Up Next
Charlie Kirk Shares His Fifth Grade Testimony and Answers Students' Questions on Christianity, Politics, and Faith
9:53
Charlie Kirk Debates Progressive Students on Border Security, Trump's Accomplishments, and Affirmative Action Policies
11:27
Charlie Kirk Debates DEI, Airline Pilot Standards, and Black Family Structure with Concerned Citizen
9:35
Charlie Kirk Dismantles Affirmative Action Arguments With Engineering Student on Campus Tour
Charlie Kirk engages in a heated campus debate with an engineering student defending affirmative action. The student argues that diversity quotas benefit everyone by bringing varied perspectives to fields like medicine and engineering, citing examples like endometriosis research and car safety design. Kirk counters by challenging the premise that race should matter more than merit, pointing to lower test scores and declining institutional excellence. The conversation expands into fundamental questions about biological differences between men and women, happiness metrics, and whether America's shift away from pure meritocracy has made the country stronger or weaker.
The Case for Affirmative Action
The debate begins with a female engineering student making the case that affirmative action benefits society beyond just helping minorities and women. She argues that diverse representation in fields like engineering and medicine leads to better outcomes for everyone. Her examples include endometriosis being understudied due to insufficient women in medical research, and car seatbelts being designed exclusively for male bodies using only male crash test dummies, resulting in higher fatality rates for women in accidents.
She poses a direct question: without affirmative action, how can we ensure diverse perspectives are brought into these critical fields where design decisions affect people's lives and safety?
Merit Over Identity
Kirk responds by advocating for pure meritocracy, turning to the white men standing near the student and asking if she would be comfortable telling them she deserves a position more than they do based on factors that shouldn't matter more than qualifications. He points to data from the Harvard affirmative action case showing that admitted students of color had test scores nearly 40% lower than their white and Asian counterparts.
When the student acknowledges that people of color often come from lower socioeconomic backgrounds that don't prioritize education, Kirk reframes the question: should we try to fix those underlying socioeconomic issues, or should we penalize competent white males to achieve diversity? He argues these are two fundamentally different approaches, and that current affirmative action policies are making institutions less excellent.
The Secret Service Example
Kirk offers a concrete example: the U.S. Secret Service has stated a goal of making 30% of agents women, despite having lower fitness criteria for female agents including fewer required pull-ups and push-ups, and slower mile times. When the student begins to acknowledge physiological differences, Kirk challenges her to explain how this differs from affirmative action in other fields.
The student pivots, suggesting the Secret Service example isn't comparable to fields like engineering where women could perform equally. Kirk presses the question: if physical differences disqualify this as a good example of affirmative action, what makes intellectual and professional fields different?
Brain Wiring and Gender Differences
The conversation shifts to whether men and women are fundamentally wired differently. Kirk argues that just as men will never be as physically strong as women, women excel in certain areas where men don't. He contends that men will never be as good at counseling, psychology, nursing, or elementary education as women because of how their brains are wired.
Kirk explains his theory: women are better gifted at micro topics like individual connections, empathetic conversations, and healing past trauma, while men excel at macro topics like building skyscrapers and discussing geopolitics. He offers a simple test: when five women eat lunch together, they typically discuss relationships and friendships, while men discuss politics, sports, or the stock market.
The engineering student pushes back, arguing there's no brain wiring that makes someone like Donald Trump or prefer political conversations. She insists women have the capability for political discussions just like men.
Nature Versus Nurture
Kirk asks whether the student believes men and women are made different in their brains. She acknowledges certain biological differences like hormone production but resists the idea that this channels people toward specific interests or careers. When Kirk asks if men are more likely to enjoy contact sports, football, UFC, and hunting, the student attributes this to societal norms rather than biology.
Kirk challenges this assertion, asking if she really believes there's nothing within the female brain that makes young women more likely to prefer getting their hair done with a girlfriend over watching a four-hour football game. The student responds that suggesting women can't sit through a football game is diminishing. Kirk counters by asking if it's equally diminishing to say a man wouldn't want to spend hours getting his hair done.
