When Bill Nye Enlisted Science in the Service of Perversion

If Nye has been taken seriously up to now, he should be no longer.

Bill Nye speaking at HighEdWeb in 2015.

By Michael Brown Published on April 26, 2017

Perversion is a strong word, but there is no other way to describe it. The musical presentation promoted by Bill Nye on his Bill Nye Saves the World show was perverse in every way. It was vulgar. It was vile. It was degrading. It was disgusting. That it was promoted in the name of science makes it all the more despicable.

According to Natural News, which is billed as “the world’s top news source on natural health,” Nye went “FULL LUNATIC” with his “vulgar transgender video.” The man known as “the science guy” has taken science to a freakish new low. Full lunatic indeed.

The World Gives “My Sex Junk” a Thumbs Down

The video in question, “My Sex Junk” by Rachel Bloom, was featured on Nye’s Bill Nye Saves the World show. (If this is saving the world, I can only imagine what destroying the world looks like.)

Within a few days, it had reached more than half-a-million views on YouTube, with the Thumbs Down responses outnumbering the Thumbs Up responses roughly 40,000 to 700. Have you ever seen a rating that negative? More than 60 to 1 panning the video.

Nye introduces the performance saying, “So, you guys, seriously, the next thing, I feel is very special. This is a cool little segment. You know this woman from Crazy Ex-Girlfriend. Please give it up for Rachel Bloom.”

What follows is … well, watch for yourself. Or maybe not. I could only stomach a few seconds of the video before shutting it off, choosing to read a description of it instead. It was that bad.

The video ridicules the idea that one must choose between male and female, and it does so in the crudest of terms.

It mocks the idea of male and female, and it does so in the crudest of terms. And it gets worse from there. Much worse. Too perverse to repeat. And remember: This video was being promoted by “the science guy, Bill Nye” on his Bill Nye Saves the World show.

We’re not talking about a family sharing with tears the struggles of their little boy who identifies as a girl. We’re not talking about a trans-identified man talking about how much happier he is now that he’s accepted his “real” identity.

We’re talking about a vulgar celebration of perversion, and the chorus repeats, “Cause my sex junk is so, oh, oh, oh. Much more than either-or, or, or.”

“Science” … or Perverted Sexuality?

As for the “science” element of the video, Bloom proclaims, “It’s evolution, ain’t nothing new. There’s nothing taboo about a sex stew.”

Yes, “If they’re alive I’ll date them” (thank God necrophilia wasn’t celebrated; at least the people are alive). “Channing or Jenna Tatum” (speaking of a husband wife). “I’m down for anything.”

We’re then informed that “sexuality’s a spectrum. Everyone is on it … Drag queen, drag king. Just do what feels right. You’re a tall pansexual. Flirty word sprite?”

“If Charles Darwin were still alive today, he would no doubt squash Bill Nye with a giant Galapagos tortoise,” Natural News commented.

And this is followed by more unintelligible mumbo-jumbo. Oh, the beauty and wisdom of science!

But there’s more. As Bloom raps out, “Sex how you want. It’s your g—d—m right,” the camera cuts over to Nye, who is absolutely getting into the music. I mean, he is down with it, baby!

Then Bloom closes things out, saying, “Get off your soap box. My sex junk’s better than bagels with lox …” (Did I mention that the video features several other dancers, cavorting lewdly?)

And what happens next? Bill Nye, the science guy, the host of Bill Nye Saves the World, strides to the middle of the stage and says, “That’s exactly the right message, Rachel. Nice job.”

Read those words slowly and carefully: “That’s exactly the right message, Rachel.”

“Full Lunatic”

Yes, Nye indeed has gone “full lunatic.” As Natural News commented, “If Charles Darwin were still alive today, he would no doubt squash Bill Nye with a giant Galapagos tortoise.”

The Daily Caller notes that Nye’s show “purports to look at various problems through a more scientific perspective, according to the International Movie Database.”

One can only wonder what a non-scientific perspective would look like.

