July 22, 2025 • 33 mins
And Another Thing With Dave, by Dave Smith
Host: David Smith Guest: Spirited Journey
In this engaging episode, David Smith and Spirited Journey explore critical questions around ideological biases within social psychology, parental rights, and the sensitive topic of gender identity in youth. They unpack a recent study investigating political leanings and perceived hostility within social personality psychology, shedding light on how these biases might influence research and social narratives.
The conversation then turns to the complex and often controversial issue of schools managing gender identity matters without parental involvement. They discuss the ethical dilemmas surrounding withholding information from parents, the risks of medical interventions such as puberty blockers, and the mental health challenges underlying gender dysphoria. The hosts advocate for a balanced, neutral government stance that emphasizes science, longitudinal studies, and individualized approaches rather than blanket policies.
Listeners will gain insights into the nuances of civil rights, the intersection of mental health and identity, and the broader societal impact of dividing advocacy into narrowly defined groups. The episode also touches on real-life cases that highlight the risks of mismanaged medical and psychological interventions, underscoring the importance of family involvement and open communication.
00:00–01:00 — Overview of a study on political ideology and perceived hostility in social personality psychologists
01:00–05:00 — Discussion on parental rights, biases, and neutrality in schools
05:00–08:00 — Risks of secrecy around gender identity issues and potential consequences for youth mental health
08:00–12:00 — Medical interventions, puberty blockers, and the importance of addressing comorbid mental health conditions
12:00–16:00 — Real-life stories highlighting ethical concerns in medical and psychological treatment of gender identity
16:00–20:00 — The complexity of civil rights versus single-issue advocacy and societal division
20:00–22:00 — Calls for more science, research, and individualized care approaches
22:00–End — Summary and reflections on government neutrality and protecting the well-being of all youth
Thank you for tuning in!
If you are digging what I am doing, and picking up what I'm putting down, please follow, subscribe, and share the podcast on social media and with friends. Reviews are greatly appreciated. You can leave a review on Apple Podcasts, or Spotify.
Links below
Apple Podcasts
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/and-another-thing-with-dave/id1498443271
Spotify
https://open.spotify.com/show/1HLX3dqSQgeWZNXVZ1Z4EC?
Thanks again!!!
Follow me and find More of My Content with link below
https://linktr.ee/andanotherthingwithdave
Episode Summary:Show Notes & Key Topics:SEO-Optimized Hashtags:#AndAnotherThingWithDave #GenderIdentityDebate #ParentalRights #SocialPsychologyBias #PubertyBlockers #YouthMentalHealth #CivilRights #LGBTQSupport #InclusiveEducation #MentalHealthAwareness #ScienceBasedApproach #FamilyInvolvement
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:16):
All right, all right, all right.Greetings, fellow Earthlings,
and thanks for tuning into another episode.
And another thing with Dave, this is part 5 in a six part
conversation with my friend, Spirited Journey.
We start off talking about biological men in women's sports
and we go deep down the rabbit hole from there.
(00:39):
I hope you enjoy. So here's one other little quote
from this paper. This is summary and overview of
the paper. In sum, we set out to answer 3
questions. First, how left wing is the
political ideology of social personality psychologists?
Second, do social personality psychologists accurately
(01:03):
perceive the ideology of their colleagues?
3rd, is there a perceived or actual hostile climate or even
willingness to discriminate against conservative social
personality psychologists? To answer these three questions,
we contacted 19139 members of the SPSP electronic mailing list
(01:27):
and invited them to complete 2 brief online surveys.
It's pretty fascinating. And once again, this is these
are the people that determine what people get hired and then
do the research and then publishresearch having to do with these
(01:47):
topics. So pretty fascinating.
Got three more messages here. Here's Drew.
I hear you there, spirited. I hear you there, right?
That the idea of a neutral stance should be taken as
opposed to one way or the other.But your initial statements,
both of you were that the exclusion of information to the
(02:11):
parent is the issue, not the taking one stance or the other.
And so that's where I was speaking to using a, the idea of
an interracial couple, right? So what do you like?
How do we reconcile the fact that parents do have biases and
there's an imbalance in power dynamic in a parent child
relationship? And that's probably why
(02:31):
information is not being provided.
Well, it's the exclusion included with the idea that
you're participating that's the difference.
But how do you address the biases of the parents?
You don't. It's not your business.
Right, right. I'm a firm advocate of unless
(02:53):
there's a problem, the state stays out of the family unit.
I haven't seen any benefit except maybe a reduction in
child homelessness. But you know, if you if you
study the foster program, there's horrible stories.
Horrible. Yeah.
(03:16):
Best of intentions, but you know.
Mm, hmm. It's just like it's it's it's a
matter of ideology. I'm assuming that the the
boogeyman here is the abuse of achild that identifies as trans.
I get that, but you're it solves, it solves and I believe
(03:38):
that happens. I'm not, I'm not at all trying
to say that that doesn't exist because it absolutely does
exist, but it doesn't exist in all cases.
And so because we can't, we can't control for, for that, we
need to be neutral or they need to be neutral.
The government needs to be remained neutral in these things
(04:01):
and continue to to be blind about that.
Like there's no, it only muddiesthe water.
It only makes it worse for thosestudents who actually need
assistance when you're, when you're advocating for silence
and secrecy. That's, that's just a breeding
ground for suicidality. Wouldn't you agree with that?
Like that's for those students that are not actually trans, but
(04:25):
have other underlying mental health issues that should be
addressed. And that is a cry for help.
Them having struggles with a gender identity is, is what I,
from what I understand, can be indicative of other other mental
health issues that should be addressed.
And so you're not telling their parents, I believe is negligent.
(04:46):
I believe that will, that's going to create lawsuits and,
and, and just danger in general,like I mentioned earlier there,
that may end up manifesting intoa school shooting situation or
you know, any, any number of things that that that child can
(05:07):
end up engaging in because of that unaddressed mental health
issue, right? That's a really good point.
That's a really good point to address what what he was saying
and what you were saying. I, I, you know, I agree.
Like if the goal is to combat bullying, well, let's address
bullying, not just at 1 demographic.
(05:30):
And and then that opens up the conversation to biases and to
racism and to all of the isms, right?
So we should be and and that's what I fall back on those.