The conversation touches on makeup and appearance, with Kirk suggesting the student's choice to wear makeup reflects something in her wiring about wanting to be presentable to find a mate. The student tries to redirect back to affirmative action, noting the conversation has strayed far from the original topic.
Parity Across All Fields
Kirk brings the discussion back by asking whether there should be equal representation of male and female OBGYNs. When he notes that 85% of OBGYNs are female, he asks if men should be given preference to achieve parity. The student responds that representation should match the general population.
Kirk points out this would mean actively discriminating against women studying to become OBGYNs to make room for men. The student clarifies she's talking about general societal structures, explaining that because women couldn't vote until less than 100 years ago, laws and systems were built by men to support men, excluding women from consideration.
The Women's Happiness Paradox
Kirk challenges whether women's liberation over the past 50 years has actually made women happier. He claims women are now the most depressed demographic in the history of the species, with the highest rates of antidepressant use and suicidal ideation. The student initially thinks men are more suicidal, but Kirk clarifies that while men are more successful at committing suicide, women have far more suicidal thoughts.
He poses a stark question: if women are more liberated than ever with more college degrees, more birth control, and less marriage, why are they the most miserable they've ever been? The student suggests this could be because women now have access to psychologists and are more likely to seek mental health treatment.
When asked directly if women are happier in 2024 than in 1964, the student says yes, explaining that as a woman of color in an interracial relationship, she wouldn't have been able to marry the love of her life back then. She references laws preventing interracial marriage and housing discrimination through redlining.
Interracial Marriage Timeline
A side debate emerges about when interracial marriage became legal nationwide. The student claims it wasn't fully legal until 1967 in all states. Kirk expresses skepticism, particularly about northern states like Wisconsin. The student insists the data supports her claim, while Kirk maintains this couldn't be true for every state, though he acknowledges some southern states likely had such laws.
Excellence Above All
Kirk brings the conversation full circle by asking what should matter more: race or merit? When the student hesitates and suggests both matter, Kirk challenges this compromise position. He asks if there's any risk that affirmative action might create institutions that aren't as excellent. The student says no.
Kirk responds emphatically: there is not a single example where affirmative action is employed and standards are not lowered. When asked again how to bring diverse opinions without affirmative action, Kirk dismisses the premise entirely. He doesn't care that much about diversity of opinion compared to excellence.
He concludes by stating he wants the country America once had, which he characterizes as the greatest country ever, where excellence and superior intellect were prioritized above "sensitive racial politics." He argues that when America was based purely on merit, the country was more successful and better run, and that the current system has made America objectively worse.
Video Transcript
0:00
Not only does affirmative action like
0:01
help, you know, minorities, people of
0:03
color, but also women in general. And
0:06
there's a lot of facets of engineering,
0:08
the medical system, and other factors
0:10
that because of affirmative action have
0:12
helped. Um, I'll just go into something.
0:14
For example,
0:16
um, let's say like in the medical field,
0:19
endometriosis, something like that has
0:21
not been studied in women due to so
0:24
little women being in the medical field.
0:27
Um, also for example like cars, um, the
0:31
seat belt is made specially for the male
0:33
body. They're only tested with male
0:34
mannequins. So a lot of women are in
0:36
risk of dying in car crashes at a higher
0:38
rate. Um, there's a lot of things that
0:41
benefit from a diverse group of people
0:43
both in engineering and medical fields
0:45
and education and other facets of the
0:49
systems. Um, and I was just wondering
0:51
without affirmative action, how do you
0:53
think uh we can bring these people in to
0:56
bring a variety of opinions?
0:58
Yeah. No, I mean just have a
0:59
meritocracy, right? So you have three
1:02
white men around you, you can see one,
1:03
two, three. So if one supports
1:05
affirmative No, it's okay. If one
1:07
supports affirmative action,
1:08
right,
1:08
it would mean that you would be okay
1:10
turning to those three men and saying,
1:11
"I deserve the position more than you
1:13
based on something that doesn't matter
1:14
more than that." I feel like that's one
1:16
facet of it that we're not also paying
1:18
attention to is that people that are
1:19
graduating are graduating from the same
1:21
schools. They're graduating with the
1:22
same degrees
1:22
with lower test scores though, much
1:24
lower. Every study of affirmative
1:25
action, for example, the Harvard case
1:27
showed that it was nearly 40% lower test
1:29
scores for people of color versus their
1:30
white male counterparts and Asian
1:32
counterparts.
