?
Maybe.
Does she have Photoshop?
She's doing that.
What I do know is that she has for the last few years, since the kids actually were born, she has taken it upon herself not to let the media take pictures of the kids in the formal setting, but to do it herself.
Yes.
So she clearly is an amateur photographer.
And I applaud that.
So it's probably quite...
But why have the kids got their fingers crossed?
Because if we've seen the Truman show theory, the suggestion would be that they're not really with their mom.
Oh, Jesus.
And they're trying to say, no, they're trying to tell her something.
No, no, no, I'm in the middle.
No, I'm in the rabbit hill.
Here we are.
You are in the rabbit hill, but so are millions of people around the world, Paula.
And although on one level it could be trivial, right?
It might just be literally that she's okay.
She's recovering well.
She's trying to do something to correct the conspiracies and just got it wrong by editing and not realizing.
Or it could be that they're hiding something.
I mean, I've been told some stuff which is, if even half of it is true about what's happening here, it's pretty alarming.
So I don't know what to believe.
Yes.
Nor do any of us.
We're not there.
We don't know.
And this is the problem, isn't it?
This is the problem.
As you rightly pointed out, the picture on Mother's Day, Mother and Sunday, was supposed to be about quelling any normal concerns that those out there who love the royals have.
But what that picture actually did, and here is where I add to the conspiracy theory, what that picture actually did was compound the conspiracy theories.
It allowed people to question what it is we are being told from the royal family in a way that we would never have done before.
It's also, and I think this might be more damaging going forward, is turned them into a laughing stock in America, which is of course a very important country for the royal family because that's where millions of royal fans live.
This is a clip from the Daily Show.
You know how I know that's fake?
There's three kids smiling at the same time.
As a parent, I know that's impossible.
Also, it should be noted, I didn't even know or care about Kate Middleton's leave of absence, but then you release a photo so edited they have to issue a kill order.
Well, now I'm all in.
And that's the problem.
And Time magazine, you know, one of the most respected magazines out there, has published an article called The Royal Family Has a Trust Problem.
And it includes this statement.
This controversy, it says, stands to undermine the press and the wider public's trust of the Royal Family, an institution that, as the late Queen Elizabeth said, must be seen to be believed.
This crisis now prompts many to question whether they can still believe what they're seeing.
I mean, Taras, you're a very amusing comedic force in America.
When you become a butt of all the jokes on late night, and when Stephen Colbert also starts doing jokes about the state of your marriage in the way that he did last night, you know, for us over here, this is our next king that is being mocked and ridiculed.
Yeah, okay, because I'm just going to keep it real.
We got far more embarrassing things, if it makes you feel better, Piers, over here in America, to where what's going on with the royal family is like DEF CON 4.
Okay, we got a president, can't remember what time of the day it is.
We got every day someone's yelling at us if we don't use their pronoun that we're supposed to know.
Like we've got all kinds of, we got crime, inflation, eggs over here cost like 300 bucks, which is like seven, seven pounds over there.
So I mean, no one's talking about y'all over here.
Like the word on the street is you're good.
King Charles is good.
That's all we know.
So you're fine.
And no one's watching the other guys.
Do you ever watch this?
No one's going to be aware of that.
Look at his race.
Serious question.
Do you ever?
He got a participation award a few years back when he got the Emmy.
The lowest ratings, because that's where America's at right now.
We're a participating country right now.
You guys are good.
Despite what you've just said, Taurus, does a little tiny part of you ever wish that you had actually preserved a monarchy in your country?
Do you think it would have spared you a lot of pain?
I have spent many beautiful weeks and months in Europe.
I wrestled in Wembley Stadium.
So, yeah, you know what?
To be a part of it, to catch with the extravaganza that is the royal thing that you guys do over there, I would like to have a little better grammar when I speak a little bit.
I'd take some of the king's language if I could, but I didn't.
But you know what?
I love you so much that I'm willing to come on here and talk about a subject that I have no business talking about.
I would do it.
Because that was all nonsense.
I mean, there's no way you'll actually be cheaper if you're not.
I just, the only thing in my head was, find a way out, and I found a way out.