Let's talk about civil rights and human rights as opposed to
trans rights, right? And by talking about human
rights and civil rights, we are addressing trans rights, right?
(05:54):
But as soon as we start dividing, that's it's the divide
and conquer philosophy, right? You, you cause inner conflict,
you cause division. A lack of unity is a lack of
power. And then like you also brought
up comorbidities coating diagnosis or or conditions going
(06:20):
undiagnosed. In one of the papers that I came
upon doing my research on puberty blockers in children, it
was saying that of children who presented as gender dysphoric,
the majority had up to six comorbidities.
(06:42):
So this is once again. Because they're focused on
transness. So once again, not that
transness is bad, but perhaps itshould be looked at like a
Canary in the coal mine and a potential indicator of existing
comorbidities. And in the best interest of that
(07:05):
person and hoping for the best outcome, we would want to
evaluate and help that person inthe best way possible for their
individual case, right? Not just apply some blanket
approach which could be neglecting the majority of their
(07:27):
comorbidities. Right, right, right.
Which? Could have a horrific outcome
in, you know, suicide rate. Exactly.
Exactly. I just think the that's there's
just a bit seems to be a big push to advocate for the few
despite the many, you know, and just just, I just that that
(07:53):
part, I don't understand that part I don't understand because
yes, they, they are at risk and yes, they have these issues and
yes, these are serious issues that they may face.
But what about what you're missing and trying to advocate
for them or cover them or, or you know, you're missing, you
are putting all this huge swath of people at risk to protect
(08:16):
this smaller swath of people. I wish we could cover everybody.
I wish we could address everybody's need with all of
these, these these initiatives or whatever you want to call
them, our new laws. But what it's not possible.
And so who do you, who do you skew towards the small number or
(08:37):
the larger number? And one answer makes sense and
the other one doesn't. Yeah, yeah, I agree.
Here's here's Dre on line 2. Was that the case where the
doctor performed the surgery on the child without the child's
(09:04):
consent and or even informing the parents?
Is that the one you were talkingabout where the child later on
died by suicide? I think there was a twin as
well, right? Or a brother or something.
Is that correct? Twin.
No, the one I'm the one I'm thinking of, the parents did
know and they but they didn't. They chose to never tell the
(09:25):
child until they were 16 or 17. Was that the good?
Twins, though. No, it was a.
Single birth. Yep, a single person.
Yeah, OK, so yeah, there's a story.
I heard that story. I'm not very familiar with that
one, but I did hear of it. But the one that were most
(09:46):
people are more familiar with isthe the twins.
That one, they when they went toit wasn't a micro penis.
It was they went to circumcise one of the twins and there was
an accident and the penis caughton fire or something.
It was crazy. I was like, Oh my gosh.
And so it was so disfigured thatthey decided to go ahead and and
(10:07):
make the boy a girl. That is insane.
They were like, oh, it's gender is interchangeable.
It's a social contract, No? Wow, I never heard of that one.
And do you know the what the results were, how that panned
out? That one is the one he spoke of
(10:28):
where the one they both ended upcommitting suicide that both
twins because they were also being abused by the doctor that
did this. I forgot.
Oh my, great. Dre help me with that.
Oh my God, horrible. Wow.
Oh my God that hurts my heart. My stomach, there was 2 doctors
(10:48):
involved. There was the doctor that did
the surgery, and I'm not sure ifthey're with the same doctor.
That doesn't sound right to me. So I'm not, you know, I'm just,
I've just heard that story several times.
I don't know the details. I'm sorry.
I'm so horrible about remembering that kind of stuff.
I'm old. I'm old, I'm old.
Here's Dre I'm lying for. But all right, guys.
(11:11):
Hey, thank you so much. I was here.
I don't know, I guess maybe my avatar went away for a bit, but
I was here. I've been hearing the whole
time. Thank you guys for taking my
answers, answering the questionsand playing the messages.
When I have time. I'm actually in the car now
heading to a location, but when I have time, let's go in and do
(11:33):
a deep dive and do a talk about this stuff.
I would love to do that with youguys.
Yes, we got the train up here, right?
Yes, we're gonna have all three of us together.
Yeah, I would, I would love to. And I and I can do my homework
and have some articles at at thefingertips.
So I'm not just saying, you know, oh, this article and that
(11:54):
article, right? Right, right, exactly.
So yeah, that's why I'm, I'm actually doing a medical billing
right now. Speaking of which, Speaking of
the devil. Episodes.
Any United Healthcare billing inthere?
You know what, no, but we only have one, one client that has
(12:20):
United Health. But I just kind of, I know I
just got a video saying they're hiring at United Health for, for
call center work. And I typically do call center
work when I get, you know, when I get desperate, I need to get
some money real quick because that's, that's my, my
(12:40):
wheelhouse, right? So that's just my easy go to
when I need some money real fastif my entrepreneurialism is not
working, but. Careful, because what?
What do they say? The devil often appears as a
friend or something like that, or as an opportunity.
Really. For real?
So yeah, I was like, yeah, I told my because my friend sent
(13:00):
me this link talking about the, the, the, the opportunity.
And I was like, yeah, I guess they do need to be hiring some
new people, right? Now, yeah, you think they need
at least one new person? Right, at least one.
Like, wow, I said. It's too.
Soon. I think it's too soon too soon,
(13:22):
too soon, too soon. I got AI have a horrible sense
of humor, so to me it's hilarious.
I absolutely, I have to say after making that joke though,
I, I, I absolutely think it's horrible that that man was
killed. He is, he was just doing his
job. I don't think, I'm not pushing
that he was the Angel or anything, but he's a person with
family and the people with people who loved him.
(13:44):
And he was just doing a job. He was just working there.
And, and if I were to go get a job there, I would be doing the
same thing. So are you going to kill all of
the people that work for the company?
What's going on? Well, you know, I wouldn't go
that far, but you know. Yeah, but they already got
somebody to replace his ass right now.
So what did you do? You didn't do anything but help
(14:06):
them be beef up their security, take pictures off of off of line
off of their websites to to secure, to further cloak their
movement. That's that's all that did.
And I feel really bad for the story that was told.
I don't know if that was real ornot.
Him, his story about his mother,I don't know if that's
propaganda. What the heck's going on there?