1:32
And so is that is that like uh like why
1:36
would that happen? Do you think it's
1:37
Yeah. Why?
1:39
What causes that? Do you think it's just
1:40
because like people of color are more
1:42
like stupid?
1:43
Of course not. I mean, people of color
1:44
come from lower soio economic
1:45
backgrounds that don't prioritize
1:47
education.
1:47
So, how do we fix those socioeconomic
1:49
status? But that's that's an interesting
1:50
point. Not should we try to penalize
1:53
white males that are competent to go run
1:54
our systems and our institutions.
1:56
So, those are two different things. So,
1:58
what we're doing is our institutions are
2:00
now becoming less excellent.
2:02
Our country is not working like it used
2:04
to because we basically told people that
2:07
are very qualified and very competent
2:09
that sorry, we're not going to put a
2:10
position for you here. For example, the
2:12
US Secret Service. Let me just give you
2:14
one example. Okay? Now, the Secret
2:15
Service has said that we want to have
2:17
30% of all our agents be women, which by
2:19
the way, they have lower fitness
2:21
criteria.
2:22
So, they have less pull-ups, less
2:23
push-ups, slower mile time by
2:26
Oh, yeah. That's something that's due to
2:27
like your
2:28
Hold on. Exactly. Yeah. No, no, but
2:29
that's this is this is affirmative
2:31
action, right? And so therefore, when
2:33
Well, there's like fields like for I
2:34
don't think that's a good one second.
2:36
One second. I just don't think that's a
2:37
good example because like women will
2:39
never be as strong as men at least.
2:41
That's an interesting question. I think
2:42
it should be something that's will be
2:45
will women be as good at engineering as
2:48
men person for person?
2:50
Uh, not necessarily, but
2:51
okay. Well, then it's how is that
2:52
different than the secret service
2:53
example?
2:54
Well, the problem is that
2:55
because the male mind is wired different
2:57
than the female mind. By the way, men
2:58
will never be as good Hold on, I'll
3:00
prove it to you. Men will never be as
3:02
good at counseling or psychology
3:04
sessions as women. Men will never be
3:06
good as at nursing or elementary school
3:08
education as women. We have certain
3:10
giftings as our brain is wider a certain
3:12
way. Women are far better gifted at
3:14
micro topics. So individual connection,
3:17
empathetic type conversations, healing
3:20
uh people that of past trauma and wound.
3:22
Men are much better at macro topics,
3:24
right? Trying to build a building, put a
3:26
skyscraper up, trying to talk
3:28
geopolitics. And I'll prove it to you.
3:29
When you go and you see five women
3:31
eating lunch, they're probably talking
3:33
about micro topics, conversations they
3:36
had, relationships, friendships. men.
3:38
They're talking about politics, sports,
3:40
or the stock market.
3:41
That's not necessarily true.
3:42
Oh, yes. You guys all agree, right?
3:44
I mean, there's a reason.
3:45
No, these are these are these are biodal
3:47
general truths, right? Of course,
3:48
there's exceptions, but
3:49
it's not a general truth, though. I feel
3:51
like women have the cap the capability
3:52
of having political conversations.
3:54
Of course, they do, but it's not their
3:55
it's not the general wiring or nature of
3:57
women.