You'll be pleased to know, Taurus.
We are moving on to other topics, more in your wheelhouse in a moment.
But James, the other serious point about... God save the Queen.
There is a suggestion that this is all.
If she's dead, we should just let you know she did pass away, sadly.
Yeah, we've established Taurus neither knows much or cares much about the royal family.
And that's fine.
You don't have to.
That's the beauty of a democracy.
But Jay, there's a theory that this has all been done to protect William.
Right.
You endorse this.
I'm fuming about it because everyone is suddenly saying, leave Kate alone, you're bullying Kate.
None of these comments on these late night shows are aimed at Kate.
It's all about William.
And this picture, I really don't believe that it was posted by William, by Kate.
I genuinely believe that this is William trying to cover something up.
And the whole, it's Game of Thrones, isn't it?
And let's be honest, it's not the first time that we've seen a female in the royal family being asked to take responsibility for the mistake of the house.
And I did see a source close to the Sussexes saying, hey, if you want to talk about Game of Thrones, I'm down with that.
Well, in this Game of Thrones, the dragons are coming for Khaleesi.
Trust me, you couldn't dramatise this stuff, Taurus.
No one would believe you.
But I did see the Sussex.
Well, you know what?
We saw how the dragons ended up.
He had a peaceful protest when his mom got killed and flew away.
I was going to make the point the Sussexes have let it be known through sources that if this had been Meghan Markle who had done this to picture, all hell would have broken loose.
To which I would say, yes, actually.
I think I've read that.
I think they've made no comment on Kate News.
Right, but if they had said that, it's a perfectly valid point.
No, that's not true.
They haven't said that.
They haven't said anything about it.
They haven't.
They've remained silent about Kate's photo, as they should, because it's nothing to do with them.
So what I would say then, even if they had, it would be a valid point.
But I don't think that Kate is getting an easier time than Meghan would have got.
I think she's getting actually just as hard if she's not.
And that's why I'm saying and calling this one out, because it isn't the first time that we've seen the woman having to take the fall for what is this cataclysmic error that's been undertaken here.
I want to know where the Palace Press Office is, right?
Well, they're hiding behind Kate.
Where is the skinny jeans?
How can you employ people whose only job it is to deal with the media who allow a photograph to be released from their office?
Because they're desperate, because something that we don't know is going on.
And they're doing what they're doing.
They need better advisors around them.
They need to stop lying.
Who can look at that picture and say, oh, this has been edited, we can't put it out.
They have clearly got incompetent advisors.
So we go back to the beginning.
Right now, they need really good ones because the royal family is in tricky thing.
This is a meme doing the rounds about all this at the moment.
And that is the problem is that there's a lot of memes, a lot of laughter, a lot of mockery, a lot of, and now increasingly in America on the late night shows, a lot of wild allegations being made by their top post.
Can I just make this point?
There are children in that photo, and these children are now in the realm of being mocked on social media, which no one has spoken about.
So, you know, we're talking about Kate and we're talking about William.
Their children are now a part of this.
The Risk of Unethical Truths00:03:37
And I hate that.
Have allowed that to happen.
And what worries me more, like alongside that, is that these late shows are saying all these things that we've been seeing on Twitter for two years.
Like this stuff has been going around Twitter.
We've all seen it, yet we're all being silenced.
We're not allowed to talk about it.
We're too scared because we'll be sued, etc.
Because it's gossip.
What is going on?
It's gossip.
I think, unfortunately, they used to always operate on a mansion of never complained, never explained.
It doesn't work now.
Now, I think they move to a new era where social media doesn't allow you to do that.
You have to be, you have to be, I'm afraid you just have to share more.
If the AI royal family, they will speak and they will complain.
Okay, we're going to put Taurus out of his misery and move on from the royals now.
I've got a fascinating story.
This involves a former Harvard professor of medicine, Martin Kuldorf.
He's an epidemiologist.
He's been a professor at the University of Harvard since 2003.
And he announced on social media on Monday that he's been fired by the university.
I'm no longer a professor of medicine at Harvard, he said in a lengthy essay on the City Journal, also posted in the news on his X account.