(14:27):
It sounds horrible if it was true, but it doesn't make sense
to me because does it sound likehe also had money?
So I don't understand why they were going if they had money,
why did they care what the the freaking health care was saying?
So there's there's a bunch of holes in that story.
But again, I just don't be, you know, killing.
Someone I'm not sure what to believe and and why if it was
(14:48):
what they say it is, why would they show us the manifesto?
Right. And how was he?
I got just it, It was just too neat and tidy with the little
bow on top. And yeah, he still had the the
the murder weapon on him and allthat's like, come on, man.
Right. We got the murder weapon on him.
Yeah, 8 fake IDs, a bunch of cash.
(15:09):
Like, really? But the come on, we've all seen
enough gangster movies to know that you throw the gun, you
throw the gun away right there on the scene, you just throw it
in the gutter because you're using a throwaway gun that can't
be traced to you. So you get it out of you get it
out of your hands as quick as possible because you don't want
it to be traced to you. Right.
Well, you know, that's a good question though.
(15:30):
I wonder if it is traceable to him.
Did he? That's a good question.
You would never that's that's gangster movie 101.
Come on. You.
Never use a gun that's going to be traced to you.
That's like every gangster movie.
There's a gun in the back of thetoilet.
Some guy goes to the bathroom, gets the gun out of the toilet.
Of course it's not his gun. He's got gloves on, so no
(15:53):
fingerprints. He pops the guy at the table,
the round table in the back, who's the head of some other mob
family, walks out the door, throws the gun in the gutter.
Boom, done. Right, absolutely.
So if it's not registered to himor untraceable to him, then that
would further confirm that he itwas a hit job and it was a
professional job. Now if it was.
(16:15):
Registered to him or somebody inhis family or something like
that, then that would make more sense to the narrative that he
was just, he just snapped because, right?
And that's A and that's a key detail, right?
Did he grab his dad's gun? How did he get his gun and why?
Because he used some janky ass like early 1900s gun or
something and it jammed on him. So right, right.
(16:37):
Crazy. The whole story, just this.
There is, of course, going to bea movie.
So it just sounds. It's just crazy.
And it gets it gets even fishier.
So there's a rumor that this guywas going to possibly tense
testify against Nancy Pelosi forinsider trading.
And Nancy Pelosi just made $10 million on one trade surrounding
(17:02):
that healthcare company, I believe.
Wow. Yeah, the plot thickens.
Wonder if we'll see a blanket pardon for Pelosi.
Oh, great, Nancy. Pelosi.
Here's Dre with another message.I've never heard of a social
(17:25):
personality psychologist either.Man my ignorance.
I need to look up what that is and what the SPS is and if they
did it on all mental health or research or just SPS research.
I'm curious. Yeah, so let's see, it says
right here corresponding author Yul Inbar, Department of Social
(17:52):
Psychology, Tilburg University, Netherlands.
So yeah, I guess he is a PhD in social psychology, social
psychology. And this was specifically
looking at social psychologists,who I guess are the people that
(18:13):
put out studies on what is affecting society, right?
Yeah, yeah. Right, they're looking at a
society, societal impacts. Right, right.
That's yeah, that's that's what I was thinking.
Yeah, yeah, simple. Simple enough, right?
(18:37):
Yeah, yeah. Here's another one from Drake.
Yeah, and I would even take, youdon't even have to take it that
far, right, The concept of the boogeyman.
And look at me being a liar, saying my last message was my
last message, right? But you don't even have to take
it that far to call the boogeyman abuse.
The concept of not being accepted by parents, simply not
(19:01):
being accepted for whatever reason, as we all know based on
child development is, is important.
It has serious ramifications. So that within itself, which is
something potentially innocuous but big and long lasting in
children's lives. Yeah, absolutely.
(19:25):
So he's saying that that it's a benign, it could be a more
benign situation that we're trying to protect for then that
meant that that's the argument that you don't need to be
keeping it from the parents. If it's not a fear of abuse,
then you really shouldn't be keeping it from the parents.
So. This just you know, I got from
(19:46):
Miss Smitty in the back channels.
According to USA TODAY, there isno evidence of any relation to
Brian Thompson and Nancy Pelosi insider trading.
So thank you, Miss Smitty. OK.
But yeah, I mean, I mean, I guess it's not, I mean more, I
said more benign, but I, I absolutely think that that's a
(20:10):
sad prospect, right? Not being accepted by your
parents. And I don't know, I'm not a
psychologist, but I feel like that would be that that would be
abuse to me. I mean, to, to be unaccepting of
your child and who they really are, that that's, that can be
some form of abuse, but maybe that it doesn't meet the
threshold of abuse, I guess. So that's why I chose to use the
(20:33):
phrase not less benign or not asbenign or more benign.
So it's, it's a tough situation here people.
That's why the government needs to remain neutral.
Neutral. Right.
That's all I'm advocating for isthe best.
(20:54):
What's what is best? I'm, I'm asking more questions.
I don't really, I'm not coming down on what we should do.
I'm just advocating for more science, more studies,
longitudinal studies. We want what's best for the most
people, right? And every individual is could
(21:16):
potentially have a, you know, best alternative set of
approaches, right? We're all individuals, so we
can't apply a broke blanket approach to all people.
Yeah. It's just there's certain things
that we have to unfortunately, we can't just ask before there's
any danger present. You can't say, oh, I'm not going
(21:39):
to tear your parents just because you said you think that
they might be abusive or angry when you don't even really know.
And it's also third party like situation.
You're not even talking to the parents.
So how do you know that's their their abuse?
If you're going by a child that may just have a strained
relationship with their their parents and you're going by
that, it's just like if you wereto go report a missing person,
(22:03):
you have to meet a threshold of all of these things before they
would even file a missing report, right?
So or, or the other, the other example I was going to do,
there's like you, you have to meet a threshold to be able to
do these things. And I feel like there's not
enough of that is required before making these decisions.
(22:27):
Oh, you said your parents are going to be angry at you and be
abusive. If you OK, we're just going to
keep everything from them. So no, no investigation, no
attempt to to find out anything,nothing.
OK. Yeah, so let's see.
So let me read another little bit of this paper here 'cause
(22:51):
this might fire some people up for comments.
It will definitely trigger some thought process.
So let's see. I'll go ahead and go into, I
guess, the general discussion from the paper.
