A central principle in ethical reasoning is distinguishing between inherent wrongness (wrong in all circumstances) and contingent wrongness (wrong only in certain circumstances). When evaluating whether something is morally wrong, one must identify the specific wrong-making feature that makes it wrong. For example, if being gay is wrong only because society treats gay people poorly, then the wrongness is not inherent to being gay but to society's response to it. This distinction is crucial for avoiding logical contradictions in moral arguments, as demonstrated when a debater claimed being gay is a mental illness while simultaneously accepting that infertile heterosexual couples can stay together, revealing an inconsistency in their reasoning.
There's nothing wrong with being gay [5/29/2026]Hinzugefügt:
What? Okay, there. That's the one.
Hey, how's everyone doing?
How are we all feeling out there?
Happy Friday indeed. Isn't it?
That wasn't even the one I was looking for. I was looking for the other one.
Yeah. I don't know. I'm like super tired, but nevertheless, I hope everyone's having a great day.
Um, okay. Yeah. How we all doing? How we all feeling? I've started my uh my slow reread of uh On Virtue Ethics by Rosland Hurst House. I'm super excited for it.
That's what we're doing. The book club.
Um I think the the very first meeting of it is going to be on uh June 6th.
Um it's on virtue ethics. What is it?
The introduction in chapter 1. Is it that? Um I don't know which Molly let me know. Um I I think that's what it is. But yeah, you just got to read the introduction in chapter one. Um it's going to be a great time. Virtue ethics is um like a really fruitful theory that has like like truly like a ton of depth to it. Um so I would be I don't know. I'm really looking forward to to reading through this with everyone. There's also a PDF available if you're interested. Um I think it's in the it's in the Discord like the like the book PDF. Just ask for it. Someone will give it for you. Give it to you. But anyway, if you're in that guest request box, make sure that you're 18 or older. Oh, um, it's just the intro. That's great. That's excellent.
Yeah. Um, only the intro. We'd love to see you there. All right. Um, if you're in that guest request box, make sure that you're 18-year-old. Make sure that you think that there is something wrong with being gay. And with that, we'll go to the very first guest.
>> Hey, how's it going? Hey, doing well.
How are you doing?
>> Doing pretty good.
>> Yep. How old are you?
>> 28 years old.
>> Yep. And do you think there's something wrong with being gay?
>> Uh, yeah. My my insides, if I've seen two men kiss, man, it's kind of disgusting.
>> Okay. So, do you think that if something's disgusting to you, like if you get a disgusted reaction from something that that means that it's wrong?
>> Yeah, for me it is. Yeah.
>> Okay. So, when you think about your parents having sex, does that fill you with like a disgusting feeling?
>> No. No. No.
>> But if you were to like visualize it, like if you were to stop and actually try to visualize your parents having sex, >> would you get a disgusted reaction from trying to visualize that?
>> Uh, no. That's what you don't get.
That's kind of weird. I mean, if I were to if I were to imagine my parents having sex, I'd get pretty revolted by that.
>> It's a man and a woman. That's pretty natural. But two men kiss. I think it's like super weird that I'm kind of disgusted by the fact that you're not disgusted by like trying to visualize your parents having sex.
>> That's kind of disgusting that you're >> I think it's kind of I think it it's probably pretty wrong. Oh, you think it's disgusting? So, you do think it's disgusting. Why would I have >> I thought it wasn't disgusting. Why would it be disgusting to try to visualize it if it's not disgusting?
>> You ever watch a You ever watch a movie with a man and a woman kissing?
>> You got exposed as lying just now, it seems.
>> Why would it be disgusting for me to try to visualize it if there's nothing disgusting about it?
Have you ever seems like it is disgusting?
>> Have you ever watched a movie with two men kissing?
>> Uh, not that I can think of.
>> Yeah, cuz there's none cuz they know that it's repulsive.
>> I don't think that it's inherently repulsive, but I agree. The majority of the population might think that it's disgusting, but also >> there are like definitely gay shows >> wherein like gay people are kissing.
>> Are there any foods that you find disgusting?
Uh, >> no.
>> Not a single one, dude. [ __ ] goat. Do you think anybody believes you? Not a single food you find disgusting. Not one.
King E, if you're off the app, can't hear you. You got to be on the app.
I think he ran. I think he realized how [ __ ] stupid that was. Then he ran.
I don't know. Kind of incredible like how how utterly able to to lie that dude is.
Oh, wait one sec. It's getting hot in my apartment.
Whoa. Thanks for the raid, AG. Welcome in. Welcome in. Um, if you're in that guest request box, if you want to debate this topic, if you think that there is something wrong with being gay, then feel free to request to join.
Let's go to the very next guest.
Hey, how's it going?
>> Yeah. How old are you?
>> So, I'm 30.
>> Yep. And do you think there's something wrong with being gay?
>> Uh, yes, I do. I think it's a selfish lifestyle. Produces no children. I think um it's danger.
>> Who cares if it doesn't produce children?
>> You might not care, but um >> Well, I'm asking like why is it wrong to be in a relationship that doesn't produce children? Like, okay, let me give you an example. Let's say that there's like a straight couple. They fall in love in high school. Um, and then they stay in a relationship, I don't know, 14 years, and then they turn 30. And then at that point, they tried to reproduce, you know, they try to have a child, uh, and they discover that actually the woman is infertile, that they can't have any children together.
Do you think it would be wrong for them to stay together?
>> Do I think it'd be wrong for them to stay together? Yeah, >> they they could adopt. Uh they >> some gay people. Do you think it's But the question was, do you think it's wrong for them to stay together?
>> You think that would cause problems in their relationship?
>> Well, sorry. The question is, do you think it would be wrong for that couple to stay together? You've kind of dodged it twice. Two two unique dodges each time. I just want a yes or a no. Do you think it's wrong?
>> No, I wouldn't say it would be wrong, but it could be.
>> Also, I think uh being gay is a mental illness. So, so to be clear, let's just make sure that we're we have like clear goalposts so that every time they shift, um, it's just made apparent that they've moved. So, at first you said that the reason why being gay is wrong is because it doesn't produce any children. But now it sounds like you agree. Well, okay.
But you would agree that a relationship that doesn't produce children isn't necessarily wrong.
>> Well, it's going to cause problems, right? It's a problem.
>> But is it wrong?
>> Uh, it's a problem.
>> But is it wrong? Um, I wouldn't say it's wrong.
>> Okay. Sure. Yeah. So, why is being gay wrong now that the first criteria failed?
>> Also, I think it's a mental illness. I think you have a high rate of disease.
And >> let's go let's go one silly claim at a time. When you say mental illness, what do you mean?
>> So, up until everything got PC, being gay was considered a mental illness.
Also, you guys have high rates.
>> That's Whoa. You're so desperate to pivot. I don't know why you keep trying to pivot away from your own claims. It's like you're scared to actually talk about the evidence. Whoa. Just calm down. Stop getting triggered, Snowflake.
Seriously, just take a deep breath.
Like, calm down and let's talk about it.
So, I asked you for a definition of mental illness. And then your definition of mental illness is quote, uh, before everything got PC in the 1950s, it was considered a mental illness. Do you think before everything got PC in the 1950s, it was a mental illness? Is a definition of mental illness?
>> I didn't say it was definition. I said it was a fact. I was asking you for a definition.
>> You really think two guys having gay sex is >> Okay. So, your definition of mental illness is you really think two guys having gay sex isn't a mental illness.
>> Is that correct? That's your definition of mental illness.
>> Yes, it is. You have a mental illness.
>> Okay. I think you might be stupid if you think that that's a definition of a mental illness. If you think that a definition of mental, like when somebody says, you know, that person has a mental illness, you think what they're saying is, you know, you think, if you think two guys having sex isn't a mental illness, uh, then there's might be something wrong with you. I I think you might just be a bit confused about language, you're being stupid.
>> Gender dysphoria. Do you think >> Why do you keep trying to pivot away from your own points? Let's get try number three. Now that your first two attempts have failed, what would be your criteria for a mental illness? What makes something a mental illness?
>> What makes something a mental illness?
>> Yeah.
>> When it's destructive uh personality flaws.
>> Okay. Are there any gay people without destructive personality flaws?
>> Sure. They have a high rate of AIDS.
>> Okay. Then you would concede then that not all gay people are mentally ill.
>> Uh it is a mental illness for sure. Um >> but you just said Whoa, that's a contradiction. You just said that a mental illness is when you have personality flaws that are destructive, but you just conceded that not all gay people have that. So being gay can't possibly be a mental illness.
>> So you're going to say being gay isn't a destructive personality trait.
>> You agree that there are some gay people that don't have destructive personality traits?
>> Well, I they have a higher rate of AIDS.
They have higher rate >> Why do you keep trying to pivot, dude?
Is there a reason why you're terrified of your own points? That's destructive.
That's >> It's like you're terrified to actually discuss the things that you say. And I can't blame you, right? Like the points are really bad. They fall apart immediately. But let's not pivot. Let's stick and talk to it.
>> I don't want to.
>> You said specifically that being gay is a mental illness. Your criteria for something being a mental illness is that it has destructive personality traits.
But you agreed that not all gay people have destructive personality traits, which means that you'd have to agree that not all gay people have a mental illness, which means that you can't possibly say that being gay is a mental illness because if it were, then all gay people would have a mental illness.
>> Not all alcoholics are unhealthy.
>> Oh my god, dude. Do you even want to attempt to engage with the argument?
>> Well, you're making these straw man arguments. Uh, >> it's literally your point. Oh gosh.
>> They have a high rate of child molestation. They have a high rate of He's still trying to pivot. Dude, why are you so scared of your own talking points?
>> Why are you ter Whoa. Why are you terrified to just talk about the things that you say?
>> No, I'm listening to you.
>> Okay, so maybe I could uh I don't know.
I don't know if this would be helpful for you. I'm more of like a visual learner. I'm not going to drop you. I'm having lots of fun. Uh so your criteria of a mental illness was something like um a destructive personality trait.
Um, okay. So, let's go through and like formalize this. So, premise one, being gay is a mental illness.
>> Premise two, um, if something is a mental illness, then uh, it is a destructive personality trait.
Premise three. Um, uh, >> being >> Yeah. Okay. Wait. So, so being gay is mental illness. If something's a mental illness, a destructive personality trait. Uh, there are some gay people, there are some people who are gay and do not have destructive personality traits. Do you understand how these are contradictory?
that these three things together can't possibly be true.
>> This is just silly, right?
>> I agree. Yeah, the three things that you've agreed to are very silly, you know. I agree. The fact that you're contradicting yourself is silly.
That's the sound of you choking on my rhetorical dick, by the way.
>> Oh god, this is so [laughter] Yeah, I'm sure there's one or two gay guys out there that are >> sure. So then being gay isn't a me mental illness.
>> It is. Being an alcoholic there.
>> By mental illness, you mean a destructive personality trait.
>> Magic Johnson. Magic Johnson's probably healthy, right? He's had AIDS since the 90s, right? Uh being gay is destructive.
>> Maybe you're like a visual learner. Like I'm not really clear what the issue is, like why you're like profoundly stupid.
>> You could put that same analogy with any disease. You could say put it with degenerate gamblers. Some degenerate gamblers win money, but it's not a positive personality trait.
>> I don't think I'd say being a gambler is a mental illness, unless there's a specific mental illness that's associated with the way that you're gambling. And then the mental illness would not be the gambling. It would be the specific way that you're going about doing it.
>> I think you're just very confused.
>> No, you're confused. You have gender.
>> Okay. You're saying that being gay >> blah blah blah.
>> Okay. So, so I drew I drew you like a little little picture. Let me label this for you.
>> Okay. So, I got I got point A and point B. Um, so let's let's let a point let's so this circle is like the circle of all the things that are mental illnesses.
And you're saying that being gay is one of them. And what you mean by a mental illness is, you know, a thing that leads to destructive personality traits. I'm saying higher.
>> So then let's go ahead and shade this in and that's going to represent all the things that have destructive personality traits.
>> Blah blah blah. Being gay is not a positive quality in your life.
>> Okay. So you would agree that the things that are shaded in are the entirety of the things that are mental illnesses, right?
>> Was this too much? Did even like the the visual display confuse you?
>> That's a stupid low IQ.
>> He tripped over his like two brain cells, dude. Holy [ __ ] >> You could say that [ __ ] spawn killed again. Can you imagine failing to track like genuinely like the simplest argument?
>> You're you're a child molester and you're going to have AIDS and I'm going to laugh. [laughter] >> Do you have any evidence?
>> You're hired in you're hired in per capita.
>> Did Did you lose the debate so [ __ ] hard that you had to make up alg about any [ __ ] >> You think logic is dumb? You think You think saying like your argument Whoa, calm down. No need to get upset.
>> Seriously, take a deep breath. There's no need for you to crash the [ __ ] out.
You're going to get AIDS and die.
>> I I'm not gay, but I understand how you might come away with the impression that I am the way that I've been blowing your [ __ ] back out this entire debate. You know, your face down, ass up, taking rhetorical back in a wheelchair. You know, if I'm gay, then you're gay, too, because you're still here despite the fact that you keep getting [ __ ] >> Anyways, u it's not positive. You could say your little argument about any destructive behavior. You could think about degenerate gamblers. You could say about alcoholics. Um it it's just a stupid >> Is there anything inherently wrong with being gay?
>> Yeah, it's it's a destructive lifestyle that >> inherently is it an inherently destructive lifestyle?
>> Yeah, it relates to it results in disease and death.
>> But is it an inherently destructive lifestyle? Does it inherently lead to disease and death?
>> Why why are gays higher than >> That's a yes or no question, by the way.
Are you physically capable of answering yes or no questions?
>> But this is just dumb. That's just a dumb argument. Like nine times out of ten anybody >> is it inherently >> leading to things like diseases? Is that an inherent feature of being gay is getting diseases?
>> Yes.
>> So there's no possible way to be gay and not get diseases.