3:58
It's not there's no wiring for your
3:59
brain to like Donald Trump. Like, that's
4:00
not a real thing. I feel like
4:02
But wait a second. But you do you think
4:04
that men and women are made different in
4:05
our brains and our in our
4:07
uh certain things but not necessarily it
4:09
doesn't like channel you to be a
4:10
specific thing
4:11
like what things
4:13
well like there's like specific wirings
4:14
to you know like produce certain types
4:16
of hormones and that's like differences
4:19
that are genetically
4:19
so you don't you don't think that men
4:21
are more likely to like contact sports
4:23
more likely to enjoy football UFC
4:26
hunting
4:26
I think that's because of a societal
4:28
norm in general like over well over
4:31
No come on you're smarter than that
4:32
That's not true. Hold on. So, why is it
4:34
there's women that play football? So,
4:35
like you you can't just say that
4:37
and there are men that dress in drag,
4:38
but those are the those are not the the
4:41
the general truth of it. So, let me just
4:44
be clear. You think that there's nothing
4:45
within the female brain in its
4:47
constitution that makes young ladies
4:50
more likely
4:51
I mean, being that I'm an engineer, I
4:52
don't think so. No. Yeah.
4:54
Really?
4:55
Yeah. I don't I mean I feel like there's
4:57
So you think if you pick a random lady
4:59
here that they would be just as
5:00
comfortable sitting and watching a
5:02
4-hour football game than they were to
5:03
go get their hair done with their best
5:05
girlfriend?
5:05
Well, I feel like that's kind of
5:06
diminishing to say, "Oh, because you're
5:08
a woman, you will not be able to sit
5:09
through a 4hour football field."
5:11
Is it diminishing to say a man wouldn't
5:13
want to go get his hair done? No.
5:14
No. I'm sure you get your hair done,
5:16
right?
5:16
Not really. It's like 10 minutes in and
5:18
out like barber shop.
5:18
But you still do it. It's
5:20
but the point again there are certain
5:22
things that women will take more ser for
5:23
example women will take a lot longer
5:25
getting ready for the day than men. Yeah
5:27
right. Why?
5:28
Because we're held to higher standards
5:30
to look pretty. For example, your hair.
5:33
How short is your hair? Super short.
5:34
Mine it takes it's going to take longer
5:36
to dry.
5:36
Do you wear makeup?
5:38
Yeah.
5:38
Why?
5:39
Because you want to look pretty and it
5:41
takes
5:41
Yeah. That's not important to me because
5:42
I'm a man.
5:43
Oh, right. But who made you feel
5:45
something in your wiring?
5:46
I don't feel comfortable not wearing
5:47
makeup because of a certain reason.
5:49
Well, but you wouldn't feel comfortable
5:50
wearing makeup.
5:51
I can not wear makeup.
5:52
But why do you do it?
5:53
I mean like right now I'm not wearing
5:55
like anything really.
5:56
No, I know. But that's the point is that
5:57
at some point you wear makeup because
5:58
there's something within your wiring
6:00
that says I want to be presentable to
6:02
the world. And that wiring honestly is I
6:04
want to find a mate to have.
6:05
I mean, this question was a vote of
6:05
affirmative action. I think we're
6:06
No, no, no. not actually important
6:08
because I don't think there's any
6:09
differences between races, but I think
6:11
that when it comes to affirmative
6:12
action, we're saying that there are
6:13
differences, right?
6:14
That we're trying to say that things
6:15
that don't matter should matter. Should
6:17
we try to have the same amount of female
6:19
to male OBGYn?
6:21
I think it should be similar to the
6:23
amount of like
6:24
OBGYn like the general population.
6:26
Hold on. 85% of all OBGYNS are are
6:28
female.
6:29
Yeah.
6:30
So now, should we have par so that men
6:32
I have an OBGYn that's a man. That's not
6:34
a problem.
6:35
That's not the point. The point is,
6:36
should we have parody?
6:38
I think it should be similar to like
6:40
whatever the
6:41
Got it. Okay. So, you're consistent. So,
6:43
women studying in the OBGYn field will
6:45
be actively discriminated against. So, a
6:47
man can because we must have parody.
6:49
It's not about people in the OBGYN
6:51
specifically. It's about people in
6:52
general. Men were like, for example,
6:54
women were not able to vote until like
6:55
less than a like 100 years ago
6:57
basically, right?
6:58
What does that have to do with
6:59
One second. Um so because of that a lot
7:02
of the laws a lot of everything that's
7:03
set in place was made by men was
7:05
excluding women was creating like like
7:08
like reforms and like certain
7:10
legislations that would specifically you
7:13
know support men rather than women
7:16
because women don't have that ability
7:17
support society. I don't think it was
7:19
always about support. Well, for example,
7:20
like like what about like what I like
7:21
what I brought up endometriosis or like
7:23
the seat belt accident like all this
7:24
stuff is due because we tend to favor
7:27
men and specific.
