Key Moments

Debra Soh | Full Address and Q&A | Oxford Union Web Series

Oxford UnionOxford Union
News & Politics8 min read61 min video
Apr 10, 2021|63,983 views|2,277|461
Save to Pod
TL;DR

Academic sex researcher Debra Soh argues that while supporting transgender rights is crucial, denying biological sex differences undermines the very concept of transition and alienates potential allies.

Key Insights

1

The majority of children with gender dysphoria outgrow their feelings by puberty, tending to become gay adults rather than transgender.

2

Denying biological sex differences can make activism appear dishonest and alienate the general public from supporting transgender rights.

3

Research indicates that even after a year of cross-sex hormones, male-born athletes retain significant advantages in muscle size and strength over female-born athletes.

4

The current climate in therapy is so politicized that adults, like children, may not receive unbiased treatment, potentially leading to detransition if underlying issues are not addressed.

5

Debra Soh criticizes the current approach to childhood transition, noting that social transition is often associated with medical interventions and can make it difficult for children to later detransition.

6

Soh believes that the backlash against her work, which defends scientific research on sex and gender, is largely driven by a fear of being labeled transphobic or bigoted, rather than by factual refutations.

The pressure to de-platform and the defense of scientific inquiry

Debra Soh, a science columnist and author, shares her experience of being invited to speak at the Oxford Union amidst significant pressure to rescind the invitation, including student petitions and a resigned union treasurer. She acknowledges her past alignment with social justice movements and empathizes with those who wish to de-platform speakers they believe spread hate. However, Soh argues that free debate is essential, even for those with whom one disagrees, and that ignoring or denying scientific facts does not strengthen an argument. She asserts that many critics have not read her work in its entirety, leading to misinterpretations and claims taken out of context. Soh emphasizes her support for transgender, intersex, and gender non-conforming people, advocating for equal rights and legal protections, and committing to using preferred pronouns. She stresses that her work should not be used to justify discrimination and has received feedback from trans individuals who found her book compassionate and reasonable, thanking her for voicing concerns that, in their view, are not always accurately represented by activists.

Leaving academia for scientific accuracy

Soh explains her decision to leave academia, citing a shift in the academic climate where sex researchers increasingly avoided certain topics for fear of angering transgender activists. She personally experienced this when she wrote an op-ed about research indicating that the majority of children with gender dysphoria outgrow these feelings by puberty, often becoming gay adults. Soh, who used brain imaging techniques like fMRI in her doctoral research on sexuality, gender, and paraphilias, felt compelled to leave academia to maintain her ability to write accurately about scientific research. She began writing for Playboy.com as their resident sex scientist and later authored 'The End of Gender' to address public confusion stemming from the difficulty in distinguishing legitimate scientific studies from activist propaganda. Soh notes that some scientists align with 'woke' narratives out of fear or for career advancement, a trend she finds concerning.

Debunking myths and the distinction between sex and gender

In 'The End of Gender,' Soh tackles nine prevalent myths not supported by facts, including the ideas that gender and sex are spectrums, that sexual orientation and gender identity are unrelated, and that there are no differences between trans women and cisgender women. She also defends evolutionary psychology and argues against gender being solely a social construct. Soh clarifies the distinction between biological sex, determined by gametes (eggs and sperm), and gender identity, which is how one feels in relation to their sex. She points out the contradiction in activists deeming biological sex 'hateful' while transgender identity is predicated on a difference from one's birth sex. Soh argues that referencing biological sex does not inherently undermine trans rights and that denying its existence can be counterproductive, potentially alienating the public. She also notes the problematic use of the word 'sex' in place of 'gender identity' in some policies, implying that trans women are female based on biology rather than identification.

Implications for sports and language

Soh discusses the implications of gender ideology in sports, arguing that even after a year on cross-sex hormones, individuals assigned male at birth retain advantages in muscle size and strength, negatively impacting female athletes. She acknowledges that sports involve more than competition, but stresses the inappropriateness of ignoring biological differences at the elite level, particularly for young female athletes who may have trained their entire lives. Soh also addresses the erasure of words referring to womanhood, such as 'individuals with a cervix' or 'birthing people,' arguing that sensitivity in language should not equate to forbidding references to being female. She believes that advocating for trans rights should not necessitate pretending biology doesn't exist, as this dishonesty can alienate potential supporters.