The Caller cites one YouTube viewer who wrote (quite representative of many others), “F— this world, I want to just move to the forest and become a monk. I can’t take this degeneracy anymore.” This is how Bill Nye saves the world?

Bill Nye is using science as a bludgeoning tool to bully ideological opponents.

Yet for Nye, this is hard science, now put into the service of the most extreme factions of LGBT activism. Anyone who disputes these allegedly established findings of science is thereby an anti-scientific bigot. What a horrific misuse and abuse of science.

Science may be amoral, but it can be used for moral or immoral purposes. It can also be employed as a bludgeoning tool, used to bully ideological opponents, as if to say, “How dare you differ with the claims of science!”

That’s exactly what Nye has done, thereby enlisting science in the service of perversion.

Nye Can’t be Taken Seriously 

Back in January, the Science March organization tweeted that “colonization, racism, immigration, native rights, sexism, ableism, queer-, trans-, intersex-phobia, & econ justice are scientific issues.”

Although the tweet was quickly removed, such themes were not absent from the march. In the words of one speaker, “We all have a story. Mine is that I’m a public health geek and a policy wonk. I’m also a queer transgender man.”

He continued, “Science is objective, but science is not neutral. The poet Dante wrote that the hottest places in hell are reserved for those who remain neutral in moral crisis. We cannot pretend we are above the fray.”

No wonder that the Washington Times reported:

The March for Science has landed under the microscope amid mounting criticism over its left-of-center political agenda, prompting fears that the event could do more harm to the image of scientific research than good.

Nye has now taken things one step further. He’s gone beyond left-of-center into the looney left, the extreme-left that does not even represent many LGBT advocates, thereby disgracing the scientific community.

If he has been taken seriously up to now, he should be no longer. His radical ideology is perverting his judgment.

Print Friendly
Comments ()
The Stream encourages comments, whether in agreement with the article or not. However, comments that violate our commenting rules or terms of use will be removed. Any commenter who repeatedly violates these rules and terms of use will be blocked from commenting. Comments on The Stream are hosted by Disqus, with logins available through Disqus, Facebook, Twitter or G+ accounts. You must log in to comment. Please flag any comments you see breaking the rules. More detail is available here.
  • Autrey Windle

    C-R-A-Z-Y! Throw a net over him and Bloom together!

  • Gary

    Evolution = change. Nothing is fixed. Everything is in flux. Including sex. That is why, to materialists, having male genitals does not mean you are, or should be, attracted to females.

  • Timothy Horton

    LOL! Forget Trump, forget climate change, forget North Korea and China, forget same sex marriage. Bill Nye did something I don’t like! 😀

    There’s been eight separate thread focusing on Bill Nye this week. When will you be renaming The Stream to The Obsess Over Bill Nye board?

    • m-nj

      hey, dude… Nye is the guy YOUR side put forth as their top representative last weekend … pointing out not only his bad science, but his bad morality it part and parcel of his (supposed) celebrity.

      • Timothy Horton

        How is pointing out the fact human sexuality occurs over a spectrum from hetero to bi to homo and isn’t consciously chosen being immoral? I’m sure you personally don’t like it but that’s your problem. Granted the song and dance was pretty cheesy but that’s the format of the show – present a kernel of scientific truth wrapped in entertainment.

        • Gary

          It is a fact that God has made rules for human sexual behavior that He demands people obey, or be punished. The rule is that only heterosexual sex between a man and his wife is moral. Bi-sexual and homosexual behavior is a violation of God’s rules and the violators will be punished by God.

        • Charles Burge

          I’m sure this has been pointed out to you before, but nobody is saying that people consciously choose to be homosexual (or anything else in the alleged “spectrum”). What we are saying is that it clearly isn’t genetic. The overwhelming evidence supports the conclusion that most proclivity toward sexual perversion stems from early childhood trauma. The fact that nobody wants to talk about that is extremely anti-science.

          • Timothy Horton

            Pretty much every religious conservative here has claimed non-hetero sexual orientation is a conscious choice. Your idiotic claim all non-hetero orientation is from being molested has already been thoroughly rebutted. No one in science wants to talk about it because it’s already been proven false.