7:28
So I first of all I just don't believe
7:30
that first of all because research will
7:32
go where the money is and so if there
7:33
was there money in endometriosis
7:35
research
7:36
not much because men
7:37
that's why so maybe it wasn't sexism
7:38
maybe it was a monetary explanation.
7:40
Well who has the like who has the money
7:41
in a society?
7:42
Actually women control more money than
7:43
men in the country
7:44
but men like women weren't able like
7:46
women weren't able to have bank accounts
7:47
until like less than 100 years ago. So
7:49
they can't really like, you know, build
7:50
that generational wealth.
7:51
Do do you think it's been a better thing
7:52
with women's liberation the last 20, 30
7:54
years?
7:54
Yeah, I would.
7:56
Do you think that's interesting? Do you
7:57
think women are happier in America today
7:59
than they were 30 years ago?
8:00
Yeah.
8:01
Then why are why are they the most
8:02
depressed group in the history of the
8:04
species?
8:05
Because we have these like legislations
8:08
that don't allow us to go into
8:09
Women are the most suicidal addicted to
8:12
anti-depressants.
8:12
I thought it was men.
8:13
No, no. Women are far more suicidal. Men
8:16
are more successful in committing
8:17
suicide. Big difference.
8:19
Men when men when men commit suicide,
8:21
they're much better at it. Women have
8:23
far more suicidal ideiation than men.
8:25
Okay.
8:26
But why is it that with women being
8:28
liberated the last 50 years, women are
8:30
the most miserable they've ever been?
8:32
Like why is that?
8:33
I don't think that's gen I don't think
8:34
that's because we're allowed to have
8:35
money.
8:36
No, I'm asking I'm asking the but it's
8:37
like more liberation, more college
8:39
degrees, more birth control, less
8:40
marriage.
8:41
I would I would argue otherwise. I don't
8:42
know where you you got that data. No,
8:44
everybody agrees that women are super
8:45
miserable like as far as versus 30 years
8:48
ago.
8:48
Well, it could be the fact that because
8:50
women weren't able to go to psych like a
8:52
psychologist or like
8:54
or maybe it's because they're not doing
8:56
the one thing that they want to do,
8:59
which is to get married and have
9:00
children.
9:02
Yeah, she said she's saying that no,
9:04
it's actually opposite. It's saying that
9:05
women actually says women around the
9:08
world report higher levels of life
9:10
satisfaction than men, but at the same
9:11
time report more daily stress.
9:13
So type in women anti-depressant use
9:16
2024. It is the highest it has ever
9:18
been.
9:18
But there's like more layers to it than
9:20
that. It can't just be that. You have to
9:21
look at why are women more likely to go
9:24
and talk to a psychologist? There's
9:25
there's the differences in that.
9:27
So, but I I just I'm I'm just curious.
9:28
So, do you think women are generally
9:30
happier in 2024 than they were in 1964?
9:33
Really? So, you think
9:34
I mean just as a woman of color, I don't
9:36
think being like not having like rights
9:38
in back then.
9:40
Whats did they not have in 1964? they
9:41
weren't able to get married to like like
9:43
a a white man. That's like my I'm I'm in
9:46
an interracial relationship. I'm dating
9:48
a white man. Like if I was back then, I
9:50
would never be with the love of my life.
9:51
I feel like that's one point that
9:53
because you're not allowed to marry
9:54
black like black people are not allowed
9:56
to marry white people back then
9:57
where
9:58
before 1964
9:59
where
10:00
in the in America.
10:01
No, that that was like outlawed in like
10:03
1918.
10:04
It wasn't 1918. It was it was happening
10:06
still until 1964. Also, banks weren't
10:09
also banks were like specifically not
10:11
allowing black people to like own homes
10:15
back then. They could
10:17
were able to own homes. You're talking
10:18
about redlinining, which is a completely
10:19
different thing.