Like most scientists and social and personality psychologists
are on average more liberal thanthe general population according
(23:14):
to a Gallup poll of 2010. Yet we also find in two studies
that their political ideology ismore diverse than often assumed.
On economics and foreign policy,a sizable minority describe
themselves as moderate or conservative.
Indeed, although only 6% describe themselves as
(23:34):
conservative overall on economicand international affairs, our
sample already meets or exceeds the 10% quota that Hyde 2011
suggested as a 10 year target for ideological diversity.
Why then, did Height have difficulty finding more than a
(23:57):
handful of conservative colleagues?
The current results suggest one answer.
Members of the conservative minority are reluctant to
express their political beliefs publicly.
Survey two shows why hostility toward and willingness to
discriminate against conservatives is widespread.
(24:18):
One in six respondents said thathe or she would be somewhat or
more inclined to discriminate against conservatives in
inviting them for symposia or reviewing work.
One in four would discriminate in reviewing their grant
applications. 25% grant applications.
(24:43):
That's funding of research. 25% said openly that they would
discriminate against a Conservative grant application
for study. More than one in three would
discriminate against them when making hiring decisions, so 33%
(25:03):
would discriminate would not hire somebody who is openly
conservative. Thus, willingness to
discriminate is not limited to small decisions.
In fact, it is strongest when itcomes with to the most important
decisions, such as grant applications and hiring.
This hostile climate offers a simple explanation of why
(25:24):
conservatives hide their political opinions from
colleagues. Given all given that all
academics depend on the opinionsof their colleagues who judge
their papers, grants and job applications, and given that
such judgments are typically made by multiple reviewers, most
of whom are liberal, this means that outspoken conservatives
(25:46):
face a very serious problem. Hence, the more conservative
respondents are, the more they hide their political opinions.
So that's problematic, right? Absolutely.
Yep. That's, that's nuts.
(26:06):
Actually, that's crazy that they're, that's them being
honest. It's probably some people not
being so honest. Right.
That's them being honest, which is probably going to lean
towards them representing themselves in a better light
than than they really are. And it's still and it's still
really bad. It's still really bad so.
(26:33):
Yeah. And this and this proves what I
ran into when doing research, trying to counter the public
popular narrative on this topic,that there is research, but it's
buried by research that's just patting other research on the
back. Like so and so said in their
paper, Da da da da da da. Like so and so said in their
(26:54):
paper, but not actually doing a study.
Yeah. And, and like Dre said, it would
be fantastic to do. And I'm excited that he asked
because I've, I've been wanting to ask him, but I, I was a
little intimidated honestly. But I've got stacks of, of peer
(27:17):
reviewed papers from when I was doing my research.
So I've got these these papers that I can pull out and we can
talk about. All.
Right, let's do. IT students, you're going to
mess around and make me go back to school, Der.
Yeah, I I couldn't, I couldn't say more about school.
(27:38):
I think everybody should should take at least a class, you know?
What? That's true.
I should at least take one glass, huh?
Yeah. And then once you do, you
realize like it's just a great way to remember that life is
short and that we, we only get one go because it, it reminds
you like, oh, a semester. Otherwise, life just slips by
(28:00):
and you think of like 05 years ago, 10 years ago.
But when you have to think aboutthings in terms of a semester,
it really makes you cram more into life and makes you
appreciate the smaller aspects of life.
Right, right. And I need, you know, what I
need to do is switch my, my thinking because I have a fear.
(28:21):
I love educating education and Ilove school.
I love, you know, I went back and got my degree for graphic
design at an older age and I wasthinking about going back to get
my psychology degree, but I was like so intimidated about the
amount of time as well as testing.
I cannot stand testing. I am, I am a predominantly
(28:43):
creative mind. So tests scare the crap out of
me. If it's not a subjective like,
you know, draw a circle with, you know, draw your
interpretation of this, you know, like it's like.
Right. But but that's also just
programming and hype, right? Don't don't believe the hype,
(29:03):
right, because we are amazing creatures, right?
Like so. And I'm a living example that
if, if you heard, if you make the decision that you're going
to make something a priority, you could do it.
I told myself 90% of my life I couldn't do math and that's what
kept me from going to school. Well, then I shifted my outlook
(29:25):
and was like, I'm going to beat math.
I'm going to find well what the minimum requirement is and I'm
going to do anything I need to do to pass that damn class, and
I got a beat. Right, yeah, I mean, I took all
my math classes at least twice in high school, but I I aced him
the second time is because I hadto take it.
(29:47):
I had to completely focus on it when I took it during the year
and I had to deal with all of myother curriculum.
I just couldn't do it. I just could have had to have
the summer. Every summer of high school was
dedicated to freaking doing overmy math class.
It is, but I would always get inthe summertime, so.
(30:07):
Yeah, and for some people, the struggle will be English or
whatever, but, you know, whatever.
Each person will have their unique struggle.
Some people will just raise their school.
Those people lucky. But it's all doable, right?
With developed study habits, youknow, and the help of the school
and the tutoring center. Whatever.
(30:28):
I lived at the tutoring center all through that semester for
math, you know, and I took a class on like how to be, how to
study, to try to learn the most efficient ways of learning and
stuff like that. So there's some simple things
that you can do to make it easy,but.
Yeah. But it's, you know, I suggested.
(30:53):
Yeah, even if it's even if it's just for personal enrichment.
Oh, I know what I was going to say.
He said you were concerned aboutthe time commitment.
Well, guess what? That time is going to go by
anyway. So as a thought experiment,
envision yourself. OK.
Worst case scenario, imagine howlong it would take.
OK, 10 years. I will.
(31:15):
Be. 6 Now Now imagine yourself 10 years in the future if you
don't do that. Yeah, yes, this is true.
This is true. Because that time's going to go
by anyway. Oh my.
Gosh, it's so. Much Well that well that that's
if you take like two classes here, two classes there.
I mean you could grind it out. Yeah, no, it would have to
(31:37):
because I have to work so. Well, there you go.
So worst case scenario, you know, 810 years, something like
that. And then you're, then you're in
psych, then you're doing psych, you're doing therapy.
You're, you know. Yeah, I'm.
I'm I'm still thinking. About it but if I had a gun is
the first time I thought about it Well, the first time I
(31:58):
thought about it I was like 19 but.