>> I'm sure it's possible but it's >> another contradiction.
>> Why do you keep on contradicting yourself? It's like I'm actually skeptical that you're even like sentient. Frankly, the way that your thoughts are like directly contradictory one after another.
So, um, alcoholics are more likely to be involved in car crashes, right?
>> Wow. Another pivot. Still terrified of his own arguments.
>> Crash is hard tonight. It's just a stupid argument. It's low. IQ.
>> I wouldn't say that there's something inherently wrong with being a gambler or even inherently wrong with being an alcoholic depending on how it fits into your life.
>> It is wrong. It's a destructive lifestyle habit.
>> Inherently, is it inherently so?
>> Yes. It's going to ruin you.
>> But what if it doesn't? What if a person goes their entire life and they're able to make it fit into their life in a way such that they don't fail to fulfill any of their other obligations?
>> Oh, I'm I'm sure it's possible, but man, >> what's the wait and what would be the problem with that?
>> What would be the problem?
>> Yeah. Let's say you're gay and you don't get any diseases and you live like a good productive life. What would be the problem with that?
>> Nothing.
>> Oh, sure. So then you don't think that there's anything inherently wrong with being gay?
You know, it it's like >> is that correct? You don't think that there's anything inherently wrong?
>> Yes, there is inherently wrong.
>> Greg, you have like perhaps two IQ points. You just conceded the debate and you don't even realize that you conceded the debate, which makes you even stupider.
>> You may be like the dumbest person that I talked to all week, which is really surprising because I talked to some really stupid people this week.
>> If it's possible, then there's nothing inherently wrong with being gay.
>> It's very, very, very unlikely. The question is, is it inherently wrong?
>> Degenerate gamblers can live a productive life.
>> I didn't say that. I said gamblers in general could live a productive life.
There's nothing wrong with being an alcoholic. Yes, it's wrong. It's it's >> in so far as you're not destructive towards your own life. You fulfill your obligations. Uh you can drink as much as you want up until you start being destructive towards your obligations to self and your obligations to others.
>> That's a destructive and selfish lifestyle.
>> Okay, I disagree. I don't think that's necessarily true.
>> I'd agree that it was like a destructive and selfish lifestyle if you're failing to fulfill your obligations to self or your obligations to others. But in so far as you're doing both of those things, uh >> if you're going to talk gambler and alcoholic, somehow they pull it off and they live 80 years, it's like, yeah, I'm sure that's possible, but it's very very unlikely.
>> Sorry. Do you think like the average gay person like dies of AIDS?
>> Uh they're higher than the general population. What percentage of gay people have AIDS, do you think? Or like what percent of gay people die of from AIDS, do you think?
>> Globally, probably one in eight gay men acquire AIDS.
>> I thought you said that it was like the majority of them.
>> I never said that.
>> Kind of seems what you were implying.
>> That not hired. And >> so, first of all, I don't even think that that's true. In fact, I'm sure if we counted by like just absolute numbers, not per capita, there would probably be more straight people who die of AIDS.
>> Now you believe in per capita. Now you believe in per capita.
>> What are you talking about?
>> Cuz you with your little uh >> you're like hallucinating.
>> You're like shadow boxing. Is there some other conversation going on in your head?
>> No. Sorry. I'm being a cookie. But uh your little your little diagram, your little argument is stupid because you can relate to any problem. [laughter] >> He like shortcircuited to like 10 minutes ago.
>> His like slow [ __ ] brain finally popped that one off the stack.
Your brain has >> I'm slamming this dude at light speed, which is why he's experiencing like time dilation. You know, time has slowed down for him, which is why he's still stuck 20 minutes ago.
>> I don't think so. Uh, hey, I didn't install.
>> Uhuh. Nuh-uh. That's all he has.
>> Well, um, yeah. I hate talking to I hate low arguments. [laughter] >> Then you must hate everything that comes out of your mouth.
>> Oh, you love everything that goes in your mouth.
>> Yeah, sometimes.
>> Cuz you're degenerate. I also love the the insults that come out of my mouth.
You know, specifically the insults that are targeted to you.
>> And you know, you know who else likes when I put things in their mouth? Uh, your mom.
>> You get AIDS. I don't want to have >> I'm not gay, bud.
>> Yeah, you are on the waiting list.
>> I'm not even gay. I've already explained this to you. But because I've slammed you so hard, you have a concussion, which is why you've already forgot.
>> You have uh Oh, >> he's buffering.
Come on. You made >> Yeah. Go run like the same insult that you've already ran before, you know? Uh, is that the sound you make every single time you get rhetorically [ __ ] Uh, make the sound again, cuck. Make it again. Uh, >> you're pathetic. You're going to get AIDS. You should >> He keeps on cycling through the same insults. He's so unoriginal. He has like three insults in front of him, you know?
Uh, you're degenerate. Uh, you're going to get AIDS. Uh, you're degenerate.
That's all he can do. He's not creative enough.
>> So, hey, are you in a wheelchair right now? Because that would roll aids.
>> Nope.
>> AIDS ate your legs. Oh, good for you.
Good for you.
>> Wow. Got the whole squad laughing with that one.
>> Also, by the way, he tried to tell that joke earlier, too.
[laughter] Literally, he keeps on recycling his jokes. This is all the material that he has.
>> I need a joke. Gay boy.
>> Is there a reason why you can't come up with like original insults or jokes?
>> If I gay gay boy, that one's [ __ ] original.
>> It would be a hate crime.
>> If you did what?
>> Dude, if I dropped you on your head, you'd be crying for a hate crime.
>> If I keep debating with you, people are going to start thinking it's ableist, quite frankly.
>> Um >> um he made the sound again. Yeah. Good boy. Good boy. Good cou. Yeah, I keep on making those sounds every time I rhetorically [ __ ] you. We could bash disabled people that are disabled. I [laughter] know.
>> Wait, so you are disabled? You do have like like a mental disability.
>> No, it's okay.
>> Cuz otherwise, Wait, which uh which disabled person am I bashing? If if indeed uh you don't have a mental disability, then who's the disabled person that's getting bashed right now?
>> Cuz as far as I can see, the only person that's getting bashed in this conversation is you by a long shot.
>> It's honestly kind of disgusting. Why?
Why do you feel okay to bash people with with a disability?
>> He's like cry bullying now, dude. He's pearl clutching. He's clutching his pearls as hard as he [ __ ] can. Every conservative turns into a triggered little snowflake as soon as you start bullying them back.
>> You just said you looked up to me with tears in your eyes from your your 56 stature and said, "Please, Ian, please stop making fun of that group of people, Ian. Please, Ian."
>> When gays when gays came in here trying to bully, trying to be a disgusting, vitriolic piece of [ __ ] And as soon as somebody bullies him back, he wants to pearl clutch and cry. He wants to [ __ ] and moan.
>> Hey, when gays, >> he's making the the getting [ __ ] sound again. Good boy.
>> When gays, >> you keep getting rhetorically [ __ ] by me, and I can't even blame you. Who wouldn't want to take a ride on this rhetorical hog? And all he can say is, "You're not. You're not." Oh, alcoholics are >> Oh, I didn't say that. But I've slammed you so hard that you have a confession.
>> Well, when gays were bullied and kept in the dark, it was better for their own interest. They weren't having gay sex.
>> What's the argument for that?
>> What's the argument that that's better for their interest?
>> They weren't able to spread diseases.
>> What's the argument that that's better for their interest that they're not able to have gay sex? You can have gay sex and wear a condom and not spread diseases. Did you know that? Were you aware of that?
>> Yeah. Like gays do that. Gays have vowed to partners over a lifetime.
>> And if you want more gay people to wear condoms, you know what you should support? You should support inclusive sex ed that tells people about how to have safe gay sex. That if somebody is going to engage in gay sex, we should be encouraging them to use condoms.
>> You actually don't value the reduction of diseases at all, which is why you don't support things like safe sex and sexed. Well, there's no such thing as gay sex. It's like what if you wear a condom?
>> You still have a risk of getting AIDS or herpes.
>> Well, then by this logic, there's no such thing as safe sex ever.
>> Poo poo sex. Poo poo sex.
>> Is that what you're saying? You that that's you're saying that there's no safe sex ever. So, no sex is ever safe.
Is that correct?
>> Yes. If two >> Holy [ __ ] dude. You don't think there's ever an example of anybody straight or gay having safe sex? It's never happened. God, you're [ __ ] stupid.
>> Yes. Um, [laughter] >> has there ever been an instance of safe sex in the history of humanity?
>> Yeah. Two virgin couples having sex.
>> Okay. But one of what if one of them has um from their their parents uh some sort of STD just genetically?
>> So you prove my point.
>> Is there is there a a zero chance or a nonzero chance of that happening?
>> Sure. But you're talking about Sure. So then it's not safe sex. So then let's try let's get try number two for this trepid trogite.
>> Are you really going to compare?
>> Can you give me a single example? Whoa.
Calm down there. No need to get upset.
>> Are you going to really compare?
>> Whoa. Calm down. Chill out. Calm down.
Deep breath. It's going to be okay. It's going to be okay. Just dial it down, [ __ ] You know, >> calm down, mouth breather. There's no need to be getting this upset.
>> I understand that you're triggered. I understand that the debate keeps going bad for you. I understand that every time you pipe the [ __ ] up, you keep getting beat the [ __ ] down. Which is why that all you can do is make your little cuck noises at your high-pitched cuck frequencies. [laughter] >> He's trying to cope laugh now, dude. He knows that he's rhetorically [ __ ] in this conversation.
>> Sure, there's a one in a billion chance.
Uh but gay sex is not one in a billion.
>> So then there's never ever safe sex under your criteria.
>> Sure.
>> Yeah. So, you reject that anybody has ever had safe sex ever? You're an idiot.
>> That is so stupid.
>> I agree. That's like the dumbest thing you've said. You're being stupid right now. Yeah.
>> You have a mental illness.
>> You just said that all sex is unsafe.
>> You're a [ __ ] Frankly, >> wait. So, why would it be wrong for gay people to have unsafe sex if every instance of sex of all time is unsafe?
>> You know what?
>> Why would that be a uniquely bad feature of being gay? I love.
>> You know what? I do know what's fun to do. What's fun to do is to beat you the [ __ ] down and humiliate you in front of tons of people as he tries to cope with his little cope laugh. Haha, he says, trying to sound like he isn't getting completely rhetorically annihilated right now.
>> Stupid argument.
>> Oh god, he's so upset.
>> Heterosexual couple uh having >> uh he made the cuck sound again. Good boy.
>> Married couple having sex.
>> Stunlock. not really dangerous.
>> But what if one of them contracts AIDS somehow? Or what if one of them, I don't know, contracts like some STD? Or what if one of them all along had an STD?
It's just a matter of chance that they eventually get it.
>> What then?
>> [ __ ] everything in sight.
>> They don't.
>> For example, not a single gay person would ever be willing to [ __ ] you.
>> Sexual partners over a lifetime. And somehow miraculously, not a single one would ever ever even consider even ponder sex with you.
>> Why do you guys have 1,00 >> 1,000? That's disgusting.
>> That's not true. What's the citation for there?
>> It is true. 18 to 60 years old.
>> 1860 years old.
>> 18 to 60 years old.
>> 18 to 60 source. Can I get the source?
>> Disgusting.
>> Can I get the source? What's the source for that claim?
>> [laughter] >> So that's a thousand.
>> Okay, I'm typing in the source. The source is haha. So when I type in haha, actually there's no source of that sort that comes up.
>> So your claim is uh gay people, this is like easily fact checkable. I don't know why you would ever [ __ ] do this because I can just easily pull up a study >> uh that disproves this.
How many gays and higher gays are child >> the average child >> gay have >> over a lifetime >> over a lifetime uh looks to be 10 to 23 >> that is such [ __ ] that is not >> no you get that gable.com >> you want that >> that's that is not even true. I've seen a thousand. You know that's not true.
>> You seen it where? On on Facebook.
>> You [ __ ] >> on goddamn X? Is that where you saw it?
>> Later, [ __ ] >> Oh, you got blown the [ __ ] out, dude.
Genuinely [ __ ] eviscerated.
I don't know. That's um this this topic is like a good rhetorical training ground because you just get to [ __ ] whail on people. you get to like low-key you go to like [ __ ] town on on these troglodites and he might not have been all there mentally. Um, you know, I may have been bullied some I may have been bullying someone who has like a like a severe illness and you know maybe that makes me a bad person but what makes me a worse person is that I'm not going to stop.
I'm going to keep on doing it.
All right, make sure you double tap it on that screen. Share it with your friends and all the good stuff. Is AG here? I saw AG earlier. Where is AG? You're more than welcome to come back up or come up if you want. Um, no.
I was uh I was doing the one v one for the clip.
Grammy, thanks so much for the super chat. Uh, guest, I would 100% deposit uh that being religious is way more in line with being inherently harmful than being gay. Do better. True facts based.
Andrew Coats, thanks so much for the $25 super chat. That's pretty stunlocked. I got stun locked by myself.
That's pretty vainy and girthy. Let's get a big big W for Andrew Coats. That's impeccable. Even Oklahoma, thanks so much for the super chat. Give his mother a son she can actually love.
True. This this dude is like ontologically embarrassing.
Embarrassing in all possible worlds.
Necessarily embarrassing.
Adam's arranged embarrassing wise.
Spaghetti. Thanks so much for the super chat. Is this guy's day sharing the one brain cell with Liam? True. They are the trinity but with like brain cells you know they it's one brain three persons one brain cell.
Dr. Fudge, thanks so much for the super chat. I fully support that entire conversation and how it went. Uh you YouTube won't let me say uh what I want and keeps making me edit this. Lol.
Whoa. I don't know. I wonder what it I wonder what it was actually supposed to say. But um huge W because that is $50.
There's a $50 super chat from Dr. Fudge.
Let's get a massive massive W for Dr. Fudge.
>> Hi, please get your claws out of my leg.
Ow ow ow ow ow ow ow. You you dumbass.
