Michael Shermer: 'Women Are Not Just Tits and Ass. There's More to It Than That, a Lot More.'
The best-selling author of Why People Believe Weird Things sees a fundamental clash between wokeness and scientific inquiry.

"I think the second-wave feminists I've talked to are very worried about the kind of woke, gender-identity movement because it's reducing women to just body parts," says Michael Shermer. "A guy can say, 'Well, if I just get breast implants [and] then I can have a vaginoplasty made out of a piece of my skin, I'm in. I'm a woman, right?' Well, no, because women are not just tits and ass. There's more to it than that, a lot more."
That's today's guest, Michael Shermer, who for decades has been one of the most popular and provocative explicators of science to popular audiences, having authored bestselling books such as Why People Believe Weird Things, Why Darwin Matters, The Moral Arc, and The Mind of the Market. He founded Skeptic magazine in 1992, hosts a video podcast with leading activists and intellectuals, and, for nearly 20 years, authored a widely read column for Scientific American in which he debunked beliefs in UFOs and other paranormal phenomena, explained the rise of the "new atheism," and showed how evolution systematically informs human behavior.
Shermer's work is deeply and explicitly rooted in libertarian and Enlightenment ideas about individual responsibility, free market economics, rationality, and the search for something approaching objective truth. In 2019, Scientific American cut him loose, a move he ascribes to the publication's suffocating embrace of the sort of identity politics and wokeness that he says dominates academic and intellectual circles and, increasingly, the culture at large.
Last fall, Shermer, who holds a Ph.D. in the history of science and teaches Skepticism 101 at Chapman University, started a weekly Substack where he posts podcasts and the columns he would have written for Scientific American.
I caught up with the 67-year-old former competitive cyclist during FreedomFest, an annual gathering in Las Vegas. We talked about what he sees as the fundamental clash between wokeness and scientific inquiry, how hard it is to overcome the cognitive biases we all have, why he thinks trans athletes should be banned from most women's sports, why we have so much trouble acknowledging moral and technological progress, and why he now identifies as a classical liberal rather than as a libertarian.
Given his cycling background, we talk about Lance Armstrong and the widespread but illicit use of performance-enhancing drugs, which leads to all sorts of hypocritical and sociopathic behavior among so many of us. We also discuss how technology—including drugs—fuels human excellence in sports, business, and our personal and professional lives.
Previous Reason interviews with Michael Shermer:
"The Future of Science," by Matt Welch (December 28, 2018)
"Nick Gillespie and Skeptic Magazine's Michael Shermer on Postmodernism, Rationalism, and The Intellectual Dark Web," by Zach Weissmueller (December 21, 2018)
"Michael Shermer on Why Even Scientists, Transhumanists, and Atheists Want To Believe in Heaven," by Nick Gillespie (August 3, 2018)
"Reason and Science Make Us Moral: Michael Shermer on The Moral Arc," by Zach Weissmueller (January 20, 2015)
"Skeptic Michael Shermer on Atheism, Happiness, and the Free Market," by Reason Staff (December 7. 2010)
"Michael Shermer on the Modern History of Skepticism," by Reason Staff (August 7, 2009)
"Monkeys and Money," by Nick Gillespie (March 31, 2008)
"Michael Shermer: Evolutionary Economics and the Google Theory of Peace," by Dan Hayes (January 22, 2008)
Today's sponsors:
- The Novus Society at Donors Trust, which is helping Americans under 40 help create a freer, better world through targeted, effective philanthropy. It offers donor-advised fund accounts for young professionals, featuring lower minimum opening contribution requirements and opportunities to expand your charitable giving horizons by working collaboratively with your peers.
- The Reason Rundown With Peter Suderman. Free minds. Free markets. Big stories. That's The Reason Rundown, which comes out every Friday. End the week with concise, thought-provoking stories from the journalists at Reason, the magazine of logic, not legends; coherence, not contradictions. Hosted by Features Editor Peter Suderman, each episode he talks to a single Reason journalist about a single big story. Subscribe today.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Women Are Not Just Tits and Ass.
Yeah, there's the sandwiches, too.
Don’t forget about the cooter, it’s the only reason men talk to them.
I am creating eighty North American nation greenbacks per-hr. to finish some web services from home. I actually have not ever thought adore it would even realisable but my friend mate got $27k solely in four weeks simply doing this best (lap-53) assignment and conjointly she convinced Maine to avail. Look further details going this web-page.
.
---------->>> https://smartpay21.pages.dev
The day the Japanese create a life-realistic sex robot, men won't even have to talk to women anymore.
I believe completely convincing virtual reality sex will be easier to do and will beat fully lifelike sex robots to the market. Robots would have to be VERY human-like to be exciting for most people, and the state of the art is far away from that.