Don't even start with that. Yeah, if since I just recently
started thinking about if I had pulled the trigger, I'd already
be about 3-4 years in, so. Well don't even start with the
shitty putter widows. The last time I was, the last
time I was in college before this was 2011, and I was 42.
(32:26):
And I allowed myself to get talked out of studying
psychology because, oh, it's going to be too long.
I mean, it was totally my passion and it was the number
one thing I was interested in atschool and still am just
fascinated, love learning more and more about how our brain
works and trying to figure out why.
(32:47):
Yeah. All right, that's it for this
episode. Thanks for tuning into another
(33:08):
episode of And Another Thing with Dave.
And remember, if you're digging what I'm doing, picking up what
I'm putting down, please spread it around with friends and on
social media. Reviews on Spotify, podcasts,
and Apple Podcasts are greatly appreciated.
Alright, until next time.
All right, all right, all right.Greetings, fellow Earthlings,
and thanks for tuning into another episode.
And another thing with Dave, this is part 5 in a six part
conversation with my friend, Spirited Journey.
We start off talking about biological men in women's sports
and we go deep down the rabbit hole from there.
(00:39):
I hope you enjoy. So here's one other little quote
from this paper. This is summary and overview of
the paper. In sum, we set out to answer 3
questions. First, how left wing is the
political ideology of social personality psychologists?
Second, do social personality psychologists accurately
(01:03):
perceive the ideology of their colleagues?
3rd, is there a perceived or actual hostile climate or even
willingness to discriminate against conservative social
personality psychologists? To answer these three questions,
we contacted 19139 members of the SPSP electronic mailing list
(01:27):
and invited them to complete 2 brief online surveys.
It's pretty fascinating. And once again, this is these
are the people that determine what people get hired and then
do the research and then publishresearch having to do with these
(01:47):
topics. So pretty fascinating.
Got three more messages here. Here's Drew.
I hear you there, spirited. I hear you there, right?
That the idea of a neutral stance should be taken as
opposed to one way or the other.But your initial statements,
both of you were that the exclusion of information to the
(02:11):
parent is the issue, not the taking one stance or the other.
And so that's where I was speaking to using a, the idea of
an interracial couple, right? So what do you like?
How do we reconcile the fact that parents do have biases and
there's an imbalance in power dynamic in a parent child
relationship? And that's probably why
(02:31):
information is not being provided.
Well, it's the exclusion included with the idea that
you're participating that's the difference.
But how do you address the biases of the parents?
You don't. It's not your business.
Right, right. I'm a firm advocate of unless
(02:53):
there's a problem, the state stays out of the family unit.
I haven't seen any benefit except maybe a reduction in
child homelessness. But you know, if you if you
study the foster program, there's horrible stories.
Horrible. Yeah.
(03:16):
Best of intentions, but you know.
Mm, hmm. It's just like it's it's it's a
matter of ideology. I'm assuming that the the
boogeyman here is the abuse of achild that identifies as trans.
I get that, but you're it solves, it solves and I believe
(03:38):
that happens. I'm not, I'm not at all trying
to say that that doesn't exist because it absolutely does
exist, but it doesn't exist in all cases.
And so because we can't, we can't control for, for that, we
need to be neutral or they need to be neutral.
The government needs to be remained neutral in these things
(04:01):
and continue to to be blind about that.
Like there's no, it only muddiesthe water.
It only makes it worse for thosestudents who actually need
assistance when you're, when you're advocating for silence
and secrecy. That's, that's just a breeding
ground for suicidality. Wouldn't you agree with that?
Like that's for those students that are not actually trans, but
(04:25):
have other underlying mental health issues that should be
addressed. And that is a cry for help.
Them having struggles with a gender identity is, is what I,
from what I understand, can be indicative of other other mental
health issues that should be addressed.
And so you're not telling their parents, I believe is negligent.
(04:46):
I believe that will, that's going to create lawsuits and,
and, and just danger in general,like I mentioned earlier there,
that may end up manifesting intoa school shooting situation or
you know, any, any number of things that that that child can
(05:07):
end up engaging in because of that unaddressed mental health
issue, right? That's a really good point.
That's a really good point to address what what he was saying
and what you were saying. I, I, you know, I agree.
Like if the goal is to combat bullying, well, let's address
bullying, not just at 1 demographic.
(05:30):
And and then that opens up the conversation to biases and to
racism and to all of the isms, right?
So we should be and and that's what I fall back on those.
Let's talk about civil rights and human rights as opposed to
trans rights, right? And by talking about human
rights and civil rights, we are addressing trans rights, right?
(05:54):
But as soon as we start dividing, that's it's the divide
and conquer philosophy, right? You, you cause inner conflict,
you cause division. A lack of unity is a lack of
power. And then like you also brought
up comorbidities coating diagnosis or or conditions going
(06:20):
undiagnosed. In one of the papers that I came
upon doing my research on puberty blockers in children, it
was saying that of children who presented as gender dysphoric,
the majority had up to six comorbidities.
(06:42):
So this is once again. Because they're focused on
transness. So once again, not that
transness is bad, but perhaps itshould be looked at like a
Canary in the coal mine and a potential indicator of existing
comorbidities. And in the best interest of that
(07:05):
person and hoping for the best outcome, we would want to
evaluate and help that person inthe best way possible for their
individual case, right? Not just apply some blanket
approach which could be neglecting the majority of their
(07:27):
comorbidities. Right, right, right.
Which? Could have a horrific outcome
in, you know, suicide rate. Exactly.
Exactly. I just think the that's there's
just a bit seems to be a big push to advocate for the few
despite the many, you know, and just just, I just that that
(07:53):
part, I don't understand that part I don't understand because
yes, they, they are at risk and yes, they have these issues and
yes, these are serious issues that they may face.
But what about what you're missing and trying to advocate
for them or cover them or, or you know, you're missing, you
are putting all this huge swath of people at risk to protect
(08:16):
this smaller swath of people. I wish we could cover everybody.
I wish we could address everybody's need with all of
these, these these initiatives or whatever you want to call
them, our new laws. But what it's not possible.
And so who do you, who do you skew towards the small number or
(08:37):
the larger number? And one answer makes sense and
the other one doesn't. Yeah, yeah, I agree.