Hi. Hello. [laughter] >> Hey. How you doing?
>> I'm good. Well, I was before uh my friend's cat who's in heat decided to try and [ __ ] me out. Um this is this is very ratchet behavior. H how are you?
>> Yeah, doing well. Doing great. defend.
>> Yeah, I dropped out of the request cuz that first debate >> what?
>> Oh, you cutting out my love.
>> Sorry, I got to call. Um, but I I was saying that that first I I dropped out of the queue cuz that first debate was really [ __ ] good. I figured you were one v one.
>> Yeah, one v one.
>> It was it was a blast. I had a I had a time. But hey, if you're in that guest request box, make sure that you're 18 or older. Make sure that you do think that there's something wrong with being gay.
Guess we go to the very next guest.
Let's get him on up in here.
Maybe not. Maybe maybe Trench Chaplain won't be coming up.
You know, we uh we it doesn't need to be like a like a horrendous faith blood sports debate. Whatever kind of debate you'd like to have, we can have that debate. Um, you just got to be 18 or older and you do need to think that there's something wrong with being gay.
Um, I have nobody requesting to join right now. Up into the guest request.
>> Why is no one real?
>> I don't know. Hey, how's it going BB?
>> Hey, so I do got a story.
>> How old are you? 18.
>> Okay. Yeah. What makes you think that being gay is wrong?
>> My sister My sister cheated on her boyfriend. Okay. And she cheated on him with a 17-year-old. So, he's like, "All right, all is fair."
>> How's old How old is your sister?
>> She's like 20 and her boyfriend.
>> I don't know if I trust that laugh. Am I crazy?
>> Cuz he was like, "I'll be here if you [ __ ] me in the butt."
>> Okay.
>> All right. I'm not even going to risk that one, frankly.
>> No.
No.
>> Okay. Um, it's kind of gross, but uh, anyway, um, on to the next one.
>> Hey, how's it going?
>> Yo, what's up?
>> Yep. How old are you?
>> 19.
>> Yep. And do you think there's something wrong with being gay?
Uh, well, I wanted to see if I could challenge your question in general.
>> Okay.
>> You say there's there's nothing wrong with being gay, meaning you think that that's basically a fact.
>> Uh, is that true or >> Yeah, that there's nothing like inherently wrong with being gay.
>> So, you think that's a fact? That's something that is universally should be accepted.
>> Yes. Correct.
>> Why do you think that's a fact?
>> Uh, yeah. in so far as there's no wrong-making feature that in order for something to be wrong, there needs to be something in virtue of which it's wrong.
Um, but this would take the form as something that's unverirtuous. And you can be gay and be virtuous. So, clearly there's nothing unverirtuous about being gay. Uh, which means that it can't possibly be wrong.
>> Well, wouldn't wouldn't that be a different question? You're basically using a different word of virtue. And that I feel like if you're saying nothing is wrong with being gay, it doesn't have anything to do with if you have virtues or not.
>> Well, it does.
>> No, if virtue can coexist with being gay, then being gay does not get in the way of being virtuous, which means it's fine.
>> Exactly.
>> I don't have anything wrong with someone that's gay, but I don't I think it's something that goes against factual evidence based by science.
>> Like what?
the fact that two people were created.
Uh whether it's a creator or not of a creator.
>> You think that's science?
>> Yeah, creator implies a creator. So, you're going to have to back that up.
>> Well, okay. Also, uh science distinctly does not tell us that there were two people that came into existence. Science tells us that the entire population of Homo erectus over time turned into the entire population of Homo sapien. you know, we didn't come from like two people. We came from an entire species basically.
>> Okay. So, so if say if we're we're specific species, right? Then why why I mean do have you heard of any stories of there being uh animals that uh that um >> penguins >> engage in in sexual intercourse.
>> Yeah.
>> With the same species.
>> With the same species. Well, [ __ ] most of them with the same species. I assume you mean with the same sex. Um, for for the the same sex, uh, if you want like a good example of this, literally every single one of our closest ancestors, every single primate species, like gorillas, bonobos, orangutans, all of them, they all have been observed engaging in gay behavior.
>> I never heard of that to be honestly, so I I'll have to look into that myself. I mean, it's not like a common fact, you know, unless you've look like looked into it or something, >> but yeah, it's, you know, it's it's kind of strange >> that all of the species that are very similar to us engage in gay sex if we if if like it's unnatural for humans to do that.
>> Yeah.
I I can I can see I can see, you know, I don't have anything wrong with gay people to be honest because I I Yeah, I just uh I kind of wanted to like challenge a question and I I feel like I mean you pretty much gave me an answer straight up that that doesn't really leave me to like question it further more. I mean >> it's just more of a societal thing where you know we just base things off of labels and stuff like that and >> action doesn't really A lot of people would like to talk against gay people just because of action.
>> Well, hey, thanks so much for coming on out. Appreciate you. Um, hey, well, make sure you're double tapping on that screen, sharing it with your friends.
Uh, appreciate that he's, uh, willing to change his mind and whatnot. That's pretty chill. Um, but hey, if you're in that guest request box, make sure that you're 18 or older, and make sure that you do think that there's something wrong with being gay. Um, all we have is that one 14-year-old who um, I don't know, >> mods, can we can you can you like please block like the the person in the guest request box? You know, if you get if you come up here and then I kick you because you're like obviously not 18.
>> Matter of fact, I'll do it by based. Um uh but yeah, >> I have something to say. Like [ __ ] you do.
>> Yes. Yeah. Uh nope.
>> I don't know, dude. Go say something in your Socratic seminar about to catch her in the the [ __ ] [ __ ] catch her in the ride.
>> You love to catch her in the ride. to Yeah, exactly. Gosh, >> my favorite book.
>> I keep stun locking myself. Brutal. Um, but anyway, uh, currently I have nobody in the guest request box. You have to be 18 or older and you have to think that there's something wrong with being gay.
If you don't fit either of those criteria, simply don't request to join.
Um, but I would love to debate you otherwise. Otherwise, I'll have to yap and fill the time. Um, here's how I'll fill the time. If you want to um if you want to learn more about ethics, like for example, the ethical system that I was just talking about, you know, virtue ethics, we're currently doing a reading group in the Discord. It's discord.gg/allegleedgedly Ian. We're reading Rosland Hurstous on virtue ethics. It's going to be an exciting time. Um the very first meeting is going to be just the introduction chapter. Make sure you come having read it. It's uh June 6th. I'd love to see you all on June 6th. If you're 18 or older for the book club, it's discord.gglegedly Ian. It's in my bio. I would absolutely love to see anyone there. I think um I think on virtue ethics is a really good book currently in the introduction. I'm like rereading back through it. Um you absolutely can. Rosland Hurst House, don't say that you're too stupid to read it. You absolutely could. Rosland Hurst House is an extremely clear writer. Um she's there are some philosophers that are really bad writers. Rosland Hurst House is not one of them. Um her her words are like exceedingly clear. It's like crystal clear. Um it's you can absolutely do that. um right now in the the portion that I've read so far, she's going through like the history of philosophy and specifically the history of ethics and about how um at the time she was writing it, virtue ethics had resurged after having like faded into the background since the time of Aristotle um in in favor of more um like modern moral philosophies like deontology from Kant or utilitarianism from John Stewart Mill. um and how virtue ethics has made like a resurgence.
But I don't know, it's going to be exciting. I still have no nobody requesting to join. I might need to switch topics or something. Wouldn't that be sad? Um it could be well h that is unusual for the number of viewers, >> isn't it?
>> Yeah, there should be someone given this many viewers surely. Um Oh, >> hey. How's it going?
>> What's up?
>> Yeah. How old are you?
>> 26.
>> Yep. And do you think there's something wrong with being gay?
>> No. Uh but >> okay.
>> Well, that was shortlived.
>> It was. Well, we have another super.
Vintage Atheist. Thanks so much for the $2 super chat. Just saw that $41 super chat. Legendary burn. Yeah, that was crazy. Uh, Liam really got nuked from orbit with that one.
Game master flash, thanks so much for the super chat. The first instance actually recorded between humpback whales was two males. That's interesting. That is a fun fact.
I don't know. Pretty crazy. Maybe I'll hit a reset really quick.
>> Okay, wait before you do that. Yeah, >> Grim, thank you for the $10 on Cash App, beloved. That was very kind.
>> Whoa. Grimlock, thanks so much for the $10 in cash app for the hydration donation.
>> Wait.
Sorry, this is awkward. Uh, yeah, let me fill the air time with something.
Um, where the [ __ ] Maybe I should swear less.
I'm out here swearing like a sailor.
Okay, that's pretty lit. Um, sure.
Sorry, I'm uh I'm restarting with a Tik Tok app right now for all those on YouTube. Um that's, you know, if there's this this awkward time that it's like, wow, Ian feels feels like Ian's like desperate to fill this awkward period of time. You're right. I am. I really wish my live studio would start up just a little bit [ __ ] quicker.
How could it be? How could it do this to me? Okay, wait. We're good. We're good.
We're good.
Okay, we're good. We're starting.
[snorts] Gosh, spare me.
Okay, let me drop that in there.
Hello. How was the feminist book club last night? I hope it was good.
I don't know. Maybe I'll need to maybe I'll need to come to one of those at some point.
I guess here's something that I could do. I could um I could start throwing together titles for [snorts] the video that I'm going to post.
Okay. Excellent. Impeccable.
Whoa. We have the the downgirl reading group.
Oh, that's right. That's right. What an excellent point, Molly. Thanks. Um, let me do that. That would be real embarrassing.
Okay. Okay. I think that we should be good. Um, well, make sure you're double tapping on that screen, sharing it with your friends, doing all the good stuff. If you're in that guest request box, I ask that you be 18 or older, and I ask that you have some reason to think that being gay is wrong.
>> Hey, how's it going?
>> Hey, can you hear me in?
>> Yeah. Uh, how old are you?
>> Uh, it's going okay. Um, I'm 26.
>> Okay. And do you think there's something wrong with being gay?
>> Um, I want to kind of clarify that. So, I don't necessarily think there's something wrong with being gay, but I do think it's okay for society to consider being gay taboo.
>> Why? Why would you want that?
>> [clears throat] >> So, um, why I'm going to say it like that is kind of because I've been listening to your arguments and kind of like, um, I agree with you like that it's not wrong, but that leads me to like certain other like troubling like logical problems like >> um, so I can you can think about it like a maximally um consensual relationship is like always going to be okay basically. So like a maximally consensual relationship would be like you know obviously they're well above the age of consent. There's no like harmful dynamic, right? Oh. Um, maybe.
>> Um, and so the problem that that creates for me is like incest stuff. And then like your I've heard your argument for incest, >> but I think like maybe my kind of defeater to that is like, well, what if it happens on a desert island, right?
Um, then is it incest permissible because they're away from society and they're presumably never going to return? And that troubles me.
>> Uh, yeah. I I guess I don't think well so that's like an interesting point but I think that you could stay consistent and say no that that wouldn't be fine for the exact same reason that you have like a familiar relationship to this person that like in the relationships that you have in your human life that there's like a very unique potential for this relationship like the relationship with with like just family members like people you're related to that you have different obligations towards your siblings than you do towards your spouse. house. You have different obligations to your children than you do towards your spouse. You have different obligations towards your cousins than you do towards your spouse. Um, and these obligations interfere with each other >> if you so it's >> I >> it's just like a like it it lowers the potential for your living a good life which I think is the kind of like the the standard of value is whether or not the life that you live is one that's like rationally successful.
>> I think I generally kind of agree with you. But I think the reason those different obligations exist, at least when it comes to familial romantic relationships, like an incest type situation, is because of the negative and harmful impacts it can have on society or on the child if a child is born by that relationship.
>> But in the desert in the desert island example, that doesn't exist. like for example like um two male cousins or two female cousins. Um they're away from society and presumably they'll never return. So their relationship will never impact society and how that um familial bond is kind of supposed to be in an idealistic way.
>> Yeah. This is just kind of not responsive to the the reason why I said that it was wrong. But also, I mean, if you're saying that it's wrong to be gay because of the effect that it has on society, but then your your reason why is because it's going to lead to us being accepting of incest, but then I'm giving you a reason for why incest is wrong, and you're saying, well, if we if we moved away from society, >> then that reason would no longer exist.
It just kind of seems like you want to talk about incest rather than like being gay.
>> Um, I want to clarify. So I don't think it's wrong to be gay and I wanted like that's why I said I think it's okay for society be to be tab for to consider it taboo and so um the reason so uh basically because if um okay so let me just start with why I'm talking about it like this. So uh I think that if it isn't then it leads to other troubling logical conclusions that >> because I think if um if like um maybe we can call them like like abnormal I guess like well if the only thing that matters in a romantic relationship is that it's maximally consensual.
>> It's not I don't agree to that.
I think that's kind of what it deduces down like okay where am I going wrong here then?
>> So what I think that your relationship needs to be is that it needs to be in line with like virtues.
>> So if the relationship is in line with the the core virtues then it's permissible. Um and that still prevents you from like lots of relationships that are considered like consensual. Like I don't think you should be having bad sex. I think you owe it to yourself to not be having bad sex. Um, and the virtue that having like lots and lots of specifically bad sex would be in violation of is temperance. That, you know, if you're sleeping with people every single night in a way that like the the sex itself is like just awful because you're settling for like the bottom shelf of people, I think you should probably re-evaluate that because you're just not enjoying sex in in a way that like treats things with its proper value.
>> Okay. I think I I think that makes a lot of sense and I think that um does I like I will totally concede the first part of my argument. Um, and so then maybe I'll talk about like why I think it's okay for um like abnormal and I don't mean abnormal in a like a rude way like just like maybe we can call them like non straight like relationships to be taboo in a sense um is because I think like society should push um the most amount of people towards the most successful path. Um because when like on a large scale when you're dealing with populations um I think it makes sense to push people to what kind of is tried and true. Um and so maybe the example for this is like um it's okay for some people to be traveling musicians. Some people can lead a good life as a traveling musician um and have success financially or um with their career and be happy. But um you know I think it would um probably not be successful for a large percentage of people if like 10,000 people tried to lead a life as a traveling musician.