          • Charles Burge

            No one in science wants to talk about it because it’s already been proven false.

            I was unaware of this. Would you be so kind as to point me toward a resource or two that presents this conclusion? Preferably from a scientific journal please.

          • Timothy Horton

            Look up the studies on twins where one is gay and one is straight. Both were raised in the identical environment and neither were molested as children.

            There’s also the testimony of millions of non-hetero folks who have said repeatedly they weren’t molested but you discount that fact because you don’t like it.

          • Charles Burge

            There’s also the testimony of non-hetero folks who have said they were molested but you discount that fact because you don’t like it. Also you once again misrepresented what I said. I used the word “most”, which you changed to “all”. And I didn’t use the word “molested”. I’m getting a bit tired of correcting your constant misrepresentations of my points.

          • Timothy Horton

            You have no evidence “most” non-hetero folks were molested. From studies I’ve seen the actual percentage is statistically no different from the number of hetero people molested as children. You’re just scraping for ways to justify your religiously based intolerance.

          • Charles Burge

            *sigh*

            Again, where did this term “molested” come from? I never used it in any of my arguments.

            Also, you flatly said that “it’s already been proven false”. Where is the documentation for this?

          • Timothy Horton

            I already told you.

          • Andy6M

            Timothy Horton: totally off topic but I’ve gotta ask – are you a fellow Canuck?

          • Timothy Horton

            No. I wish I was related to the donut guy and had his family’s money but I’m not.

          • Andy6M

            Ha…your name is indeed what led me to ask.

          • Charles Burge

            Um, no, you didn’t. You pointed to twin studies, and while that is certainly interesting, it’s evidence, not proof. I’m a little surprised that I would need to point out to a scientist that evidence is not the same thing as proof.

          • Timothy Horton

            (facepalm) Science doesn’t prove things but it can and does disprove them. Your claim that “most” (which you won’t quantify) non-hetero orientation is caused by molestation (which you hide behind “childhood trauma”) has been proven false.

          • Charles Burge

            Whatever, Timothy. I’m genuinely trying to have an honest conversation, but your constant twisting of my words has made that effort futile.

          • Timothy Horton

            No you’re not. You’re still grasping at any straw to find some sort of scientific justification for your intolerance of non-hetero people. You’ll never find it because it doesn’t exist.

        • m-nj

          I was speaking generally of Nye, as you were commenting generally of the articles on Nye on The Stream the past few days.

          No one is denying that, “human sexuality occurs over a spectrum from hetero to bi to homo”… the argument is WHY? There is no evolutionary beneficial reason for anything other than hertero… evolution runs on propagation of the species, and only hetero naturally supports that. So the purely evolutionary explanation for non-hetero sex is lacking, and proves these are not natural (read: normal) behaviors. So it must be something else…

          you can go ahead and cite instances of supposed “homosexuality” in other animals, but those are likely expressions of dominance/submission in the group, not of anything positive the LGBTQ etc., etc. crew would ascribe to their “relationships”. and it certainly doesn’t fall under an evolutionary normal propagation of the species.

          • Timothy Horton

            There is no evolutionary beneficial reason for anything other than hertero…
            There is an evolutionary benefit. It’s called kin selection. You don’t have to reproduce yourself as long as your presence increases the chances you siblings and cousins reproduce. There is also evidence the genetic component of homosexual orientation also tends to make other female members of the family have higher fecundity.

        • Michael Gore

          I’m a little more surprised that you don’t protest to Nye prostituting out “Science” for a Leftist political agenda. I would assume, with the veneration of Science in general you often show, you would see a major issue with tying the institute of Science to a political party or ideology.

          • Timothy Horton

            What you call “the Left” are just those who understand the science and who accept the results of scientific investigations. That’s the opposite of many RW religious conservatives who reject the science solely because it contradicts their religious teachings.

          • Michael Gore

            That’s rather sloppy thinking to claim that everyone who agrees with a certain political agenda “are just those who understand the science and who accept the results of scientific investigations”. Once again category errors abound.