The Harvard motto is Veritas, Latin for truth.
As I discovered, truth can get you fired.
Well, he joins me now.
Professor Kulov, thank you very much indeed for joining Uncensored.
For those who've not been following this or haven't read your piece, just briefly summarize what has gone down here with you.
Well, my superiors at Harvard were not very pleased when I objected to lockdowns and instead advocated for focus protection with Dr. J. Barashaya from Stanford and Dr. Snatra Gupta from Oxford.
But then later on, I think they are ignoring basic scientific truths.
For example, we have known since 4.30 BC during the Athenian plague that if you have recovered from an infection, you have immunity, the infection acquired immunity.
And despite that, they mandated vaccinations.
It was only last week that they ended the vaccine mandate for the students.
And that's of course very unscientific and unethical.
It's unscientific because we know that people who have had COVID have superior immunity to those vaccinated.
And it's unethical because let's say that this is the best possible vaccine ever.
There are certainly issues with it, but let's just, for the sake of argument, assume that it's the perfect vaccine.
Then we shouldn't give it to people who don't need it when there's a shortage of vaccines, which there was in 2021.
And there were people, older people who hadn't gotten it yet, who were at high risk.
And there were people in Brazil, Nigeria, India, and other countries who hadn't gotten it yet.
So it's unethical then to force it on people who don't need it when there are people who do, who has high risk from COVID to actually who haven't gotten it yet.
I mean, my point would be, and I've got to be honest here and say that there were various stages during the pandemic when I got too emotionally overwrought by what was going on and very censorious of people who weren't having the vaccine.
I believed the science at the time and thought that if you had the vaccine, then you couldn't transmit the virus.
That turned out not to be true and so on.
And of course, the reality, and I've talked, you know, I wish I hadn't done that.
The reality of it is that in a fast-moving health crisis like a pandemic with a novel virus, the science is inevitably going to evolve and change.
And I don't understand why an epidemiologist expert like you, a professor at one of the supposedly great universities of the world, should not be allowed to at least offer your expert opinion and challenge the science, given that it changed so many times anyway.
Defending Free Speech at Harvard00:10:25
But the idea also that Harvard should be somewhere that would then find you challenging science and offering your opinion, which might well be correct in many of these areas.
I don't know.
I'm not as expert as you, but certainly your job suggests you know more than I do, that they would then fire you for expressing honestly held opinions.
What does that say about Harvard?
Well, I think there's a problem in science and academia because there has been a lot of censoring.
I think we should neither censor true opinions, true things, or false things, because if I have somebody who thinks something different, I want them to speak out so that we can have an argument, we should have debates.
But there was no debates about this, and instead there were censoring and there was slander.
And in this case, I was fired together with some other staff members.
So I think that's a huge problem for academia.
And if you look at the taxpayers, it's the taxpayers who are paying for our scientists to do research.
The NIH is paying over a billion dollars a year to mass General Brigham Hospital, which is the Harvard Hospital where I work.
And I think the taxpayers deserve to be able to have to know that whatever the scientists do, that there can be debated between them and that there's no silencing or censoring or firing because of use.
Academic freedom is very important and freedom of speech is very important.
Otherwise, science will die.
And the support of science will die and it should die if there's no this academic freedom.
Yeah, I mean, it seems to me completely inconsistent with the ethos of any top university that they would employ incredibly bright, eminent people like you, incredibly experienced in your field, and then suppress your right to express honestly held opinions.
But we've seen with Harvard, they recently came bottom on a list of universities on the free speech analysis that has been done by an independent organization.
Then we had the furori over the nonsense of the president of Harvard, you know, suppressing views on campus during the Israel-Hamas conflict and so on.
Time and again, we're seeing what seems on the face of it to be Harvard leading suppression of free speech, when in fact they should be the absolute epicenter of encouraging free speech, shouldn't they?
I agree with you.
Yeah, I mean, so is this conspiracy?
Is it cock up?
Is it, as Elon Musk would call it, the woke mind virus?
What is going on here?
I think the climate has changed and we really need to go back to academic freedom, to freedom of speech.
And I think that requires two things.