>> Yeah.
>> Um and so I think like um for the same reason like um you know there's other things like maybe like um BDSM relationships. Uh there's not necessarily anything wrong with that.
like it's not it's not immoral to have a consensual BDSM relationship with your partner, but um you know I don't necessarily think that when we're talking about large populations that this should be something that's front and center. Um, so I think that for example, like what this doesn't mean, this doesn't mean that it's okay to treat um a gay individual in a like uh disrespectfully or in a way that uh you know subjects them to some like punishment or something like that.
That's absolutely not what I'm suggesting. What I am suggesting Oh, sorry. Yeah, you go ahead.
>> Yeah, just to interject really quick. Um I think the traveling musician example is probably disanalogous from being gay.
I think there's like kind of two features that would make me think that the first is that the traveling musician unlike the gay person can just go do something else. Like, you know, you could go work at Waterburger or something. You know, you could get like a job that you'll be successful at. Um people have like the ability to make that choice. Um like gay people, they can't choose to not be gay. But additionally, like the second part is that traveling musicians like it's very likely that you'll fail if if you try to pursue music unless you have like a very established career already or like industry connections or like some unique factor that would favor being a traveling musician. Um, I don't think that being gay leads to like a like a high chance that the that your life is going to go bad. So, I'm not really sure why we would want to like discourage people from being that if they are.
>> So, I um Yeah. So, I think your your argument there u makes a lot of sense.
Um and I want to clarify that I'm not suggesting that gay people should be discouraged from continuing to being gay. So what I am saying is something like a child or a juvenile person who is maybe figuring all this stuff out. I think that society should encourage them through the path of least resistance which is kind of the tried andrue way.
And so if that person, you know, maybe when they're, you know, coming into adulthood or something like that, they say, you know what, actually I am gay. Um, I don't think that person should be subjected to any any negative like they should be treated well and fine by the society. All that I'm saying is that it should be taboo in the same way that like a sex shop should have to have frosted windows because the BDSM relationship although moral should not be presented like you know what I mean like uh and I I agree with the um what you were saying about the traveling musician of the choice stuff but the point I'm trying to make is more that this like when we're dealing with broad populations the society should push people down this kind of triedand-true path if they stray That's okay. But like that's why we have certain like being a traveling musician might be taboo in the same way gayness is.
>> Wait. Okay. I think I'm a bit confused.
So what's your specific prescription for like what we should do when you say like we should push them down this path? Like what does that actually look like?
>> Um what that might actually look like is um you know let's say you're a parent and you have a young child um and Valentine's Day is coming up. Yeah.
>> And so maybe you give your child uh you know Hershey's kisses and say you know give these to the let's say your child is a boy and you say give these Hershey's kisses to the the girls in your class that you want to be your Valentine or something like that like I'm saying um and maybe like you know um sex education should focus on um safe sex um like you know obviously h well okay maybe I'm straying away like let's just focus on the Hershey's Kiss thing.
That's that's kind of what I'm saying.
>> So, I don't want to I know that this word has like a lot of like baggage to it, but are you basically saying like we should just like do heteronormativity?
>> Uh yeah, actually, yes. Yes, I am saying we should do heteronormativity.
And if people then say, you know what, I'm putting my hand up. I'm, you know, like um father or mother, I'm coming out to you. I'm gay. That should be perfectly acceptable. But I'm saying that it is okay for society to be heteronormative and like that's kind of what I mean by gayness as taboo.
>> So, okay, >> this harms gay people.
>> Yeah, >> very much so. Um, when you have let's go back to the uh the situation that you presented previously with uh a BDSM shop having the window frosted, right? This implies that the things inside of that shop are hidden so that when the general public walks by, they don't have to see it unless they choose to. Right? The difference here is that when it comes to seeing sexual things, um this this is something that you have to consent to.
So these things being frosted, that's fine, right? But the idea that society would have to consent to a gay person just existing is something that puts them on the margins. The issue with this is that it leads to outcomes like poor mental health or even to the point of maybe queer people unaliviving themselves. Um, as a queer person myself, pan specifically, uh, society treating queerness as a taboo has done nothing but harm me. Maybe this is fine for straight people because they don't have to worry about my existence, but unfortunately I do. So, >> okay. Um I I totally hear your point and I do think that you like certainly there's credibility to the fact that um gay or queer or trans people have been harmed by society in these kind of ways.
Um I think what I was really trying to clarify is that um individually people who um are gay or are you know um lesbian or bisexual or whatever um should it should be inappropriate for them to be mistreated on that fact. Um and I think I was fairly clear in clarifying that. I think that like you know if a father or if a mother or if a teacher or if a whoever uh police officer whatever mistreats a person on the beha on the basis of their sexuality or their gender or uh whatever that should be seen as like that is inappropriate that's like you know bullying or um whatever like it it is inappropriate.
Don't you think this is going to cause like lots of anguish in the lives of gay people that like as they're as they're figuring out their identity? This is going to be like really confusing because gay people, the existence of gay people isn't presented and it's, you know, they're you you'd have to go against like the way that people have been talking about you your entire life.
Like it just seems like this would cause like a whole bunch of like mental strife.
>> We actually can already see how this affects us. So I don't even know why you'd can want to continue the society in which have we've already done this like we push heteronormativity. We still do. We have people who compulsively um become heterosexual and then come out later in marriages and that they wouldn't have had to do that if they had the emotional literacy to say that I I've been gay or this this explains this. Um I just also like the word taboo has a negative connotation. So you even latching on to heteronormativity and taboo and acting like you don't want any any negativity to it is really odd because those it just doesn't really make any sense. Both of those things are negative.
>> You can't really say like I don't want negativity from it when those things literally systematically cause harm.
>> Also just to you know to to Broncos fan Jay in the comment section. You should hop in the guest request little bud. You know I'll shatter your ankles like you were Bo Nicks.
Um I okay I I think um so I think here like I am totally willing to agree that you know in so far as people are harmed by whatever the suggestion that I'm making then I would say that I'm wrong in in that part like I I definitely would not be my desire for anybody to be harmed be it you you know, anguish or self harm or um some sort of strife. Um and that's not what I'm that's not what I'm trying to um suggest at all. Um and maybe this maybe I need to do some more thinking about this and uh maybe I have some things I haven't considered. Um but I think like for example um yeah I don't I don't know because like doesn't there become like a bit of a tricky thing with like how much is enough even if we were to like say like okay we should have a maximally uh accepting culture and society then like what like what does that really look Like cuz isn't there always going to be at least one subject who feels that the society has not done enough for their specific um concern? You know what I mean? like >> like if I'm the the intersecting, you know, disabled, queer, transgender, um, you know, uh, like multi-racial person, then it might be like very unlikely that I get my specific day or something like that or that my specific concern is addressed in um, sexed day or something like that. And then like [clears throat] doesn't it become very cons like there there because um the there's like like a um a lot of different like options here and a lot of different um where you can have one of one and another of another and like it doesn't it become very difficult to have a perfect balance like that?
>> Well, no. [snorts] Because your initial suggestion was to treat queerness as a taboo. Now you're going from treating querness as a taboo to well if we don't treat queerness as a taboo then everyone's gonna have to accept the uh liberal stereotype cuz that's what you named by the way like you know what what do we do with with things that are taboo? We ostracize them. We we treat them like things to be stuffed away into into the closet. No pun intended. So I I don't understand that. You're you're saying like if we don't treat people like [ __ ] cuz I know you're saying that's not what you're saying, but that is what you're saying, though. If we don't treat people like [ __ ] then now the queer people are going to keep demanding more and more and more and more. But when what queer people are demanding are to be treated as equals, I I think we can leave it there. No, >> I think that's but I think I was also suggesting that they should be treated as equals. I think like I think maybe my question Um, okay. I mean, I may perhaps we have a different understanding of what that means. I was just suggesting that um like society in general should push um or should encourage young people down the path of least resistance. Um but I think I was very clear in qualifying that like you know if somebody chooses to step off that path that's perfectly acceptable. Well, but wait, it's only the path of least resistance because of things like heteronormativity.
>> You're saying we need heteronormativity to make sure that people go down the path of least resistance, which is being straight, and that's made the path of least resistance because of heteronormativity.
Um, you know, I I I debate religion quite frequently. Um, and to me this sounds like people saying like God made hell uh to to torture you infinitely as a punishment for the crime that you did that had the harm of getting yourself sent to hell where you'd get tortured infinitely. Like it seems like if you just removed the hell then kind of the problem would go away. And similarly like if you removed like the heteronormativity kind of the problem would go away.
>> That's an interesting argument. Um, >> can we please real quick, please?
>> Taboo does have a negative connotation.
Like I I'm confused as to how you didn't put that there. It always has.
>> Sure. Okay. Um when when I'm thinking about it, I'm thinking about like um like kind of what I was suggesting is like that the like in my example of the parent and the the young child who is uh going to school on Valentine's Day. Um, all what I was suggesting is that the the child should uh like if it's a male child or a female child or something like that, then the parent can go, you know, oh, here's some Hershey's kisses.
Give um, you know, give some Hershey's kisses to whoever you want to be your Valentine, like from the, you know, the girls in your class or the boys in your class.
>> Why would you add the extra bit? Why not just say go give this to whoever you want to be your Valentine?
>> Yeah, I think that's fair. Um, I I like I don't think it would be wrong to do that. Um Um, I think I think that's that's very fair. I think um maybe like I don't know part of what is uh like do you think the sex shop windows should be frosted? Maybe let's put it to that.
>> Yeah. Yeah, I probably do. Um I >> And so why right like isn't that tricky?
Like >> well no I think that that's like pretty straightforward which is just I think that like in general um you should like one of the things that I consider is that if you have the ability to um not I don't know like upset large groups of people you should probably do it if it wouldn't come at like some huge cost to yourself.
Um, so I think that that's true of like the sex shop. It's not like kids are allowed in there anyway, nor should they be. Um, and I I don't think that it I don't think that it comes to like a huge cost to yourself to like frost the windows, but it does, you know, spare like a lot of like anguish of people looking in there and seeing like some freaky [ __ ] you know?
>> Yeah. And I think I think that that's all that I'm suggesting. Like if the analogy is between um like maybe um like um like uh a queer or gay or something like that. Um sexual choice and the sex shop.
I think that in both examples, it's okay to um to step into that. it's okay to make that uh decision or to say this is part of my life. It's who I am. Um >> but it's not a sexual choice.
>> So yeah, sorry. Like um I maybe like I I totally accept that that it's not a choice. Um it's hard like I'm >> okay. I think like like romance. Oh, let me let me Yeah, true.
>> I think it totally is.
>> Don't say that.
>> Don't you think like if >> you seem sharper than the rest of them, you know that this is like a bad point?
Don't bite that bullet.
>> Let me I'm going to bite. I'm going to bite. So, okay. So, like let's imagine your >> Do you think that it's Do you think that when you say go and give these to whatever girl or like whatever person and have them be your Valentine, when you tell your fourth grade child to go do that, are you telling them to engage in a sex act?
Um, no, perhaps not. But I think it is maybe like protoexual. It's like it's courting. Yes, I think it is.
>> Here, let me Yes, I think it is. I think it is. So, for example, um like I can remember, >> let let me think. Let me talk. Let me talk. So, okay. So, I think um there's an experience that like I can remember that I think is probably fairly um universal where like you're on the school bus as um someone who's like just going through the puberty kind of age like when I was in middle school and like a pretty girl that I liked, we held hands and it, you know, it makes your heartbeat increase. It's like these I think that is romantic and I think it's um I think that you're maybe taking away from some of the finer points of that to say that these things are completely not romantic.
>> So you'd say well wait but so you'd also so we agree that they're romantic. We reject that romantic implies sexual.
>> Exactly. I think that it does and that means that you are encouraging children in your analogy to engage in what is essentially a sexual act.
>> Not a bullet you want to you'd be erasing asexual people cuz asexual people can be purely a-romantic and have no sexual desire but in your worldview every romantic decision they make would have to be inherently also sexual because you don't divorce them.
H okay that's the point about asexual people I think is really really tricky for my uh view and I I'm really just not prepared to I I think I don't have something for that but I think uh what I'm suggesting maybe is that these sort of I would say that romance is maybe like protoexual or something like that that these things are tied in a way that can't be untied.
For example, um it would be if somebody told you, I had a very romantic evening with my father, that would be inappropriate because I think it's tied even in your own mind to sexuality.
And so I think if you say it's not tied at all, then you must also be able to say it would be acceptable to have a romantic evening with you know your your father or something like that, right?
So, okay, I don't think that follows.
Um, I I think that like a distinction between relationships that are familial in nature versus relations that are like romantic in nature where like a like a romantic relation is specifically one where you and the other person are like planning on like building your lives together um as as as equals or like something kind of in that ballpark. I don't know. It's hard to hammer out the exact specifics, but um >> but like even what you're suggesting there sounds >> Well, yeah. partnership, romance. Yeah.
Yeah. Well, no, not necessarily. For example, if you're asexual, then that's not going to happen. But so, and for like the the father example, I think the other thing there is that that implies like a really problematic dynamic. Um, you know, if somebody said, um, well, okay, I I used to not know I used to think that like the daddyaughter dance uh was, you know, like you take your daughter to a dance, then you like dance with them. Um, and you know, I thought I thought that's like kind of weird, but it's like maybe fine. Um, but I I I mean, I I learned recently that it's like way more innocuous than that. That what it actually sounds like is like you bring your like four-year-old to a dance and then they like jump around with their friends on like the dance floor and you like sit and talk to the other dads. But, you know, that's, you know, nevertheless. Um, so I don't know. I think that if somebody said that they had a romantic evening with their father, I' I'd probably come to the conclusion that there's like like problematic dynamics there.