10:19
Well, like they were they were they
10:21
could
10:21
But no, I'm just I'm curious though at
10:23
some point
10:24
1967. Yeah.
10:25
That's when interracial marriage was
10:27
finally brought here.
10:29
In the last state, which was where?
10:31
Okay. But that's crazy still. Like I
10:33
would not be able to be
10:34
Yeah. We you asked me the question as a
10:36
woman would you be happier back then?
10:38
No, I wouldn't because I couldn't be
10:39
with the love of my
10:40
wife. I I think that's I think it's
10:41
shocking. I we are seeing things like
10:44
that. So things like that is what is
10:45
important.
10:46
No, it's amazing. If you think women and
10:48
like people are happier today than they
10:50
were 50 or 60 years ago, it's it's it's
10:53
remarkable. It's just objectively
10:54
just by that fact that I would be able
10:56
to marry someone that I love is I think
10:58
what you just said it was repealed in '
11:00
67 in one state by the way. 1967. That's
11:03
when No, that's when it was finally like
11:05
made like law. So before that, like
11:08
in every state.
11:08
Like in every state. I'm pretty sure
11:10
that's when it was.
11:10
There's no way that is true.
11:11
They just looked it up. They just showed
11:12
me.
11:13
It's There's no way it's true in every
11:14
state in
11:15
I don't know what to tell you. Oh my
11:16
god.
11:16
Yeah. This is not true.
11:17
That's just what it shows. Well, you
11:18
can't just say that's not true and just
11:19
say, "Oh, like
11:20
you're trying to tell me in the state of
11:21
Wisconsin you could not interraially
11:22
marry in 1964?"
11:24
You couldn't. I'm pretty sure in
11:25
Wisconsin you couldn't.
11:27
Is is that I mean I I think that's
11:29
I was born.
11:30
Yeah. It's just like that's not even
11:31
close to being true. Yeah,
11:32
I'm sure there were some southern states
11:34
where it might have been true.
11:35
Well, now we're avoiding it.
11:36
Yeah, but no. Okay, so affirmative
11:37
action. Let me ask you a question. What
11:39
should matter more, race or merit?
11:43
Oh, okay.
11:44
So, what should matter more, race or
11:46
merit?
11:47
Uh, I I don't think it's based on like a
11:50
little bit of both. Yes.
11:51
Why should race? Well, my initial point
11:53
was that because of not having like
11:56
people, you know, like, you know, of
11:59
certain races or certain genders like be
12:02
here and working in engineering and
12:05
stuff like that, we have not been able
12:06
to like research into certain things
12:07
that would benefit.
12:08
Do you think there's any risk that we
12:09
might have institutions that aren't as
12:11
excellent?
12:12
No,
12:12
there is not a single example where
12:14
affirmative action is employed and
12:15
standards are not brought down.
12:18
I wouldn't say that, but
12:19
Okay. Thank you very But I just had the
12:21
question of how would you want to fix
12:22
that? Just like
12:23
there's there's no problem to fix pure
12:24
meritocracy.
12:25
No, I'm just saying like how how do you
12:26
bring people with diverse opinions?
12:28
Oh yeah. I mean like I don't care that
12:29
much about I care about excellence.
12:30
So like women like used to be studying
12:34
STEM. I care about being a strong
12:35
No, I'm talking about like being able to
12:37
like look into those type of things like
12:38
in materials is like all this stuff. How
12:40
do we make that safer for other people
12:42
without bringing people that care about
12:43
it?
12:43
Not that important to me. I want the
12:45
country we once had, which was the
12:46
greatest country ever, where we put
12:48
excellence and we put superior intellect
12:51
above like sensitive racial politics.
12:54
Not interesting to me.
12:55
Okay.
12:56
Because it was a bunch of white men that
12:58
were like running the country and all of
13:00
a sudden we've decided
13:00
I'm not saying that's a bad thing. I'm
13:01
just saying
13:02
no good. Like that's fine. I mean, but
13:03
when we used to have a country that was
13:05
based on merit, we were more successful
13:08
and we were a betterun country and we're
13:09
objectively not
Related Books
Browse Conservative Books