It requires that people can talk and that there can be discussion.
And there can be very passionate discussions.
That's good.
As long as they are polite.
We also have to make sure that there is no bullying or slander because then people will self-censor.
So it's very, very important to maintain an open climate of debate.
And during this whole pandemic, there was clearly disagreements about these things at Harvard.
But there were two of my colleagues who tried to arrange the debate between me and those who were favoring lockdowns.
But the other side did not want to participate.
And I think that if there's a scientist who is not willing to debate their views with other scientists, it doesn't matter if they are at Harvard or Stanford or Cambridge or Oxford, but you shouldn't believe scientists who are not willing to debate their views with other scientists who have opposing views.
Yeah, I just think it's ridiculous what's happened to you.
Professor Gouldorf, I'm sorry that this has come to end your career at Harvard, but I'm sure somebody else will snap you up pretty quickly.
And I think it's an outrage, actually, and another outrage at Harvard following a series of other outrages.
So I don't know what's happening there, but it needs a complete top-to-bottom change of attitude so that students there are encouraged to express opinions and debate and challenge conventional thought.
Otherwise, what's the point of Harvard?
But I appreciate you joining on Censor.
Thank you very much.
Thank you so much for having me.
I appreciate it.
All right, let's go to the panel.
Taras, this is definitely more in your wheelhouse.
What do you, I mean, you and I have talked about Harvard before on Gutfeld in the States.
But time and again, Harvard seems to be, like I said, leading the charge against free speech.
Why?
Well, because it's part of the, it's the feelings over facts revolution that we're having here by the woke.
But you see, you did something in the beginning of your interview that had you been on any kind of board, would have helped everyone out during the pandemic.
You corrected yourself.
You looked back at the science.
You said, you know what?
We got it wrong here.
And now we're going to get it right there.
That's what I think the world, American people, we could take bad news.
You know, what we couldn't take was the average people who just studied biology would be like, this doesn't make sense.
and how we're taking care of ourselves with this virus or with this thing.
So as we continue to go, anybody, any doctor, friends of ours, Dr. Drew, Dr. Nicole Sapphire, careers were wasted, pulled from TV, quacks, their entire life, like anyone who opposed them, because in another word you use, it wasn't conspiracy.
It was corruption.
Because look at all the people that have benefited.
And I have a saying where a lot of times it feels like the American people during the pandemic, well, if we break a few eggs, no big deal.
Because they were continuing to do things that they didn't know.
They didn't know long-term effects from the vaccines.
And we're still seeing that.
And we're still learning.
And even now, when we're learning the truth, where's Fauci with the, whoops, we got it wrong?
Because see, there's the thing.
Science can be, it's changing.
So what started here with the information, as we've discovered, things change over time.
And when something changes, then you tell what happened.
It's not that this wasn't difficult.
It's just that they were fine with what was happening in the beginning because it was a control thing and a profit thing.
So, and then we became more expendable, like we always are.
We always have to do with medicines in our country.
It's ridiculously expensive.
Insulin is ridiculous.
It's just non-stop.
And they're always giving us stories about how they're going to do this and that.
But they can cut a check to your crane in six seconds.
But it just goes back to the thing.
It was all about corruption, unfortunately, this pandemic.
And we're seeing the results of that.
Okay, so James, I mean, look, I, you know, I admitted to that professor that I myself was too censorious.
But the idea that academic institutions like Harvard would fire somebody like him for expressing opinions, many of which, by the way, I've checked him out, many of which are now accepted to be correct.
You know, lockdowns were pretty ruinous, particularly after vaccines came in.
You know, Sweden did turn out to do rather better by being a bit more open than we were here.
You know, we should have treated younger people different to older people because younger people clearly weren't suffering from the virus in the way older people, and so on.
I definitely agree with that last point.
Right, but what do you think about what's happened to this guy?
I think it's awful.
Obviously, I think he should be allowed to say what he wants.
I do believe that saying free speech is, you know, is important in society is slightly concerning to me because free speech doesn't necessarily exclude things that are wrong, but in this case.
Well, actually, it does.
That's the whole point of free speech.