Here's here's Dre on line 2. Was that the case where the
doctor performed the surgery on the child without the child's
(09:04):
consent and or even informing the parents?
Is that the one you were talkingabout where the child later on
died by suicide? I think there was a twin as
well, right? Or a brother or something.
Is that correct? Twin.
No, the one I'm the one I'm thinking of, the parents did
know and they but they didn't. They chose to never tell the
(09:25):
child until they were 16 or 17. Was that the good?
Twins, though. No, it was a.
Single birth. Yep, a single person.
Yeah, OK, so yeah, there's a story.
I heard that story. I'm not very familiar with that
one, but I did hear of it. But the one that were most
(09:46):
people are more familiar with isthe the twins.
That one, they when they went toit wasn't a micro penis.
It was they went to circumcise one of the twins and there was
an accident and the penis caughton fire or something.
It was crazy. I was like, Oh my gosh.
And so it was so disfigured thatthey decided to go ahead and and
(10:07):
make the boy a girl. That is insane.
They were like, oh, it's gender is interchangeable.
It's a social contract, No? Wow, I never heard of that one.
And do you know the what the results were, how that panned
out? That one is the one he spoke of
(10:28):
where the one they both ended upcommitting suicide that both
twins because they were also being abused by the doctor that
did this. I forgot.
Oh my, great. Dre help me with that.
Oh my God, horrible. Wow.
Oh my God that hurts my heart. My stomach, there was 2 doctors
(10:48):
involved. There was the doctor that did
the surgery, and I'm not sure ifthey're with the same doctor.
That doesn't sound right to me. So I'm not, you know, I'm just,
I've just heard that story several times.
I don't know the details. I'm sorry.
I'm so horrible about remembering that kind of stuff.
I'm old. I'm old, I'm old.
Here's Dre I'm lying for. But all right, guys.
(11:11):
Hey, thank you so much. I was here.
I don't know, I guess maybe my avatar went away for a bit, but
I was here. I've been hearing the whole
time. Thank you guys for taking my
answers, answering the questionsand playing the messages.
When I have time. I'm actually in the car now
heading to a location, but when I have time, let's go in and do
(11:33):
a deep dive and do a talk about this stuff.
I would love to do that with youguys.
Yes, we got the train up here, right?
Yes, we're gonna have all three of us together.
Yeah, I would, I would love to. And I and I can do my homework
and have some articles at at thefingertips.
So I'm not just saying, you know, oh, this article and that
(11:54):
article, right? Right, right, exactly.
So yeah, that's why I'm, I'm actually doing a medical billing
right now. Speaking of which, Speaking of
the devil. Episodes.
Any United Healthcare billing inthere?
You know what, no, but we only have one, one client that has
(12:20):
United Health. But I just kind of, I know I
just got a video saying they're hiring at United Health for, for
call center work. And I typically do call center
work when I get, you know, when I get desperate, I need to get
some money real quick because that's, that's my, my
(12:40):
wheelhouse, right? So that's just my easy go to
when I need some money real fastif my entrepreneurialism is not
working, but. Careful, because what?
What do they say? The devil often appears as a
friend or something like that, or as an opportunity.
Really. For real?
So yeah, I was like, yeah, I told my because my friend sent
(13:00):
me this link talking about the, the, the, the opportunity.
And I was like, yeah, I guess they do need to be hiring some
new people, right? Now, yeah, you think they need
at least one new person? Right, at least one.
Like, wow, I said. It's too.
Soon. I think it's too soon too soon,
(13:22):
too soon, too soon. I got AI have a horrible sense
of humor, so to me it's hilarious.
I absolutely, I have to say after making that joke though,
I, I, I absolutely think it's horrible that that man was
killed. He is, he was just doing his
job. I don't think, I'm not pushing
that he was the Angel or anything, but he's a person with
family and the people with people who loved him.
(13:44):
And he was just doing a job. He was just working there.
And, and if I were to go get a job there, I would be doing the
same thing. So are you going to kill all of
the people that work for the company?
What's going on? Well, you know, I wouldn't go
that far, but you know. Yeah, but they already got
somebody to replace his ass right now.
So what did you do? You didn't do anything but help
(14:06):
them be beef up their security, take pictures off of off of line
off of their websites to to secure, to further cloak their
movement. That's that's all that did.
And I feel really bad for the story that was told.
I don't know if that was real ornot.
Him, his story about his mother,I don't know if that's
propaganda. What the heck's going on there?
(14:27):
It sounds horrible if it was true, but it doesn't make sense
to me because does it sound likehe also had money?
So I don't understand why they were going if they had money,
why did they care what the the freaking health care was saying?
So there's there's a bunch of holes in that story.
But again, I just don't be, you know, killing.
Someone I'm not sure what to believe and and why if it was
(14:48):
what they say it is, why would they show us the manifesto?
Right. And how was he?
I got just it, It was just too neat and tidy with the little
bow on top. And yeah, he still had the the
the murder weapon on him and allthat's like, come on, man.
Right. We got the murder weapon on him.
Yeah, 8 fake IDs, a bunch of cash.
(15:09):
Like, really? But the come on, we've all seen
enough gangster movies to know that you throw the gun, you
throw the gun away right there on the scene, you just throw it
in the gutter because you're using a throwaway gun that can't
be traced to you. So you get it out of you get it
out of your hands as quick as possible because you don't want
it to be traced to you. Right.
Well, you know, that's a good question though.
(15:30):
I wonder if it is traceable to him.
Did he? That's a good question.
You would never that's that's gangster movie 101.
Come on. You.
Never use a gun that's going to be traced to you.
That's like every gangster movie.
There's a gun in the back of thetoilet.
Some guy goes to the bathroom, gets the gun out of the toilet.
Of course it's not his gun. He's got gloves on, so no
(15:53):
fingerprints. He pops the guy at the table,
the round table in the back, who's the head of some other mob
family, walks out the door, throws the gun in the gutter.
Boom, done. Right, absolutely.
So if it's not registered to himor untraceable to him, then that
would further confirm that he itwas a hit job and it was a
professional job. Now if it was.
(16:15):
Registered to him or somebody inhis family or something like
that, then that would make more sense to the narrative that he
was just, he just snapped because, right?