Um, okay. I think that's that um that makes sense. Um, so maybe Okay. What about the concept of because I think what you're saying is you're you're untying or you're trying to separate uh romantic things which uh from sexual things. Um, and so I think um but I think these two are distinctly tied. Um, and so maybe a point that I'll make is like if you've like heard of the concept of like bedroom eyes or like um you know like a a knowing look between two romantic uh partners which is implying some incoming um like sexual encounter or like a kiss or something like that which is more sexual. Um, I think that there are things which are like I I would say that romance and sexuality are distinctly tied in a way that can't be untied. Um, >> perhaps only in the example of the asexual person, which I do not have an argument for.
>> Um, and I would say that romance is maybe is could be basically just re renamed to like protoexual or something like that. Well, I the the common trait that you're picking out between romance and sexual, like the example you gave earlier that your heart is racing when you hold the girl's hand on the bus. I think the the trait that you're pointing towards is exciting. I think that that's the thing that romance shares in common with like sexual stuff is that they're both very exciting and like intimate.
But >> I think what's also important too is like uh libidos when it comes to relationships like even um irrelevant of like asexual people some people do romantic gifts not for sexual pleasure in the slightest um just just for the fact of you know wanting to keep their romance alive in relationships um it's just going to be dependent on the relationship too but I think so many people just do romantic ideas because they want to do romantic ideas for example like if you if you are you know uh proposing to somebody like I don't think that your end goal should be we're gonna have sex after this. I think your end goal is you want to have a beautiful like like the way in which you propose to somebody you want it to be romantic and beautiful that that's not inherently sexual.
>> I think that's fair but I think um so if we think about two gifts one is a romantic gift and one is just a gift. I think what separates that is the partnership between the giftgiver and the gift receiver. One is a partnership which is inherently um romantic and I would argue inherently sexual um and the other there is no inherent romantic partnership or romantic sexuality. Would you maybe disagree with that?
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. And this is especially bad for the case you brought up earlier because if this is the case then those fourth graders are engaging in a sexual act.
>> I I think they are like I think um >> I think it's just actions.
>> So I agree. I I I agree. I think but they're they're at the end of the day they are h they're humans. there eventually they will like I'm not suggesting >> I don't want to smother you up here but >> you would say then that when somebody says go give this Hershey's kiss to to your your crush or whatever it's like their fourth grader you think that that person is encouraging their kid to engage in a sex act?
>> Uh no I wouldn't go that far. I think I think so I'm I'm separate. So I'm what I'm suggesting is that I'm I'm you're encouraging the kid to do something romantic for another kid.
>> I think the two are tied in a way that can't be untied. But I think for example in a kid like that there there is no um it's something that will become that later in life but it doesn't exist yet.
Well, I I mean I agree that it's not sexual in like fourth grade, but you know that you as the parent >> if if what you're saying is that romance is inherently sexual or maybe like Well, yeah, that that seems to be what you're saying is that romance is inherently sexual, then if you're encouraging your kid to do something that you think is romantic, you would need to say that you're encouraging them to do something that's sexual. But that's like obviously not true. Like frankly, like okay, we've talked to some pretty dumb people so far. You seem to be the smartest. You're saying something that's like very stupid. It's just false. Like it's obviously false and I think you know that it's false. You don't want to I don't know. You can just say that you don't know if you think that it's like >> h Okay. Um I I take your point. What do you think about this? So like I think the example you're giving is the same as saying okay. So, um, oh, a parent notices that their kid is beginning to start puberty and so they begin focusing more on like making sure they're getting healthy meals because the child is, for example, also going through a growth spurt. So, um, but you're also a component of uh, puberty is that they're becoming like their sexual organs are changing, right? So like I think you're like the parent isn't feeding the kid so that the kid can have sex or like or have these sexual organs. Um it's so that they can go through a healthy part of growth. And I'm suggesting the same thing with the Hershey's kiss where the the proto romance kind of thing will healthfully grow into something which is inherently sexual.
So, >> but I'm not suggesting it's the same.
>> Yeah. Well, so, so here to me is like, well, I think you kind of have to. If you're saying that romance is inherently sexual, I'm not sure how you could avoid that. It it kind of seems like there's no way to avoid the the idea that um if if what you commit yourself to is romance is inherently sexual and a parent saying, "Hey, go give this to your crush on Valentine's Day in fourth grade." That that's like a romantic act that you're encouraging them to do. then you would need to say that you're encouraging them to do an act that's sexual. Otherwise, you would need to dellink things like romance and sexuality. The reason why I don't think that's analogous to like parents feeding their children is because I think that the parent can feed the child um without it being like inherently linked to some sort of like specific sexual action.
Like it's it's true that when you as a parent feed your child through the growth spurt that they're going to grow and like several years in the future when they're like 25 or I don't know like 20 um they'll be having sex and you know you you did indeed you are in the causal chain there. Um but I just don't think that the parent is like is like thinking about that. Um, and I also think that you're so so many steps disconnected in the causal chain in terms of like what you're encouraging them to do that I like that's that can't it's obviously not like a sex act to like feed your kid. Um, even if there's like 20 years or even if there's like 10 years in the future where you feeding your kid will lead to them having sex.
>> Okay.
Um, yeah, I think that's I think that's reasonable.
>> Mhm.
>> Um, is there anything else you wanted to talk about?
>> No, I think it's it's been uh Yeah, it's been nice talking to you. I've been watching a lot of your stuff. I'm a big fan.
>> Hey, thanks. I appreciate it.
>> Well, I mean, at least I was able to Somebody in my comments, somebody in like my YouTube comments yesterday made this point and it was really, really good. shout out to that person. That for a lot of the people in this conversation, they'll bite like some pretty crazy bullets. And probably what I should just say at that point is that's stupid. Like I should just point that out to them. Like that's dumb. You said a dumb thing. Um and that doesn't make you a dumb person, but you you said a dumb thing. You like it's okay to say I don't know to a thing like that. Um >> I don't disagree. If anything, I think that that should have started at the taboo thing cuz like I know I'm not tripping when I think the word taboo is, as uh AG said, negative connotation.
It's not even the connotation. The [ __ ] word is negative. I looked it up is negative, right?
>> A strong social or cultural prohibition that forbids discussing, touching, or doing something because it's considered offensive, sacred, or unacceptable. So, you think queerness being viewed as uh offensive or unacceptable is fine, but also we should treat them with kindness?
>> What?
>> Yeah, but >> they contradict each other.
>> Um I don't know. Yeah. Yeah.
>> Bradley Ray Troxel, thanks so much for the super chat. I'm brand new to ethical systems. Do you think there's inherent flaws or something wrong with consequentialism or deontology? Um, I think that there's so I think that there's cases that they in in pure forms I think there are cases that they struggle to accommodate. Um, here's a case that I think gives compelling reason to think that virtue ethics is true. Let's say that you're traveling through the woods with your kids and your dog. Um, and you get lost in the woods. There's a huge storm that rolls in. Um, and it becomes apparent that you're going to need to like kill, cook, and eat your dog if you and your kids are going to survive. Um, I think you probably have an obligation to do that, but I think you have you I think you should feel horrible about doing that. Um, I think that that should be like an agonizing experience for you.
And if you take pleasure in the process of like killing your dog, I think that you've done something like pretty seriously wrong. Um, I think that there's like something like like deeply wrong with you if you if you're like excited to do that or if you're happy to do that or if that like satisfies your desires, if that fulfills like whatever utilitarian criteria. Um, and and then I also just don't think that deontology is able to account for a thing like that. I think only virtue ethics with its focus on things like the type of person you are is able to account for why you have an obligation to feel horrible about doing an action like that in a tragic set of circumstances which is that you realize that this is like a very valuable creature that you're killing and that that's like this is like a horrible tragedy. Um I think virtue ethics can accommodate for that. I I'm not sure that other moral systems are able to accommodate for that.
>> Pork ramen, thanks so much for the super chat. Welcome as a cool Corey. Happy to happy to see you here. Mike Bowen, thanks so much for the super chat. Um, this topic really brings out the clowns.
That's true. I don't know. It's like the I don't know. Typically, it's like a lot of like the really really really dumb people. Um, Dr. Fudge, thanks so much for the super chat. This guy's very polite and all, but I think uh he's got a sort of dangerous keep it silent and invisible mentality, and I think he needs to realize this is inherently dehumanizing. Yeah, I agree with that. I think that it's um I don't know, it's like really super harmful and you shouldn't do that. Um Grammy, thanks so much for the super chat. I swear I hear the arguments about children being exposed to informative information. Like children aren't allowed to self-reflect and evaluate information themselves.
That's true. Um I don't know. That's because there's like there's like for sure things that I don't think children should have access to. There's like for sure um like images or like videos or things like that, maybe even information that I don't think kids should have access to. Um but then there like for sure is stuff that I think would be like fine. Like I don't have a problem if a kid is like googling at the age of 14.
Like how do I know that if I'm gay if they're having like confusing feelings?
Um that's I don't know. It's I I think I I think I probably agree.
Relax with Russell ASMR. Thanks so much for the super chat. Hate the words game.
Hate the word games they play to pretend they don't have bigoted views. I'm not saying it should be discouraged, but I it should be taboo. Like by definition, taboo means discourage if not restrict.
Yeah, that's true. Grimmie, thanks so much for the super chat. The path of least resistance is give them the information and let them sort that out.
Withholding information makes it the path of resistance. True. I agree.
Squirrelnitter, thanks so much for the super chat. The sex shop is age and appropriate for kids. The existence of gay people is not. That's true. That's a good point. Okay, let's go to the very next guest. If you're in that guest quest box, you got to be 18 or older.
You gotta think that there's something wrong with being gay. And with that, we'll go to the very next guest.
Hey, how's it going?
>> Hey, how's it going, man?
>> Yep. Doing well. How old are you?
>> I am 35.
>> Yep. And do you think there's something wrong with being gay?
>> Gay?
>> I do, but not morally.
>> Uh, in what sense do you think that it's wrong? So, I'm going to debate you from a scientific aspect.
>> Okay. Um, so wrong is kind of like an intrinsically like what's called normative, which means that it's like reasons. It's like reasons giving. When you say something's wrong, basically what you're saying is that people have reasons to not do it. Do you think gay people have reasons to not engage in gay behavior?
>> No. Absolutely. You're born gay. It's not something you can help. Um, my belief is that it's more of a disease.
kind of like um depression, something like that.
>> So, what makes something a disease typically is that it's like harmful. Uh that's the >> it is absolutely from a um what's the word I'm looking for? Emotional standpoint for especially in those, you know, early childhood, young adult years, >> inherently. Do you think it's inherently harmful?
>> Inherently, [sighs] yes, I would say so to the person experiencing it.
>> Okay. Uh yeah, >> it does not harm those around them. It harms the individual. Okay. What's the harm?
>> Uh, mostly emotional >> like what?
>> Um, it can lead to severe depression, bullying, um, assaults in extreme cases.
>> I'm not sure how if people are going to bully me for it.
>> Um, I know I have several friends who are, you know, some form of sexual affiliation other than heterosexual. [ __ ] >> nothing what I just said.
>> They are have been bullied their entire lives.
>> Okay.
>> Right. Is it wrong for me to be disabled because it will lead to me being bullied?
>> I'm sorry. Can you repeat the question?
[cough] [clears throat] >> Is it wrong for me to be disabled if it will lead to me being bullied?
>> Absolutely not. And there's it's not morally wrong. It's not something you can help.
>> But is it wrong in the same scientifically wrong for me to be disabled?
>> Let me let me counter with this. If we could cure a disabled person, >> it was just like a yes or no question.
Do you think that there's something wrong in the same sense?
>> I mean, in the sense if it could be corrected, then we have a moral obligation too. you you >> eugenics.
>> I we have a moral obligation to make me not autistic. Is that what you're saying right now?
>> If we could then yes we should.
>> But I don't want to be that bro.
>> I don't want that. I just want society and I'm sure Sam would agree. Society to help uh not be so [ __ ] annoying.
>> And I get that and I can Yeah. I mean, >> but my thing is >> Yeah. What if the disabled person doesn't want to not be disabled? Then what if the gay person doesn't want to not be gay?
>> I mean, if you're happy, then by all means.
>> Okay. Would there be something wrong in that circumstance?
>> Would it change the fact that it's still a disability? No.
>> Oh, sure. In the case of like the disability, I mean, that's not really what I'm asking. I'm asking would there be something wrong with it in the sense that you're saying >> I might have missed your original question.
>> Um okay. Do you think um if somebody is disabled but they're like they don't want to get rid of it like I don't know say that they're like autistic but they're happy being autistic.
Do you think that they there would be like something wrong with that?
I mean, I'm a firm believer and to each their own.
>> That's clear. That's like obviously not true.
>> How so?
>> Necessarily. It's not prescription.
>> You're like, did you're saying that it's that there's like something wrong with it.
>> Okay. Maybe let let's go backward a little bit, right?
>> Yeah. Let's back up. So, maybe I should say from an evolutionary standpoint.
Maybe that's a better way.
>> But there you you are a firm believer in evolution.
>> I am. Yeah. the firm.
>> And at its very core, what is the purpose of sex?
>> Uh, I don't ascribe like purpose language. I think purposes come from like agents. I think that you need to be some sort of agent that takes actions in the world in order for purposes to be a thing that exist. Um, I don't think that I think body parts have functions. I think that there there are different things that they can do. They have like the powers to do specific things. Mhm.
>> I don't think that they have a purpose ab like some sort of agent that's directing them towards a purpose.
>> Okay. So you don't feel that sperm cells and egg cells have a purpose?
>> No, I don't think that biology has purposes. I think that they have functions. I think that they have for example, you know, the function of um I don't know penetrating the egg and then fertilizing it and then you know developing. I think that that's like one of the functions that it has.
What else would it do?
>> Um feel uh provide like a like a great feeling of enjoyment. Uh getting >> like swallowed by a person >> is another crusty in a sock or something.