I'm not if you're inside.
No, I can say something about anything, and I can be wrong, but I'm allowed to be in a democracy.
But you have a responsibility, you have a platform.
No, no, but I can be wrong.
Not if I held opinions.
Let me ask you a question because I was listening to that.
If there was a vaccine tomorrow for the woke mind virus, would you make sure everyone had it?
If what, sir?
If the woke mind virus, if there was a vaccine for this so-called woke mind virus, would you make sure everyone had to vote?
Oh, I'd mandate that and exhibit.
Right, there we go.
So there is some hips.
Because I do actually think Elon Musk is right.
I do think it's a virus.
I think it becomes contagious.
Absolutely.
It is not a virus.
Well, it's not a real virus, but it's a mentality virus.
I mean, it is Paula because Harvard is now the worst performing university in America for free speech.
Harvard.
And this is where I have a problem with this discussion.
Because we have taken a very small, small issue, which is man gets sacked from job.
Happens every day.
Sorry, no.
Professor...
No, no, no, no.
It's not a small issue.
It happens every day.
The professor at Harvard gets fired for expressing honestly held opinions about a pandemic.
It happens every day.
And then what happens is we hear why he thinks he's been sacked, but we don't hear why Harvard thinks he's been sacked.
Now, the reason why I'm saying this is actually because of something that the professor said that I agree with him on.
He referenced truth.
And I think that's a really dangerous word when we talk about science and why I think we've had this problem with COVID.
Because when you start talking about truth, you introduce a level of subjectivity.
Well, I think it was about this, and I think it was about that, and I've read on Facebook this, and I've read on Xtat.
And that's what happened.
Facts are facts.
Well, are they?
Truth is truth.
Are they?
Yeah, the real problem is that a lot of your mates in the woke world like to talk about the where world?
The woke world like to talk about my truth.
Is there something that's not?
Am I saying that?
They talk about my truth.
There's some sort of weird version of the truth that you can manipulate that isn't actually true.
I've never minded if you listen back to the professor, he spoke about his truth.
And that is why I reference the fact that we need to be careful in this discussion.
Because what we should have been fired for expressing honesty held views.
This is where I actually agree to a certain extent with the professor.
What we want is scientific rigor.
Of course we do.
What we want is the debate.
That's what we want.
But what I don't want is my professor telling me about his or her truth.
You don't want a professor of epidemiology telling you what he believes are facts.
No, that's not.
That's not what he said.
No, it's actually not agreement with you, really, isn't it?
Because he didn't say that.
And you just said that my truth isn't acceptable.
So why is it when the professor's using the current?
I think every scientist in the world should be encouraged to look at a set of data and give an honest opinion about what they think it represents.
Science as a whole should make an opinion, not just one side.
Science will never agree in totality.
Exactly.
They will always agree.
Puberty Blockers and Scientific Debate00:05:45
But you take the...
But why is he being fired for having honestly held opinions about it?
He's an epidemiologist at Harvard for 20 years.
And we don't know the answer to that question.
And that's why I'm saying to you, we do know the answer unfortunately is corruption.
We do know what the answer is.
Well, I think it's a very important thing.
It's sounding conspiratorial now, exactly.
I think I trust Harvard more than you guys to be able to do that.
Anybody who has gone through this and asked questions and challenges is shot down.
We are so far past that.
You would think at this point we could have a little, as we would say in America, come to Jesus moment where we would sit down and talk about the mistakes were made so we could learn from them.
Let me ask you.
We can talk about mistakes.
You're attacked and crucified for saying we got it wrong on stuff.
In America, we got it wrong on stuff.
Well, here we are.
We're not honest with people.
We didn't say we're not.
We are attacking you.
If you're obese, if you're obese, you're in trouble.
If you're older, you're in trouble.
I'd much rather.
If you're young and shape, you got a better shot.
We did not splice that.
We treated everything the same.
Let me ask you this, Tara.
It's like, well, I'm immune to it, or this, we attack.
Let me ask you this, Tara.
In England, actually, the NHS, the health service here, has just ruled to ban children from being given puberty blockers.
This follows a lengthy campaign here.