I think this is a difference without a distinction. I also think it falsely or over-prioritizes realism. VR is going to need mass and substance, visuals alone or even visuals and haptics isn't going to cut it. Even strip clubs are nowhere near as popular as regular dance clubs and at the point where you've got the mass and kinetics of a robot projecting the image of a person, the distinction between VR and a sex robot is pretty moot. Unless you're the kind of low-brow pedestrian that considers Rosey from The Jetsons to be a robot but a Roomba to be something other than a robot.
I just worked part-time from my apartment for 5 weeks, but I made $30,030. I lost my former business and was soon worn out. Thank goodness, I found this employment online and I was able to start working from home right away. (res-47) This top career is achievable by everyone, and it will improve their online revenue by:.
.
After reading this article:>>> https://getjobshere34.pages.dev
Are you saying people shouldn't... you know... rumba with their Roomba? That sucks.
Roast beef?
Makes me queef, as the kids say.
"Well, no, because women are not just tits and ass. There's more to it than that, a lot more."
Is this guy a biologist?
WHY MUST YOU PRINT THESE LIES???
Relevant Youtube video (all 3 videos are worth watching) - Boys Will Be Girls
Michael Shermer: 'Women Are Not Just Tits and Ass. There's More to It Than That, a Lot More.'
I'm certainly not going to argue against the underlying premise about wokeness being the sworn and mortal enemy of scientific inquiry, but again, someone has pushed the 'body parts' argument again, which, ironically is exactly what the Woke contingent ignores.
You don't need 'tits or ass'... or a vagina, or a uterus, or a combination of all of the previous and a certain amount of circulating estrogen and/or lack of circulating testosterone (I could go on-- but if you really want to know, I can point you to two PhDs in evolutionary biology who can explain what a woman is) to be a woman, you merely need declare yourself a woman and then you're free to wander into their changing rooms, their restrooms and beat them up in a cage match or on a rugby field, or cream them in every competition that favors strength and agility where you'd only be a middling (at best) performer before said declaration was made.
FYI, I'm glad to see Nick catching on. This shit could have been a central feature in a Libertarian magazine since... I'll be conservative and say 2015, but I'll take what I can get, when I can get it.
Especially when transgenderism is so at odds with campaigning against female genital mutilation. It should have been an article as soon as it showed its face in public.
I used to respect Shackford, seemed to have his head screwed on right, wrote a lot of useful and informative articles on things like LA light rail and housing policies. Then he decided to defend hormone blockers and gender surgery for pre-puberty kids, and Reason decided to publish them, and still employs him.
This shit could have been a central feature in a Libertarian magazine since... I'll be conservative and say 2015, but I'll take what I can get, when I can get it.
I'd be Conservative and go further. The magazine should've hired a more rational feminist to juxtapose against ENB when they hired her. Half or more of ENB's schtick is "Women aren't just a vagina but if you pay to treat them as just a vagina, that's OK." Kinda makes the whole "It's not just a social construct." argument a lot harder when half or more of the gender is saying "For $20, I'm whatever you want me to be baby!" Of course, it would also have been nice to have an actual woman on hand to say things like "A mother drowning her 3-yr.-old is never OK no matter how crazy she is." and "Statutory rape is statutory rape regardless of the sexes of the people involved."
So Michael Shermer turns out to be a right-wing fundamentalist. Sad!
/sarc
He'll be fired from Scientific American any day now.
Ah, already fired. Well that didn't take long.
They're also not just mental processes. They are PARTLY tits and ass. But mostly genetics, i.e. chromosomes.
Woman: a variety of human that when properly fucked by a man, generates and then incubates a proto-human. A woman comes with all the hardware and software to support this process.
Sorry, dudx. That's a person with a womb. Get with the program, or get to the gulag.
One can properly fuck with contraception and not produce offspring.
"Women Are Not Just Tits and Ass. There's More to It Than That, a Lot More."
Such as great gams, a pretty face and a pony tail hangin' down,
a wiggle and a walk and a giggle and a talk....
The Big Bopper lives!
"Women are not just tits and ass."
Presumably instead they're a microscopic molecule that wasn't discovered until hundreds of thousands of years after we set gender roles.
He's making an argument against plastic surgery perhaps, but for accepting gender identity, since women aren't just their body parts.
It's a real disappointment that some of the skeptic community got roped in by the fascists. I take everything Richard Dawkins says seriously, but at the end of the day, everyone's wrong about something, and if you're an old white heterosexual man, apparently, you're at risk for not being flexible about novel cultural attitudes.
One of my favorites is Laurence Krauss, a decent enough scientist I guess even though he's written some iffy popular books. In a very unoriginal way, he hates PC culture. In his case, naturally, it probably is more focused on anti-sexual-harassment movement.
Women Are Not Just Tits and Ass.
No, but they are some fine parts of many a woman!
This profound insight is brought to you by apparently one of the "foremost" science writers of the day.
That tells you mostly about the sorry state of science writing these days.
He just giving you some technical advice you can use with your Stepford Subsidiarity. 🙂