And that's A and that's a key detail, right?
Did he grab his dad's gun? How did he get his gun and why?
Because he used some janky ass like early 1900s gun or
something and it jammed on him. So right, right.
(16:37):
Crazy. The whole story, just this.
There is, of course, going to bea movie.
So it just sounds. It's just crazy.
And it gets it gets even fishier.
So there's a rumor that this guywas going to possibly tense
testify against Nancy Pelosi forinsider trading.
And Nancy Pelosi just made $10 million on one trade surrounding
(17:02):
that healthcare company, I believe.
Wow. Yeah, the plot thickens.
Wonder if we'll see a blanket pardon for Pelosi.
Oh, great, Nancy. Pelosi.
Here's Dre with another message.I've never heard of a social
(17:25):
personality psychologist either.Man my ignorance.
I need to look up what that is and what the SPS is and if they
did it on all mental health or research or just SPS research.
I'm curious. Yeah, so let's see, it says
right here corresponding author Yul Inbar, Department of Social
(17:52):
Psychology, Tilburg University, Netherlands.
So yeah, I guess he is a PhD in social psychology, social
psychology. And this was specifically
looking at social psychologists,who I guess are the people that
(18:13):
put out studies on what is affecting society, right?
Yeah, yeah. Right, they're looking at a
society, societal impacts. Right, right.
That's yeah, that's that's what I was thinking.
Yeah, yeah, simple. Simple enough, right?
(18:37):
Yeah, yeah. Here's another one from Drake.
Yeah, and I would even take, youdon't even have to take it that
far, right, The concept of the boogeyman.
And look at me being a liar, saying my last message was my
last message, right? But you don't even have to take
it that far to call the boogeyman abuse.
The concept of not being accepted by parents, simply not
(19:01):
being accepted for whatever reason, as we all know based on
child development is, is important.
It has serious ramifications. So that within itself, which is
something potentially innocuous but big and long lasting in
children's lives. Yeah, absolutely.
(19:25):
So he's saying that that it's a benign, it could be a more
benign situation that we're trying to protect for then that
meant that that's the argument that you don't need to be
keeping it from the parents. If it's not a fear of abuse,
then you really shouldn't be keeping it from the parents.
So. This just you know, I got from
(19:46):
Miss Smitty in the back channels.
According to USA TODAY, there isno evidence of any relation to
Brian Thompson and Nancy Pelosi insider trading.
So thank you, Miss Smitty. OK.
But yeah, I mean, I mean, I guess it's not, I mean more, I
said more benign, but I, I absolutely think that that's a
(20:10):
sad prospect, right? Not being accepted by your
parents. And I don't know, I'm not a
psychologist, but I feel like that would be that that would be
abuse to me. I mean, to, to be unaccepting of
your child and who they really are, that that's, that can be
some form of abuse, but maybe that it doesn't meet the
threshold of abuse, I guess. So that's why I chose to use the
(20:33):
phrase not less benign or not asbenign or more benign.
So it's, it's a tough situation here people.
That's why the government needs to remain neutral.
Neutral. Right.
That's all I'm advocating for isthe best.
(20:54):
What's what is best? I'm, I'm asking more questions.
I don't really, I'm not coming down on what we should do.
I'm just advocating for more science, more studies,
longitudinal studies. We want what's best for the most
people, right? And every individual is could
(21:16):
potentially have a, you know, best alternative set of
approaches, right? We're all individuals, so we
can't apply a broke blanket approach to all people.
Yeah. It's just there's certain things
that we have to unfortunately, we can't just ask before there's
any danger present. You can't say, oh, I'm not going
(21:39):
to tear your parents just because you said you think that
they might be abusive or angry when you don't even really know.
And it's also third party like situation.
You're not even talking to the parents.
So how do you know that's their their abuse?
If you're going by a child that may just have a strained
relationship with their their parents and you're going by
that, it's just like if you wereto go report a missing person,
(22:03):
you have to meet a threshold of all of these things before they
would even file a missing report, right?
So or, or the other, the other example I was going to do,
there's like you, you have to meet a threshold to be able to
do these things. And I feel like there's not
enough of that is required before making these decisions.
(22:27):
Oh, you said your parents are going to be angry at you and be
abusive. If you OK, we're just going to
keep everything from them. So no, no investigation, no
attempt to to find out anything,nothing.
OK. Yeah, so let's see.
So let me read another little bit of this paper here 'cause
(22:51):
this might fire some people up for comments.
It will definitely trigger some thought process.
So let's see. I'll go ahead and go into, I
guess, the general discussion from the paper.
Like most scientists and social and personality psychologists
are on average more liberal thanthe general population according
(23:14):
to a Gallup poll of 2010. Yet we also find in two studies
that their political ideology ismore diverse than often assumed.
On economics and foreign policy,a sizable minority describe
themselves as moderate or conservative.
Indeed, although only 6% describe themselves as
(23:34):
conservative overall on economicand international affairs, our
sample already meets or exceeds the 10% quota that Hyde 2011
suggested as a 10 year target for ideological diversity.
Why then, did Height have difficulty finding more than a
(23:57):
handful of conservative colleagues?
The current results suggest one answer.
Members of the conservative minority are reluctant to
express their political beliefs publicly.
Survey two shows why hostility toward and willingness to
discriminate against conservatives is widespread.
(24:18):
One in six respondents said thathe or she would be somewhat or
more inclined to discriminate against conservatives in
inviting them for symposia or reviewing work.
One in four would discriminate in reviewing their grant
applications. 25% grant applications.
(24:43):
That's funding of research. 25% said openly that they would
discriminate against a Conservative grant application
for study. More than one in three would
discriminate against them when making hiring decisions, so 33%
(25:03):
would discriminate would not hire somebody who is openly
conservative. Thus, willingness to
discriminate is not limited to small decisions.
In fact, it is strongest when itcomes with to the most important
decisions, such as grant applications and hiring.
This hostile climate offers a simple explanation of why
(25:24):
conservatives hide their political opinions from
colleagues. Given all given that all
academics depend on the opinionsof their colleagues who judge
their papers, grants and job applications, and given that
such judgments are typically made by multiple reviewers, most
of whom are liberal, this means that outspoken conservatives
(25:46):
face a very serious problem. Hence, the more conservative
respondents are, the more they hide their political opinions.