It's been a raging issue in America.
What do you think?
I think it's great.
It's butchering.
There's no reason for it at all.
To be changed for sexual matters as a child is ridiculous.
In America, you can't buy a pack of cigarettes.
You can convince children that Santa Claus is real, that a tooth fairy takes their tooth from under a pillow.
So grooming them or talking to them about where they are, there's a whole reason why you call growing up.
And you go through things and you support, and your first move should be therapy, probably family therapy, not looking for drugs and medications and stuff like that.
And I think it's great.
And I hope America follows.
You have experience in this particular personal issue yourself.
I think it's a great day for parents.
And again, that's what's sexy.
That's a good question.
I mean, you're speaking like you know, but I don't know if you've actually had this in your family.
So I'd like to know whether you have experienced this.
Yeah, I actually have.
You've had a child or someone close to you that had gender dysphoria?
I have one of my children who are in the LGBTQ.
That's not what I asked, though.
Do you have experience as a parent with a trans child?
Yeah.
Right.
And we're not running off to the doctors.
Wow.
I'd love to hear more about that.
Well, James, your view about...
Well, that's my family and it's none of your business.
Right.
And I completely agree with you.
You asked him a question, Tyrus responded.
Probably to your surprise.
Let me ask you a question.
No, not to my surprise.
I'm pleased to hear that.
One of the children.
I'm not surprised.
I'm asking because I want to know that you have experience in what you're talking about and you've answered the question and so therefore I'm not going to come back at you.
I just wonder if Tyrus would be applauding when we actually go behind that headline because what that headline doesn't actually tell us, Tyrus, is that they're not going to stop giving the puberty blockers to children.
Actually, they will.
No, but if you want it, you can find a way.
Actually, they will continue to be prescribed that.
And we're looking at just under 100 children at the moment who are currently being prescribed it.
And they're being prescribed it.
You'll be pleased to hear, and I hope you'll be applauding this, by medically trained physicians, experts who understand why it is the children need to be prescribed this particular medication.
I don't think...
So to applaud the fact that it's been banned, I am concerned about that because here we are, interestingly, now talking about the medical experts who've opined that children in certain cases do need these drugs, and yet you seem to be applauding the fact that they're banned.
That concerns me.
All right, I thought what it's worth, as a father of four kids, I think no child should be given puberty blockers.
I think it should be outlawed everywhere.
And I think what's been going on at some of these clinics, like the Tavistock Clinic in London, absolutely disgraceful child abuse.
I just want to talk about what is, you do realize you're talking about parents of these children, don't you?
So you've shown us the parent card here, but these children who are being prescribed have parents.
I think it's disgraceful.
So you're suggesting that these parents, who are no doubt, going through a hell of their own...
I have no idea what they're going through.
You don't know what they're doing.
I suspect it hasn't been.
Because you can see that.
There's a reason the Tavistock television is.
Please don't understand things.
There's a reason that Tavistock Telling got shut down.
And two further clinics have been open.
It was not...
Oh, sorry, was it ruled as committing child abuse?
You have that factually ringing.
That's not what I asked.
It's my interpretation of what was being done to children there, yeah.
Tyrus, I also just want to apologise for putting you on the spot there because that is unfair and I didn't expect that answer.
All right, we're going to move on.
We're going to move on.
So that's the problem when you try to throw shit up in the wall and somebody hits you with the music.
No, I wasn't throwing shit at the wall.
I just wanted to point out that this research that was done in the UK that decided to ban puberty blockers was only the people that they asked, only 32% of them were actually trans or trans children.
And that's not enough to decide what.
All these parents that don't have these problems, all these other people are just deciding for these trans people and that's not acceptable.
That's not situations.
Yeah, look, let's...
Well, during this time of, I will say this.
During this time, my child that you're asking about has had several different directions that they have gone to in and out of.
And so if I would have jumped at the first one and ran her off to the doctors, and then what?
So as she's growing, as therapies and all that good stuff.
Well, sending love.
We'll see where she's at and what she wants.
Embracing Individuality Over Gender Rules00:03:37
Because whatever she wants at the end of the day, when she's old enough to make that decision, I'll be right there with her.