>> True.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. Can't forget about that one.
So that is that is my uh my statement though is that it is um >> for lack of a better way to say it um 11 an evolutionary mutation.
>> Well so >> and I know you're going to pick at me on semantics there but that's the best way I know to put it in words right now.
>> Not even um it it's an evolutionary advantage. So, okay, think about this.
Humans, a human child, uh, a lot of other animals, their children develop really quickly. Their children reach like peak maturity by like the age of three or something. Humans, it takes till, >> I don't know, we're we're we're going Yeah. to like 25 it takes for us to develop into like fully mature adults when we're like basically done growing.
Um, it's a huge resource investment. Um, and then at that point, if they themselves have more kids, then their kids are going to be a huge resource sink. But let's say if you're having lots of kids, some of your kids won't have more kids. Let's say that, you know, if if you have like some number of kids, it becomes more and more likely that they start being gay. Um, well, then you're going to have all of these kids, so the future generation is insured. And then you also have these additional kids that don't overpop populate you, but they just contribute resources to the community. Wouldn't that be like a huge evolutionary advantage?
>> I don't know. Evolutionary, but economically, yes.
>> Yeah. Well, so economics in this sense, like there's going to be gosh, not to use proto, but you know, like there's going to be like a protoeconomy. Um or probably not even just like a like proto like there's going to be combined resources if there's like a group of humans that are living together >> together >> um and a gay person is going to contribute resources to the community without having children that suck resources away from the community.
>> I mean gay people are a huge bonus to many communities. Mhm. They also gay couples pay more taxes than straight couples for example.
>> Um on average probably higher income earners.
>> Yep.
>> It's just um my my contention is solely that several individuals who are gay have suffered mentally from it because of the way they're treated by others.
>> Same thing's true of straight people.
Have you ever heard how sad like a breakup song is? These [ __ ] are not okay.
>> [laughter] >> Yeah, but all all people with the except Well, no, I won't even say that. So, all people experience that. If you've ever been in a relationship that ended then and you were not the one who ended it, then you've probably experienced that heartbreak.
>> Yeah. I mean, I I there's just going to be mentally ill people in like every group.
>> Yeah. And um I'm not going to go as far as to say it's a a mental illness. Um, but I mean if we're speaking purely scientific, it is something >> it's a disease.
>> Yeah. But I mean that's that's I mean we define heroin addiction as a disease.
You don't go outside and catch addicted to heroin.
>> So okay, even if that's true, I'm not sure why I would categorize like being gay in like the same category.
>> Yeah. The contagion is not the issue.
It's the categorization itself or the lack there the the lack thereof of contagion. like the fact that you can't catch it is not the problem. It's the fact that we're calling it a disease that's the problem.
>> Yeah. So, a disease by definition, let me define the term. Um any um any condition that causes just that disease either physically um or emotionally.
So, >> and how was >> you know, for example, like when I when I came home and I I got like a D on my math test and upset my mom, that was like a disease.
>> True.
>> Oh, that's not a condition. That's an event.
>> Okay. So, just any sort of And by condition, you just mean like something that's like long-term?
>> Something that is you are experiencing that you is a part of who you are. So condition would be liked >> you know um >> Sure. So >> would black be a condition?
>> Yeah.
>> In like a society where people are >> No, that's your race.
>> But I I get treated poorly for it and it is ongoing >> and it causes like disease.
Yeah, >> those >> I mean I feel like you know that they're not on the same parallel.
>> Well, they are.
>> It I mean it does fit on like the it fits with the definition that you're providing. Like if you're just saying like something that that is like your identity um that causes disease. Well, if you're a black person in a like a country where people uh treat you really weirdly because of that um and really badly because of that, then it seems like that would qualify. It it I I don't see how you could get out of saying that being black is a disease.
>> Yeah. Especially if you have gay and disabled on that level. All of these are intersections of marginalization. Why is black different?
different.
>> You can just say one second. Don't let me formulate.
>> Yeah, that's okay. You know, it's okay.
What I think you've committed yourself, you know, I'm getting into the habit.
I'm not saying that you're a stupid person, but I am saying that you've committed yourself to stupid things and it's totally fine to um I don't know, say that you don't know and say that you need to like think about it more or something.
>> Well, you know, and here's the thing, man. If we're being honest, you know, I've wanted to debate you on religion for a long time and I finally just got on the show and needed something to say.
>> You should come back tomorrow then. I'll I'll debate religion tomorrow.
>> Like I love gay people, man. I really do.
>> Like I really just wanted to be on the show.
>> Okay. Well, Tyler, come back tomorrow.
>> That was a choice.
>> It was. Yeah. Uh squirrel knitter, thanks so much for the super chat. I was bullied for getting a girl. Should I stop being or oh sorry um I was bullied for being a girl. Should I stop being a girl? It can be corrected. True.
Yeah. Being >> husband is crazy.
>> Being a being a woman is a disease under the previous criteria.
>> Um Mr. Pico, thanks so much for the super chat. Uh I thought this would be a light-hearted romp uh through collar not understanding what scientifically wrong meant and we went from zero to eugenics so fast. I'm sure we violated special relativity somewhere. That's good.
That's a funny one. Um, oh no, AG got like Thanos snapped out of existence or something. What the [ __ ] >> Um, but let's get a big W for Mr. Bigco.
Uh, yeah, I really did. Yeah, he really said gas pedal.
True. Um, John Klein, thanks so much for the super chat. Uh, the the cool Corey subscription. Um, I like being my gay self. That's great. Big W for John. I appreciate you helping Maga deconstruct.
Thanks so much for the super chat. When did Nazi talking points become okay in society? I don't know, man. People just bite the [ __ ] craziest bullets. Like, I don't even think they believe it. I just think that they get kind of like forced into it and then they don't know when to say, "You're right. That is stupid." And then they just keep on [ __ ] pushing forward for some reason.
All right, let's go to the next guest.
>> How's it going?
>> Hey, going well. How old are you?
>> I'm 19.
>> And do you think there's something wrong with being gay?
>> Um, yes, but subjectively.
>> Um, okay. So, do you think that there's any reason why a gay person would have to not be gay or like to not engage in like gay activities?
>> Um, no, not necessarily. If if you don't mind, I like to piggy off piggyback off of the taboo guest if that's okay.
>> Maybe like Okay. Where do we disagree?
Do we disagree about something related to gay people?
>> Yeah, cuz I would say that, you know, when he was talking about it being taboo, I would just like to find that middle line kind of in the space of social ambiguity.
>> Like kind of taboo.
>> Yeah.
>> Why Why would we do that? Well, the stance I'm kind of taking is would everyone being gay be better for society?
>> So, I can well I I'll direct answer first. No, I don't think so. I don't think if everyone was gay, society would be a better place. Um, now the problem is is that we can run a parody argument of this. If everyone was a software engineer, would society be a better place?
>> No.
>> Yeah. Does that mean that we should make being a software engineer like a little bit taboo?
>> No.
>> Exactly. Right. So, what's the difference between being a software engineer and being gay that justifies why being gay should be considered a little bit taboo, but being a software engineer shouldn't?
>> Sure. Um, and I guess for me I I would take the stance of, you know, just how you guys maybe get a little bit of an ick when you hear someone is Christian or maybe I don't know for sure.
>> No, there's >> no you don't you don't >> think of them any differently even just >> No, I'm like curious like I want to hear about their like denomination and whatnot.
>> Sure. For sure. Because I will say that is kind of you know I can't force this on to you of course. Um, but we all make slight subtle jud judgments when we first meet a person, when they're talking, what they're saying. Um, and I think that's kind of necessary to the human experience in the first place. So, when I talk about it being, you know, kind of taboo, it's more in the stance of, you know, there there is a gay community that exists. There is a Christian community that exists. there is someone who doesn't, you know, necessarily go to either side or or whatnot. Um, does that kind of make sense?
>> Um, not really. I'm a bit unclear to the point like why. So, are you saying with respect to like gay people, you're saying like we should feel like disgusted by it? No, I'm just saying that the Christian person is going to have all these opinions from this, you know, ideology that they or have been, you know, whether it is inter indoctrinized or uh simply just whatever it is. And then the gay community is also going to have all these opinions on this and just all this back and forth only just creates more discord and it doesn't actually get to anything um truthful. It really just gets to chaos.
Well, I think if people have unfounded biases that they should probably get rid of them um no matter who you are. I think that something that's important is is recognizing, you know, like the actual reality of of um I don't know other groups like what sort of people they are. And then if you're holding on to biases that you're not justified in holding on to, >> you should probably discard those biases.
>> Exactly. I I 100% agree.
>> Okay. Wait, so what do we disagree on?
I'm confused.
>> So, I think I think we disagree with it being I mean, I guess it I kind of hold a a not very controversial stance, which is kind of the problem, per se, or lack thereof of a problem. Um, is that it's not um, you know, it's taboo or kind of taboo to the majority. Um, because is the majority of society straight or gay?
I don't actually know.
>> They're straight like by a long shot.
>> And that's that's you must know that, Kyler.
I I I just wanted to clarify. I you know I don't know the stats so I'm not going to like say the stat. You know what I mean?
>> Um but just just because the majority is straight than it is you know just the reality that we live in um that it is kind of um you know more ambiguous.
But the problem is is that you shouldn't hold biases against like a group of people just because of their identities.
Like you shouldn't feel weird. If you if you feel weird meeting somebody who has like >> red hair, for example, that's probably a you problem. I don't think you should feel weird about that. I I might agree with you descriptively that people get ky when they meet people of different identities. Um >> but you shouldn't. And if you do, you're living your life wrong. Like you're just doing things that are unjustified.
>> Yeah. And there's definitely, you know, judgments that come out all the time.
Like I I do think that this is a kind of a key point of my argument is that we do judge people. Um whether that is a negative judgment, a positive judgment just in general agree first look at awesome. Um so when that happens, >> it's you know not necessarily that there's something wrong with us. It's more that that is just how we've um oriented ourselves as a society.
>> Don't you think it depends on the judgment?
>> For sure. Yeah.
>> Yeah. So, I think that there are some judgments that you can make about a person that are reasonable upon first meeting them. Um and there are some judgments that you can make about a person that are unreasonable. Now, if somebody makes a negative judgment about a gay person, um, which of first of all, for a lot of gay people, I'm not even sure how they would be making the judgment that this person is gay, um, just by looking at them. But, yeah, let's say that they have a perfect gaydar. They know exactly who's gay. Um, they're like they're like inspector gadget of finding gay people, you know, go gadget >> gayar. Um, >> all right.
If if this person is seeing a gay person and then coming to like some sort of negative judgment about them, that's unbi like that's that's they shouldn't do that. That's unjustified.
>> For sure. And would you say that it is also unjustified to be more like, hey, they're gay, but I personally wouldn't do that.
>> No, that's fine. That's that's just true. That's true to say this person is gay, but I'm not gay and I wouldn't be gay.
>> That's those are all just facts.
>> That's kind of the the standpoint I'm coming from. This is more than >> Who's telling you to not do that?
>> I don't think anyone is. I I I think I'm more clarifying my position because I didn't really clarify it perfectly. Um, and to go back on that, it's it's more that, you know, this is my choice, that's your choice.
Um, but since we live in a majority straight society, there just will be um subtle social friction from being gay.
>> And that's not what is, it's what should.
>> Yeah.
>> Right. Like we we already know this is the case, >> especially queer people. Like we we live that. We know. But you're arguing or at least when you came up here, you argued that that's like that ought be the case.
Why? Lots of people get sexually assaulted and and they shouldn't. That's bad.
>> Yeah.
>> Right.
>> Like that is the case, but like >> like ideally, no.
>> Yeah.
>> So I I guess what would be the alternative solution >> to what? I don't know like be more accepting.
>> I know. I know it kind of sounds like you know the bare minimum, right? Um, and for sure I I I guess I I agree with that in the sense that it it should be Let me just craft my thoughts here because >> um >> that's good. I I think that that's like a I I I respect that. I respect a person who's crafting their thoughts.
>> Yeah, for sure.
[snorts] I I guess I I'm not completely up to date with, you know, the statistics. I'm not gay personally, so I don't know what it's like um you know, if there is uh a genuine um I guess taboo or even hatred um for people who are gay. I personally don't, you know, hate people or or try not to, right? Mhm.
>> Um, and in society, I just if everyone were to be accepting of everything and and everywhere, it's kind of like the the slippery slope. Not to say that being gay is the slippery slope. That's not what I'm saying. Um, but I I'm just trying to find that line of what else do we um accept? What if we accepted the things that are morally permissible and then didn't accept the things that aren't morally permissible?
>> Yeah, >> I concur. I [ __ ] with that heavy.
>> Yeah. And honestly, that that lines with me, too. I don't really have anything to say to that. It's well articulated.
I guess for me it's it's more that we we agree that the reality is is is not the case, which is not that it ought to be the case, but that >> um then it's it's not clear what you're saying that like if if what you're saying is that like descriptively gay people get like discriminated against or harassed or have like these negative effects, we we just kind of agree, right? I'm not sure what the point of disagreement there would be because I agree. Um I I don't know if this is an AG story. I think this is an AG story. I could be misremembering. Um but you know, I think AG told a story about um her her mom telling her like straight up that um she just couldn't accept the fact that she was gay because it went against her religion. Um and it was it would like send her to hell or something. Like that's >> I don't know. That's That's pretty horrible. And it's like a like an experience that a lot of gay people have to endure. It's Yeah.
>> Yeah. And there there's an unfortunate number of layers that uh most people don't break out of. Um so I guess if you could just break down my logic on this because I think this is the main contention is that I think it should be, you know, socially ambiguous.
>> What does socially ambiguous mean? like that. It's not um >> should feel like weird when meeting a gay person or >> it it's more like a middle ground. It's more like it's not universally forbidden, but it's not openly encouraged either. It's more like, you know, these they're it's tolerated is isn't really the right word. Uh but they just carry subtle social friction.