So that's problematic, right? Absolutely.
Yep. That's, that's nuts.
(26:06):
Actually, that's crazy that they're, that's them being
honest. It's probably some people not
being so honest. Right.
That's them being honest, which is probably going to lean
towards them representing themselves in a better light
than than they really are. And it's still and it's still
really bad. It's still really bad so.
(26:33):
Yeah. And this and this proves what I
ran into when doing research, trying to counter the public
popular narrative on this topic,that there is research, but it's
buried by research that's just patting other research on the
back. Like so and so said in their
paper, Da da da da da da. Like so and so said in their
(26:54):
paper, but not actually doing a study.
Yeah. And, and like Dre said, it would
be fantastic to do. And I'm excited that he asked
because I've, I've been wanting to ask him, but I, I was a
little intimidated honestly. But I've got stacks of, of peer
(27:17):
reviewed papers from when I was doing my research.
So I've got these these papers that I can pull out and we can
talk about. All.
Right, let's do. IT students, you're going to
mess around and make me go back to school, Der.
Yeah, I I couldn't, I couldn't say more about school.
(27:38):
I think everybody should should take at least a class, you know?
What? That's true.
I should at least take one glass, huh?
Yeah. And then once you do, you
realize like it's just a great way to remember that life is
short and that we, we only get one go because it, it reminds
you like, oh, a semester. Otherwise, life just slips by
(28:00):
and you think of like 05 years ago, 10 years ago.
But when you have to think aboutthings in terms of a semester,
it really makes you cram more into life and makes you
appreciate the smaller aspects of life.
Right, right. And I need, you know, what I
need to do is switch my, my thinking because I have a fear.
(28:21):
I love educating education and Ilove school.
I love, you know, I went back and got my degree for graphic
design at an older age and I wasthinking about going back to get
my psychology degree, but I was like so intimidated about the
amount of time as well as testing.
I cannot stand testing. I am, I am a predominantly
(28:43):
creative mind. So tests scare the crap out of
me. If it's not a subjective like,
you know, draw a circle with, you know, draw your
interpretation of this, you know, like it's like.
Right. But but that's also just
programming and hype, right? Don't don't believe the hype,
(29:03):
right, because we are amazing creatures, right?
Like so. And I'm a living example that
if, if you heard, if you make the decision that you're going
to make something a priority, you could do it.
I told myself 90% of my life I couldn't do math and that's what
kept me from going to school. Well, then I shifted my outlook
(29:25):
and was like, I'm going to beat math.
I'm going to find well what the minimum requirement is and I'm
going to do anything I need to do to pass that damn class, and
I got a beat. Right, yeah, I mean, I took all
my math classes at least twice in high school, but I I aced him
the second time is because I hadto take it.
(29:47):
I had to completely focus on it when I took it during the year
and I had to deal with all of myother curriculum.
I just couldn't do it. I just could have had to have
the summer. Every summer of high school was
dedicated to freaking doing overmy math class.
It is, but I would always get inthe summertime, so.
(30:07):
Yeah, and for some people, the struggle will be English or
whatever, but, you know, whatever.
Each person will have their unique struggle.
Some people will just raise their school.
Those people lucky. But it's all doable, right?
With developed study habits, youknow, and the help of the school
and the tutoring center. Whatever.
(30:28):
I lived at the tutoring center all through that semester for
math, you know, and I took a class on like how to be, how to
study, to try to learn the most efficient ways of learning and
stuff like that. So there's some simple things
that you can do to make it easy,but.
Yeah. But it's, you know, I suggested.
(30:53):
Yeah, even if it's even if it's just for personal enrichment.
Oh, I know what I was going to say.
He said you were concerned aboutthe time commitment.
Well, guess what? That time is going to go by
anyway. So as a thought experiment,
envision yourself. OK.
Worst case scenario, imagine howlong it would take.
OK, 10 years. I will.
(31:15):
Be. 6 Now Now imagine yourself 10 years in the future if you
don't do that. Yeah, yes, this is true.
This is true. Because that time's going to go
by anyway. Oh my.
Gosh, it's so. Much Well that well that that's
if you take like two classes here, two classes there.
I mean you could grind it out. Yeah, no, it would have to
(31:37):
because I have to work so. Well, there you go.
So worst case scenario, you know, 810 years, something like
that. And then you're, then you're in
psych, then you're doing psych, you're doing therapy.
You're, you know. Yeah, I'm.
I'm I'm still thinking. About it but if I had a gun is
the first time I thought about it Well, the first time I
(31:58):
thought about it I was like 19 but.
Don't even start with that. Yeah, if since I just recently
started thinking about if I had pulled the trigger, I'd already
be about 3-4 years in, so. Well don't even start with the
shitty putter widows. The last time I was, the last
time I was in college before this was 2011, and I was 42.
(32:26):
And I allowed myself to get talked out of studying
psychology because, oh, it's going to be too long.
I mean, it was totally my passion and it was the number
one thing I was interested in atschool and still am just
fascinated, love learning more and more about how our brain
works and trying to figure out why.
(32:47):
Yeah. All right, that's it for this
episode. Thanks for tuning into another
(33:08):
episode of And Another Thing with Dave.
And remember, if you're digging what I'm doing, picking up what
I'm putting down, please spread it around with friends and on
social media. Reviews on Spotify, podcasts,
and Apple Podcasts are greatly appreciated.
Alright, until next time.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Betrayal: Weekly
Betrayal Weekly is back for a brand new season. Every Thursday, Betrayal Weekly shares first-hand accounts of broken trust, shocking deceptions, and the trail of destruction they leave behind. Hosted by Andrea Gunning, this weekly ongoing series digs into real-life stories of betrayal and the aftermath. From stories of double lives to dark discoveries, these are cautionary tales and accounts of resilience against all odds. From the producers of the critically acclaimed Betrayal series, Betrayal Weekly drops new episodes every Thursday. Please join our Substack for additional exclusive content, curated book recommendations and community discussions. Sign up FREE by clicking this link Beyond Betrayal Substack. Join our community dedicated to truth, resilience and healing. Your voice matters! Be a part of our Betrayal journey on Substack. And make sure to check out Seasons 1-4 of Betrayal, along with Betrayal Weekly Season 1.