Or they.
Or whatever my child wants to be.
Absolutely.
Completely agree.
Okay, let's move on to something a little lighter.
Catfish girl.
Hannah Barron from Kentucky, who is an outdoors influencer and catfish noodler, has become a social media superstar.
The post from Samira Carr has been viewed 62 million times because she said that Hannah's accent needs to be illegal and women should be banned from doing manual labor like this.
There's nothing feminine about American women.
Well, let's listen to this clip.
I've been helping dad build houses since I was 15.
I just think that you should embrace your own individuality.
You should be yourself.
And don't worry about what anybody else said because these folks talking about me and think they're going to offend me.
That ship sailed a long time ago.
So don't be scared to build your own box and don't try to fit in anybody else's.
Taras, I absolutely love the Kentucky accent, I have to say.
I'm pretty outrageous of this.
I'm a big fan of the British one.
I said, I'm a big fan of the British accent.
Of course.
I know you want to speak like me.
Let's be honest, Tara.
You know you do.
And I want to speak like you.
Occasionally, if I ever get pulled over by a cop, I would love to have your accent.
Yes, I would.
But on this one, the kind of snobbery of this woman, Samira Carr, saying that her accent, Hannah's accent used to be illegal.
And women shouldn't be doing manual labor like catfish noodles.
Listen, good for her to speak her mind.
We want people to speak her mind, but that's just not how it is.
Unfortunately, if you would have done life differently, if you maybe applied yourself more in school or worked a little harder or got yourself in a better situation, maybe you wouldn't have to do manual labor, whatever your circumstances is.
But the world, there is no perfect box and there's no promises.
Everything comes from hard work and we all get circumstances and things that happen to us in life.
But to say, I don't think it's fair, it's not fair, it wasn't for me, it just shows that we have a real problem with accountability right now in this country where nothing's their fault and they are not responsible for any of their actions and anything they have to do is forced against their will.
And that's just the beauty of living in a first world country where you can complain about getting good wages and being able to have a roof over your head and electricity and the Wi-Fi and you can sit on your, take pictures of your food and send it to your friends all day and then complain about it all.
I mean, that's a really nice luxury to have here in America and the western parts of this country.
So it's more, so you listen to them whine and complain, but at the end of the day, why are we even talking?
Good for you, lady.
Her smugness did not dictate what her life looked like.
Yeah.
And Paula, I mean, this idea that you can't be feminine and noodle a catfish.
Have you ever noodled a catfish?
You sure can.
Piers, you know I swim in the River Thames and I absolutely love it.
Yeah.
While swimming?
Yeah.
So have you noodled a catfish?
I haven't noodled a catwish.
Absolutely, and I'll look out for one the next time I do.
But I just wanted to say that unfortunately, it doesn't surprise me that there are women like Miss Khan around who think that it is appropriate to tell another woman what she should look like, what she should sound like.
Sadly, you get that even in terms of your race.
You will have people of color telling you that you have not suffered from racism.
I think she's brilliant.
I've got to say, I loved her accent.
I love what she does.
Noodling a Catfish in the Thames00:01:14
She's fantastic.
I couldn't noodle a catfish.
That looks incredibly hard work, but I think it's fantastic.
James, you must have noodled a few catfish in your life.
Yes, I have.
Or been catfished by a few noodles.
I've never been catfished by a few noodles.
I love her, and I think Paula's right.
I think that this is the issue when you start policing gender, really.
And it's great that you agree on that.
I don't think we should be walking around accusing people of being too masculine or what is feminine because it's all just made up anyway.
It is.
I totally agree.
It's a point of consensus.
Sorry, what?
Did you just say it's masculine?
You're just saying gender's made up.
Who would have thought we'd be watching by catfish?
Oh, my God.
Before we let you go, Taurus, what have you got coming up on your Outkik show?
Oh, I got a cool interview with Hot Tip Jesus.
So it's going to be fun.
It kind of comes out this Sunday.
Brilliant.
So we got after it.
Brilliant.
And you were a great guest.
It was an amazing opportunity to sit down with you one-on-one.