>> I Why would we want social friction?
>> For what?
>> Subtle like very subtle.
>> Why would I want subtle social friction?
Okay. So, let me just explain um try to articulate my full position here. It's more that um I'm I'm applying the the the fractal to this. The um if everyone was gay, we wouldn't be in a better place.
>> If everyone was a software engineer, we wouldn't be in a better place. We shouldn't I I don't I think it would be bad if we had social friction with software engineers.
>> It I know that it it kind of seems silly, but can you explain why like the logic behind that? I understand it conceptually, but I don't like >> I don't think social applies to undesirable. We should we should want not social friction. We should want the opposite. We should want social cohesion, social unity. We're able to get more done working together. We're able to live better lives when we live them together. Um our lives get worse when we are living them um with subtle social friction.
Mhm. Yeah. And actually I I would I would agree with that. So it' be more the position of that it's openly discussed and that it's it's not even taboo at all. Um would that be a depends what specifically is discussed? Like there's a way to say it that's fine for probably I can't think of an age where it's like not fine to say um you know some men like men or you know that's his husband.
Um those are just facts. Um I don't think that there's anything like I don't think that there's anything sexual about any of that. Um, I think that there are certain statements that are age appropriate and I'm fine with people hearing those ones and there are certain statements that are age inappropriate and I'm not fine with people hearing those ones if they're not the proper age.
>> Euphemisms.
>> Um, not really.
or um well I I don't I I probably don't think you should go around saying like a bunch of euphemisms around kids.
>> Well, euphemisms are kind of the the thing that you should say around kids.
It's it's that that version of like, you know, instead of he died, it's more he passed away. That's a euphemism.
>> Uh which euphemisms do you think we should say around kids?
So when you know someone dies, you're not going to >> No, no, but like with respect to like gay people, like I I don't Kyler, you might you might be about to say something stupid, but I want to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you you didn't say something stupid just now. When you say euphemisms, you're not saying like sexual euphemisms, are you?
>> No.
>> Okay. Okay. Which euphemisms related to gay people do you think we should say around kids? So euphemism is, you know, a phrase.
>> Yeah, I know what an euphemism is.
>> Okay. Yep. So like for example, if someone dies, you're not going to tell your 5-year-old, "Yeah, grandma died."
You're going to say, "She passed away."
or something like that. That's a euphemism. Am I right?
>> Got it. Yeah, I agree. That is a euphemism. Yeah.
>> Okay. Um All right. I'm lost here.
>> Yeah. So you said, "What euphemisms do you think we should say around kids?" We we already said I don't agree with saying any sexual euphemisms about but are there is there like I I guess I'm confused.
I I actually I think I'm lost I'm lost by the fact that you're lost because you brought up euphemisms after what I said.
>> Okay. Um >> I'm going to try and and and rain us in a little bit. Let me know if this is accurate for both of you. Yeah.
>> So, [clears throat] guest, you're talking about uh queerness having some kind of social ambiguity and when you went in depth about that, you were saying that there could be like a like an allowable an allowed amount of social friction regarding gayness and how that manifests uh in the context of kids was using euphemisms, right? But you're not talking about sexual euphemisms. You just mean saying things in code around kids. Yes. Ian's question is how does this relate to gayness? What euphemisms surrounding queerness should we be using around kids?
>> Yeah. So, I was more just adding on to his point like saying, "Hey, you know, that reminds me of euphemisms like something that we do to guard that."
>> That's that's fine, I guess. Yeah. Um, sure. Okay. Um, then yeah, sure. Then I mean we agree that there's like age appropriate ways to talk about like gayness even if it's like or even not not to like go into like detail about it but just like mention that gay people exist >> even for like a really young audience >> for sure.
>> Okay. I'm confused then about what we disagree on because I agree like Okay.
Well, hey uh is there anything else you wanted to talk about?
>> Um yeah. I I mean just on the point of the the whole romance thing um with romance being sexual or not. Can we say those words now?
>> Uh I don't so I personally I post a lot of clips to YouTube. Um and I think that it's kind of embarrassing to have my clips I don't want to say like the Tik Tok words and the clips that I post to YouTube. I just want to say like the real human words.
>> Um exactly. So I say them. It's probably bad for the algorithm, but I'm I say them and you can say them, too.
>> Well, you seem to be doing okay. So, you Tik Tok maybe likes it. So, yeah.
>> All right. I appreciate it.
>> Yeah, for sure. So yeah, as far as for romance um and just you know sexual or not sexual and then the asexual argument and this just to add on that add on to that I think intention is really important as well because I think that it is possible uh for me to compliment you know a random girl walking out of Target and have no intention or any sexual desires whatsoever. But I also think that another man can compliment a girl walking out of Target and have the sole intention of taking her home. Yeah, I agree with that.
>> Sweet.
Well, uh, that's all I got.
>> Okay. Well, hey, uh, thanks so much for coming on up, Kyler.
>> Hey, thanks.
>> Make sure you're double tapping on that screen, sharing with your friends, doing all the good stuff. Um, if you're in that guest request box, make sure that you're 18 or older. Make sure that you do think that there is something wrong with being gay.
Um, let's read some supers. Vintage atheist. Thanks so much for the super chat. Victim blaming is stinky of heart.
That's true. I disavow victim blaming.
Big boof pass, please. Thanks so much for the super chat. If I give the homie a kiss, it's not gay. I don't care.
True. Truth. Nuke.
>> The eye contact for that was very necessary.
Yeah, [laughter] it was well the the truth was very nuclear.
>> Yes, of course.
>> Also, hi Dan.
>> Oh, hello.
>> Hey, how's it going?
>> Hey, how are you guys doing? Thanks for having me on.
>> Yeah. How old are you?
>> 25.
>> Yep. Do you think there's something wrong with being gay?
>> Yeah, I do.
>> Okay. What do you think's wrong with being gay?
>> Um, well, I just wanted to come from it from the point like like what's the function of of sex? Like >> I think it has lots of functions. So you can one of the function >> the main bi biological function is like to reproduce.
>> I don't know how we assign like a main function.
>> Well, like what happens? That's what happens.
>> But lots of things happen.
>> Yeah, sure. Feelings and all that.
>> Yeah. I mean sex has like quite a few functions you know it has of course it has like like a reproductive function but it also has like a pleasure function it has it releases like certain neurochemicals um so it has like closeness function is greater than the function of >> I don't know how the wave functions what would be the criteria for determining what like the main function of a thing is >> well we could just go with time span so time span you know you create a life that lasts um a lifetime or pleasures that last you know 10 minutes. Few minutes.
>> Sure. I think I'm I think I'm understanding, right? Um you know, so the by this logic you'd say like the function of the throat is to like choke on something and die because then you have like a death that lasts forever. Um as opposed to like just like chewing and swallowing some food that just lasts like a like like a day or so.
>> No. Oh, I'm a bit confused as to the >> um maybe I don't understand what you mean by function like how or like the the criteria for functions. M >> matter of fact, similarly like if I'm going to use like my anus to [ __ ] only for like like a few minutes maybe seconds where the [ __ ] is actually going to exit my body. But inversely, if I use it to have anal intercourse, which will last significantly longer ideally, then like the thing that has a greater function is is the anal intercourse.
>> That's I'm not sure why we took the time that I used from, you know, how long a life is to compare.
>> That's the criteria you said. So, this would have to be applicable to other things in order for it to be universal.
>> That doesn't make sense. You know, I'm sure a human life is much different than um anal intercourse or choking on some food.
>> I agree. Which is why we need a better criteria than the main function of a thing is like the duration of time that gets produced.
>> But would you agree that it is it is of greater significance that a child is born from sex than anything?
>> I I I I have an alternative um an alternative idea here. So, let's just look at the number of times that like, you know, sexual intercourse is used for one thing versus another, right? I would say that people have a lot more nonprocreative sex than they do procreative sex. Like, I've had a decent amount of sex in my life.
>> Okay. This guy's a sex. Get a little >> Oh, yeah. Um, but never any procreative sex, right? Like zero kids. And I don't really necessarily have the intention of having kids in the future. So, I have an entire lifetime of non-procreative sex.
Um, you know, people usually only have, you know, 2.5 kids, let's say, but they probably have sex more than 2.5 times, right?
>> So, like I would say that if we're judging it based on the number of times that an activity is used for, you know, or, you know, per like serves a particular function, then sex probably has more of a non-procreative function than a procreative function. I mean, I'm not judging it on the fact of how many times it's it's being had. I'm saying it's greater to have kids than to, you know, go about how you are having sex for pleasure doing whatever >> greater. But I gave you a pretty reasonable kind of idea for why my way of judging like what the kind of primary function of something would be like.
That's I've got some reasoning behind it. Yours is wholly arbitrary.
>> Yeah. Well, it sounds >> it's not arbitrary. Life is pretty great. Would you agree? Is your life not >> Yeah, we agree. life is is pretty great.
So it sounds like what you're saying is that the main function of a thing is like the use of it that produces the most value. Is that what you're saying?
>> If you want to say that. Sure.
>> Okay. So then why aren't you like volunteering right now?
>> You could be using your cognitive faculties to improve people's lives, but instead you're debating on TikTok.
>> Yeah, I'm not doing anything else. So then like the main the main function of your brain should be to do like a [ __ ] ton of volunteer work >> like perpetual.
>> Okay. I mean I could ask you the same question. Why are you on here?
>> I don't hold that criteria in terms of like functions and like values.
>> Okay. What's your criteria?
>> So I think that something is good just in so far as it's virtuous. And I think that virtue of course is going to include things like charity, the virtue of charity. Um, but it's also going to include things like temperance, which is going to be things like enjoying things in the right way, taking the right amount of enjoyment towards things, which is why I allow myself to engage in things like debates because I enjoy them.
>> So, would you agree it's like not virtuous to take a life?
>> Um, it depends on the circumstance.
>> Depends on circumstance. Interesting.
Um, all right. Well, would you agree that it's virtuous to give life and to, you know, help support life?
>> Uh, it depends on the circumstance.
>> Yeah, I'm not with this whole circumstantial thing. I mean, like you you don't think it's important to give life and like >> So, okay. Um, do you think that let's say you like rape a girl and get her pregnant, do you think that the the giving of life was like a valuable thing there?
>> No, that's a completely different story.
>> Yeah. Exactly right. So, you know, it depends on the circumstance as to whether or not giving life is valuable.
>> But you in a loving relationship, giving life, raising a kid, you know, to to have a long healthy life, that's pretty virtuous. No, [clears throat] >> in general, I think that that's valuable, >> right? That's the circumstance thing.
>> Yeah.
Which is why we said it was circumstantial because it is.
>> But we agree that that's virtuous. So in your criteria, >> if it fits within like the the broader spectrum of who you are as a person, then yeah, I think all else equal, if if you're not somebody who would despise having kids, I think you should probably have kids.
>> Okay. So how do you have kids?
>> Through sex. Usually you could do IVF.
So that's pretty big function of sex.
No.
>> Okay. I mean, I agree that it's a function of sex. I don't know how we compare like the magnitude of functions.
>> When you say big, how many how many days out of the out of a cycle can a woman get or like a cisgender woman get pregnant?
>> It's only like a week, not even.
>> Okay. How many And out of that week on her most fertile on her most uh fertile day, um what's the percentage that she can get pregnant?
>> It's not that high.
>> Yeah, it's 30%. But you think that's the main function and more days out of the month she can't get pregnant than she can get pregnant. More days out of the year she can't get pregnant than she can get pregnant. And typically she can only have one to four uh children out of the entire year being quadruplets uh being one of the higher risks of pregnancy.
But most times most people just have like one child. So if you're saying like if you're comparing to like litters of animals or other animals where we can see they have like lots of animals. It doesn't seem like the the main function of sex would be uh to procreate considering that we don't use it that way for one and two it's extremely hard to get pregnant and it has a lot of complications and risks and then two um what we do see is kind of back piggybacking off of Jordan is that the main two functions we see is bonding like sexual intimacy and sexual pleasure is what we see sex being used for.
>> Yeah, I 100% agree with the bonding and pleasure for sure. But I think it's of a larger magnitude to have a kid through sex. Like that's that's obviously greater than, you know, small pleasures.
>> What if you don't that's what but then that's back to what Ian was asking was are you are you doing it based off of what you value which you didn't you said no. So then it is true that you think that it's of more value to have a child than of to than to like have pleasurable sex. But that doesn't mean that it's immoral to have pleasurable sex. You have to make the argument that it's immoral about pleasurable sex. Then >> I never I never made that argument.
>> That's kind of where you're leading.
>> Well, you need to make that argument otherwise there would be like a non sequator like I'm I'm not sure why being gay is wrong.
>> Well, I'm just saying that what comes from sex is babies or or you know and pleasure whatever. But the pleasure is not nothing compared to a life.
>> What do you think? The main function of the mouth is >> eating, tasting. I don't know.
>> Is it wrong for me to kiss my girlfriend?
>> I wouldn't say so.
>> Why not? It's not its function.
>> The main one.
>> Yeah, but it's it's a it's a loving it's a bonding experience. Like, >> but it's not the main function, though.
>> I'm not saying it's wrong to have sex without without having a kid. That's that's not where I'm coming from.
>> Why would it be wrong to be gay? What's the point?
>> Yeah. What's the argument?
>> Heterosexual sex. That's the >> Why would it be wrong?
>> That's the way to go because that's where you get the bonding and you get the >> You also get bonding gay sex.
>> Do you think the gay people don't have like like don't get sexual intimacy?
>> Let me go tell my girlfriend.
>> What?
>> It's not purposeless cuz purpose is subjective, right? Like that's it's our purpose.
>> Okay. Well, I don't want to have serves no function. It does. It's pleasurable.
It's enjoyable. It has the function of like creating bonding.
>> But it does of a greater magnitude. It doesn't create children.
>> Those you don't think.
>> But you just said creating children wasn't it though. You just said that wasn't it.