The desistance literature and conversion therapy bans

Soh defends the 'desistance literature,' which suggests most children with gender dysphoria desist by puberty and are more likely to be gay. She contends that criticisms of these studies as outdated or mythical are unfounded and that activists are asking society to ignore research backed by science in favor of unsupported ideas. Regarding conversion therapy bans for gender identity, Soh distinguishes between sexual orientation (immutable) and gender identity (which can fluctuate, especially in children). She does not support conversion therapy for sexual orientation, but argues that gender identity is different and that transitioning before puberty for the majority of children who will desist is not advisable. She notes that the current climate prevents proper clinical assessment, forcing clinicians to either affirm all desires to transition or risk their careers. Soh views these bans, particularly in Canada and the US, as a new form of conversion therapy for those who might otherwise be guided toward accepting their sexual orientation, drawing parallels with experiences shared by gay adults.

Social transition for children and the concept of two genders

Soh challenges the notion that social transition for children is harmless or easily reversible. She states that allowing a child to change their name and presentation as the opposite sex is often associated with moving towards medical transition, and that children rarely choose to revert to their birth sex identity. She reiterates her stance that there are only two genders from a scientific perspective, while acknowledging that individuals can identify differently. Soh suggests that the desire to identify as non-binary or outside the male/female binary often stems from other life issues, such as experiencing sexism or homophobia, which should be addressed directly. She expresses concern that this ideology convinces girls that not conforming to feminine stereotypes means they are not female, leading to potentially irreversible medical interventions like double mastectomies and testosterone use. The case of Kiera Bell in the UK, a detransitioner who underwent medical interventions, is highlighted as evidence of the potential harms of these decisions in minors, with the High Court ruling that children under 16 cannot consent to puberty blockers.

The link between autism and gender dysphoria

Soh discusses the correlation between autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and gender dysphoria. She stands by her assertion that autism is a mental health condition, as it is listed in the DSM. Citing a study by Professor Simon Baron-Cohen in the journal Nature, involving over 600,000 participants, she notes elevated rates of autistic traits in transgender and gender-diverse individuals. While clarifying that this does not preclude people with autism from transitioning, Soh emphasizes it as a crucial factor for clinicians to consider during assessments. She believes individuals on the spectrum and those with gender dysphoria deserve support and love without differential treatment.

Critiques on gender quotas, 'female typicality,' and the definition of a woman

Responding to accusations of misogyny, Soh clarifies her stance on gender quotas in STEM, stating she is in favor of women's rights and equal rights. She argues that pointing out average biological differences, such as the effects of prenatal testosterone on brain development or differences in occupational interests, does not justify sexism or devaluing women. She defends James Damore's 2017 Google memo, emphasizing the distinction between interest and ability, and arguing that on average, women are more drawn to people-focused occupations, while men gravitate towards mechanically interesting ones. Soh believes the narrative that women must be more male-typical to be taken seriously is a form of sexism, and that resources might be better allocated elsewhere than solely on recruiting women into fields where their average interests may differ. She defines 'female typical' as traits stereotypically associated with women, like nurturing and empathy, which she notes are sometimes devalued. Soh suggests that some women struggle with accepting their femininity and may distance themselves from these traits due to societal pressures. Regarding the definition of a woman, Soh believes distinctions should be made depending on the context, such as in sports or intimate spaces like prisons, while still being respectful of trans women and using their preferred pronouns. She critiques the idea that differentiating between trans women and cisgender women is inherently transphobic, arguing for the importance of honest, science-based conversations about these differences.

The future of scientific inquiry and societal healing

Soh expresses optimism that truth will eventually prevail, despite the current challenges to objective scientific inquiry and the rise of 'cancel culture.' She believes the current ideology will eventually collapse, necessitating a rebuilding of scientific and societal structures. Soh encourages public engagement and vocalization of agreement on these issues, stating that many people share similar views but are hesitant to express them. She criticizes the notion that speech equates to violence, deeming it hyperbolic and a way to avoid factual debate. Soh advises individuals to develop resilience and 'thicker skin' to navigate a world where not everyone agrees with them. Looking ahead, she is launching a new project and urges followers to connect via her website due to social media censorship. Ultimately, Soh hopes for a future where free inquiry and open, albeit sometimes difficult, conversations can lead to greater understanding and societal progress.

Common Questions

Debra Soh's book argues against the idea that gender is purely a social construct, defending scientific research that indicates biological differences between sexes. She aims to debunk common myths about gender and highlights the influence of activism on scientific discourse.

Topics

Mentioned in this video

More from OxfordUnion

View all 81 summaries

Ask anything from this episode.

Save it, chat with it, and connect it to Claude or ChatGPT. Get cited answers from the actual content — and build your own knowledge base of every podcast and video you care about.

Get Started Free