#436 Ideology in Psychology, Parental Rights, and the Limits of Institutional Power 5 of 6

And Another Thing With Dave, by David Smith

Host: David Smith
Guest: Spirited Journey
Episode Title: #436 Ideology in Psychology, Parental Rights, and the Limits of Institutional Power

In this powerful and intellectually charged episode, David Smith and Spirited Journey explore the intersection of politics, mental health, gender identity, and institutional authority through the lens of a major study: Political Diversity in Social and Personality Psychology by Joel Inbar and Joris Lammers.

The conversation opens with a breakdown of the study’s core questions:

1. How left-leaning are social and personality psychologists?

2. Do they accurately perceive the political leanings of their colleagues?

3. Is there a hostile climate or discrimination against conservatives in the field?

David and Spirited Journey reflect on how these ideological imbalances can shape what research gets funded, what ideas are allowed to flourish, and who is deemed credible in the conversation around gender identity and mental health. They highlight that ideological bias in psychology isn’t just an academic concern—it’s impacting real-world policy and shaping narratives in schools, healthcare, and media.

The discussion is elevated by listener messages, including questions about abuse, acceptance, and how to balance protecting vulnerable youth with maintaining institutional accountability. Real-life case studies, including disturbing stories of early medical interventions gone wrong, ground the conversation in hard-hitting truth.

Follow me and find More of My Content with link below

https://linktr.ee/andanotherthingwithdave

• [00:00] Overview of the research study by Inbar & Lammers on political diversity in psychology

• [01:18] Listener question: how do we address parental bias without overreach?

• [02:30] The slippery slope of state involvement in family matters

• [03:25] Emotional and mental health risks of secrecy and silence in schools

• [04:48] Civil rights vs. group-specific rights—how to talk about unity without erasing identity

• [05:25] Coexisting mental health diagnoses often overlooked in gender dysphoric youth

• [07:33] Advocating for the few vs. the many—what does a balanced approach look like?

• [09:04] Disturbing case studies: early gender reassignment surgeries and long-term outcomes

• [13:15] Speculation and skepticism: media narratives, conspiracy, and critical thinking

• [16:31] What is a social personality psychologist, and why does it matter?

• [18:25] Acceptance, perceived abuse, and long-term psychological impacts

• [20:49] The danger of bypassing due diligence—what thresholds should exist before action is taken?

• [21:57] Final thoughts and further excerpts from the research paper

• Ideological Echo Chambers: Social psychology may be vulnerable to political homogeneity, which can shape scientific discourse and skew research outcomes.

• Parental Rights vs. Institutional Power: Schools and government agencies should maintain neutrality and not withhold information without due cause or proper evaluation.

• The Need for Long-Term Data: Especially regarding puberty blockers and gender-affirming care, more longitudinal research is critical.

• One Size Doesn’t Fit All: Each child's situation is unique—policies must allow room for individualized, evidence-based care and family involvement.

• Human Rights First: Rather than separating civil rights into smaller categories, focus on universal human rights to foster unity and inclusion.

  
  

  #aatwd #andanotherthing #davesmith #podcast #conspiracies #truther #politics #uspolitics #truthseeker

#AndAnotherThing #PodcastWithDave #ParentalRights #GenderIdentityDebate #PsychologyBias #SocialPsychology #AffirmativeCare #TransYouth #MentalHealthMatters #ResearchEthics #AcademicFreedom #SchoolPolicy #ChildWelfare #PubertyBlockers #CivilRights #HumanRightsForAll #CriticalThinking