>> But that's also irrelevant.
>> That that would be irrelevant because that's you're not arguing a morality.
Like you're not making any a moral claim here. a moral prescription about whether or not like we choose to just have sexual uh you know sex or sorry um pleasurable sex. Like Jordan was like explaining to you like if he he's only ever having pleasurable sex for the rest of his life. He doesn't want to have kids. What's wrong with that?
>> He's straight and you said nothing. So what would be the difference between me and Jordan? I'm a lesbian. I'm only having pleasurable sex. Jordan straight only having pleasurable sex.
>> But what's the difference between me and Jordan?
What was the question?
>> I'm a lesbian. I'm only ever going to have pleasurable sex. Jordan's straight.
He's only ever going to have pleasurable sex. What's the difference between us?
>> There's no difference between you guys.
I I would say that both of you having pleasurable sex for the rest of your life is still less than that of a creating >> because it's preventing a life. Yeah.
>> No. No. But is it wrong?
>> Yeah.
>> To have pleasurable sex only. So like you am I spend your whole life not even trying to have kids not trying to create life, not trying to raise a child to do something in the world?
>> Well, first of all, I know lots of of gay couples that are trying to get each other um uh you know, gay pragers, but um you know, and in addition to that, [laughter] >> um so okay, I'll give you a scenario.
Let's say that we had um like a high school sweetheart couple. Uh they get, you know, they meet when they're like 16. They they're in a relationship for like 14 years. At some point in that they you know they uh get married and then at the age of 30 they're ready to try to start having kids and then they find out that one of the people is infertile. Do you think staying in that marriage for the rest of your life even though it's not going to produce kids?
Would that be wrong?
>> Further if you're infertile are you just morally bankrupt in this way permanently because you can't have kids?
>> No, that's not what I'm saying. But if you have the ability to have kids, I feel like it's virtuous to have kids.
>> Is it not virtuous to not though? So choosing to not have kids is immoral to you if you have the ability to do so.
>> Yeah, I think so.
>> So have kids.
>> Well, wait, wait. So to be clear, so then you would say that it's wrong to stay with the to stay in the relationship with the person if after you find out that they're in >> a completely different scenario. They're not able as a as a couple.
>> Wait, but what's the difference? If you have the ability to have kids, >> they do. The person who isn't infertile could go and marry someone else.
>> Once a couple's together, they're one.
>> Okay, sure. So, a gay couple just has to get married and then they're fine.
>> I didn't say that.
>> Okay, but I thought after a couple is together, they're one.
So, it's okay if that doesn't produce a child as long as you're married.
>> Yeah. I mean, you're putting words in my mouth. Like, I didn't say that. I'm saying that if you have the ability to have kids, it's more virtuous to do that than to just go about your life seeking the pleasures of life and going >> over his head. This is the issue for >> It didn't go over my head. He's just trying to make a silly >> argument. Is saying there are two people that that are in a couple. One of them is fertile, one of them is not. The fertile person has two options to stay with this infertile person for the rest of their life. So any sex they have will never result in a child. So all the sex they have will be solely for pleasure and bonding and nothing else. Or in order to have a child, the fertile person can leave the infertile person to go have a kid. Which one is the virtuous one?
>> They need completely different. They could still and they wanted a child, they could still go adopt the child, you know, which was your main issue.
I mean, you can apply this to a certain scenario like that. It's just >> what's the difference between this and the gay couple.
>> The gay couple's deliberately choosing not to have kids.
>> So are they.
>> So like so choosing >> the the person who's fertile is choosing. The person who's fertile could choose fert is not a choice. Correct.
>> I agree. Neither is being gay.
I mean, I would say it's kind of a choice.
>> Okay. So, I'm going to give you the evidence that it's like for sure not.
Um, how would you explain the fact that as you get less genetically related to people, the correspondence between you two being gay uh goes down. So, let me go into some details there. So, let's take identical twins. They share every or they they share all the genetics. If one of them is gay, there's a 65% chance that the other one will be gay. But if you took um for example nonidentical twins, they share only 50% of the genome. If one of them is gay, then there's a 30% chance that the other one will be gay. Um and then if you took me and like a random person on the street, if that person's gay, there's like a 2.5% chance of me being gay. How would you explain the fact that as you get genetically less related to people, there's a lower likelihood that you'll be gay if they're gay if it's just a choice?
>> I mean, you can say it's genetics, but genetics change. Like, there's a bit there's ways to turn on and off different gene types.
>> I agree.
>> In people, right? Yeah.
>> Yep. I agree. Epigenetics. Yes.
>> Okay. 100%. Yes.
>> You know, I actually have somewhere to be, but I know I'm not going to change your guys' mind. I hope you give it some more thought.
>> Okay. Um, I would compare being gay to any other vice such as being an alcoholic. If you do it enough, you know, you're going to think that's that's who you are.
>> Before you go, >> that's my whole thought.
>> Before you go, can you uh name two virtues? You said it was virtuous. Name two.
>> Virtues.
>> Yeah, name two virtues.
>> Um, like giving life [laughter] or helping other.
>> You think giving life is a character trait? Okay. All right.
based [ __ ] goat dude. This guy's like an ethical genius. Um, make sure >> I was just I was gonna ask him like, you know, let's say the people didn't start out as a couple and then learn that one of them is infertile. Let's just say like as a person and you know that you know you are fertile and then you meet somebody and you know that they're infertile, is it immoral to initiate that relationship with them? And if you said yes, then it's like, okay, are infertile people just condemned if they're not already in a relationship when they learn they're infertile? Are infertile people just condemned to not be in a relationship? If if they're doing the the moral thing, are they condemned to not be in a relationship with their entire life? Because all of their potential fertile partners should find other fertile partners. Like that's ridiculous.
>> I think they'd probably bite the bullet on that and say, um, yeah, if you find out the person's infertile, you should say no.
>> Yeah. Yeah. But then I I would I would challenge them to like look at it from the infernal person's point of view and be like, "Okay, well, I guess I guess they're they're stuck. They're done."
>> Yeah. It's like, well, it's like crazy.
I I I think that maybe Well, I don't know because I I really do think that they just bite the bullet, but it's like obviously wrong to I'm okay. Depends on who you are as a person. Um, if if having kids is like the most important thing to you more than anything else in the world, I think maybe it's reasonable to end like a really long-term relationship because you find out your partner's infertile. Um, and that's like sad. It's like a tragedy. Um, but I I would think if you don't value having kids, I would think it's like so crazy to end that relationship. Like that makes no sense at all.
Yo, what's up?
>> Hey, how's it going? How old are you?
>> 18.
>> Yep. And do you think that there's >> How long?
>> Yeah. Premise one, >> back. I have to go. I love you all.
>> Love you. Later.
>> Premise one. If there's a sound argument in favor of the proposition that being gay is wrong, uh, then being gay is wrong. And then you can just affirm the anticedent and the conclusion follows.
>> Okay. Sure. So, what's the sound argument?
>> Yeah. So, if there's a sound argument in favor of there being a sound argument in favor of the proposition that being true is wrong, then there's a sound argument in this >> a really funny trolling.
>> Yo, based uh can I get the the justification for there being a sound argument in favor of their >> Oh, wait. That >> No. Yeah. Is there Yeah. What's the sound argument for the first?
>> If there's If there's a sound argument in favor of there being a sound argument in favor of there being a sound argument in favor of the proposition that being gay is wrong, then there's a sound argument in favor of the proposition that being that as a sound argument about the proposition of being gay is wrong.
>> God, >> you can just the ant conclusion.
>> God, that's so [ __ ] based.
>> The infinite regress of uh sound arguments.
>> Hey, how's it going?
>> Good. How are you?
>> Uh doing well. You sound really young.
How old are you?
I'm 12.
>> Jesus [ __ ] Christ, kid. Get out of here.
Go back to like chewing on Legos or something.
Go.
Well, maybe I'm evil. Um, but anyway, make sure you're double tapping on that screen sharing with your friends. Um, would it be No. Oh, no. I think this is this is perhaps optimal.
Um, one sec. Um, I am dropping a new video right now. It's out right now. It's the debate against Liam, uh, where he takes an IQ test and gets less than 100. Um, let's watch the preview. Last one.
>> That was beautiful to watch live. It was fantastic.
>> Um, let's go with >> F. F.
Your score. Sorry, let's let's your score is below 100. We will be expanding the measurable range of this test as soon as we have gathered more data. In some cases, this can be caused by plugins or other browser specific settings that prevent a correct scoring.
Liam, >> what did that accomplish?
[sighs] >> Liam, >> you need to you need to understand >> you're like three standard deviations below the mean. Like, you should probably shut I think the frankly I think like the harm reducing thing I think the utilitarian thing for you to do is to shut the [ __ ] up for the rest of your life. Frankly, Liam, [laughter] like I I actually think that when you speak, you make the people around you like actively stupider. I think that you might be the Benjamin Button of IQ. That you started off, you were born, you had 160 IQ, and you've been hemorrhaging IQ ever since. You've been losing [ __ ] one nay two IQ points a year. You're on track for zero. Zero IQ. Liam is 100.
Liam, >> what is he? What is he?
>> The average is 100 IQ.
>> Okay.
So, throwing a a throwing a IQ test at someone.
>> It's an IQ test. Liam, this is why you scored so low. Hey, how's it going?
Go check it out. It's live on my YouTube right now. Um, it's titled anti-gay piece of [ __ ] loses the debate and pivots to insults. Uh, give it a like.
My YouTube channel is allegedly Ian.
It's in my bio. It's in my link tree.
Um, you should all go do that. Um, uh, let's read some supers. the the last supers. Grimmie, thanks so much for the super chat. Uh things in life can be great, but life itself is a neutral function. Um I I don't know. I think I think that there is something valuable about life. Um I think that there is like I certainly value like other things, but um you know, let's say somebody wanted to make like an art project out of like like fetuses. I would think I'd have a problem with that personally. Even ones that aren't sentient, I would think that that's like quite strange. Um, probably wrong even.
Um, I don't know. I think that that disvalues something that has value. Um, but you know, of course I I so I think you should assign like some value to a thing like a fetus, but I just think that the total value gets like substantially outweighed by things like bodily autonomy, you know, especially especially when it's not even sentient.
Um, so I think that you probably should see it as having like some value even if ultimately you think that there's like way more value elsewhere. But I don't know. I think that that requires valuing things like life.
I I you know, I value human life. Um but you know, I I typically if all that there is there is human life, I typically value other things more.
Optimus Rhymes, thanks so much for the super chat. It's better to have children even if you ate kids. No, I don't think so. Um, I think that you should have children if you're a person who wouldn't feel like their life is like completely [ __ ] derailed by having kids. I think that having kids probably adds to your life, but only if you're a person who's open to having kids. Um, if you're not, then I mean, you know, obviously don't do that.
Godless punk, thanks so much for the super chat. Procreation is immoral, by the way, and I will die on that hill. # antiatalism. Um, that that just can't be true, right? I I think that that almost certainly commits you to the idea that like a a good thing to happen would be for somebody to come and like obliterate the earth. Uh, and that just there that can't be true. I don't know. Like I wouldn't prefer to be dead than to, you know, be alive. Like I'm glad that I'm alive. I I wouldn't prefer dead. And my, you know, I don't know. I don't think my life is like more suffering than it is like happiness and joy. I just think antiatalism is like for sure false.
Hail myself. Thanks so much for the super chat. My mental health would make me a bad parent. It would be morally abhorentt for me to have a kid. I grieve uh that. But it is what it is. Having kids is morally neutral. IMO. Um I think it's good. If it fits into your life, I think that having a kid is is good. Um all else equal, I think you should do it. If you have if you don't want to have a kid, then don't don't do that.
You know, I think it's permissible to not have a kid if you don't want to have one.
But, you know, if you're open to it, I think you probably should.
Daddy Cod, thanks so much for the super chat. I thought I was the only kid who chewed on Legos. No, I uh I destroyed those tasty Lego tires. [ __ ] those were so good.
Chilly [snorts] Crunch Edits, thanks so much for the cool corey membership.
Appreciate you.
Rummy53, thanks so much for that $10 super chat. Let's get a big big W for Ry153.
Thank you so much. I appreciate that.
Okay, Molly, do we have any anything else? Otherwise, I'll shout out the book club.
Okay, you guys should all join the book club. Uh, it's in the Discord, discord.gg/allegedly Ian. We're reading Rosland Hurst houses on virtue ethics. It's one of the foundational texts for the modern resurgence of virtue ethics. Um, we are going to uh we're going to go through the the full exploration of virtue.
You're going to learn about tragic moral dilemmas and about the importance of things like your character traits when evaluating moral situations. Um, the very first meeting of the book club is going to be on June 6th at 8:00m EST in the Discord. Uh, it's the introduc it's the introduction chapter. Um, I can't wait to see you all there. It's going to be a blast. It's going to be so much fun. Um, other than that, again, like the YouTube video just dropped. Go give it a like.
Do all the things that are good, helpful, and useful, and necessary for the algorithm. Other than that, shout out to all the people on the panel.
Thanks all so much. Uh, go check out my newest video.
>> Yep. This
Ähnliche Videos
BSA Goldstar - I gave up! And why animals beat humans!
thebingleywheeler
102 views•2026-05-31
don't put shein's responsibility onto individuals #shein #neoliberalism
ScintillaePod
231 views•2026-05-30
3 Dreams That Changed Philosophy Forever
mommyplus24
731 views•2026-05-31
I Cringed Watching These Protestants Critique Catholicism
jaynijackson
458 views•2026-06-05
Scholar Explains: WHAT IS A GNOSTIC?
fightbackpodcast
965 views•2026-05-31
When They Ignore You, Do This Instead | Stoicism
ZenithWisdom-e3k
615 views•2026-05-31
Why Pure HEDONISM Is IRRATIONAL
qnaline
12K views•2026-05-31
Nietzsche's Last Man Explained in Minecraft
twozziii
117 views•2026-05-30