            Besides it seems to me the Politics is driving the science a whole lot more than the other way around. Isn’t it telling when the entire endevor of science seems to have been narrowed down to a persons opinion on Evolution, Global Warming and Homosexuality. Especially when all 3 of those topics seem to be more political footballs than meaningful scientific categories anyway.

            I am just pointing out your inconsistency once again, you claim to be a defender of “Science” but seem to be more concerned about preservation of the political ideology even if it means subordinating scientific studies to it.

          • Timothy Horton

            You’re the one who started off falsely claiming science was being used to boost the Leftist political agenda. I agree that was very sloppy thinking on your part.

            Isn’t it telling when the entire endevor of science seems to have been narrowed down to a persons opinion on Evolution, Global Warming and Homosexuality

            Those are the three areas religious conservative folks who don’t understand science scream the loudest over. That’s why they get discussed the most.

            seem to be more concerned about preservation of the political ideology

            LOL! That’s pretty funny since all I’ve been arguing since I got to Stream is keeping the anti-science conservative political ideology OUT of science. Woefully sloppy thinking on your part.

    • Patmos

      Your “LOL!” sure showed him! Good job Social Justice Warrior. You can take off your Wonder Woman outfit and your Superman cape now, it was a job well done.

  • Zmirak

    The Tweeter also got Dante wrong. The “Trimmers” who were morally neutral were in a canal OUTSIDE of Hell. Not hot at all. Also, the worst places in Hell are the COLDEST, and they’re reserved for those who betray their benefactors. But apart from that, quite a piece of scholarly commentary.

  • Patmos

    The Nazis had some of the most brilliant scientists the world has ever seen. It takes more than just science, especially if it’s Bill Nye’s brand of “science”.

    • Timothy Horton

      Godwin’s Law! You lose the thread! 😀

  • Michael Gore

    The sad part is that Bill Nye is getting the cobwebs blown off him in order that he can serve as the ambassador to children for the secular movement. This is the guy they are trying to put up as a role model to kids.

  • Hawkdriver1961

    Brainwashing children and young people to accept evil and perversion in the name of the left’s new god, what they term “science”.

  • ericdijon

    Is he trying to increase his audience or is he grasping at anything close at hand as he hopelessly slides down the tubes? I don’t see anything that identifies a man as irrelevant more than having a purpose of opposing that which he cannot control.

  • alive in the river

    Bill Nye is a hack. He is a “science guy”, not a scientist. Anyone can be a “science guy”. Anything he “produces” in the name of science is nothing but garbage because it isn’t backed by any credible research. He can throw any number of popular celebrities on his show, have them sing or dance or speak about transgender crap, but in the end that is all that it is. Until someone can prove to me, scientifically, that a male human can “identify” as a female and can immediately have the ability to bear a child in a womb and give birth to said child, gender identity will be nothing but a heap of rubbish, tailoring itself to people who are detached from reality. If you are born with reproductive organs that can bear children, you’re a female. Otherwise, you are a female. End of story.

    • Timothy Horton

      Anything he “produces” in the name of science is nothing but garbage because it isn’t backed by any credible research.

      Actually everything he discusses on the show is backed by credible science. You may not like the packaging but the content is 100% verified.

      Until someone can prove to me, scientifically, that a male human can “identify” as a female and can immediately have the ability to bear a child in a womb and give birth to said child,

      No one says or thinks gay males should grow a womb and bear children. There are plenty of biological straight women who have had hysterectomies and/or can’t bear children for other reasons. Does that mean they’re no longer women?

      • alive in the river

        To your first point: I said anything he produces is garbage. Not the science in the show is garbage. Nye hasn’t done anything credible in the scientific community with the exception of regurgitating someone else’s work and discovery on a children’s show over a decade ago.

        To your second point: I said later in my statement that “If you are born with reproductive organs that can bear children, you’re a female. Otherwise, you are a male.” Clearly if a woman had a hysterectomy she was born with female reproductive organs. Otherwise it would be malpractice to give a male a hysterectomy.

        • Timothy Horton

          Nye is just the messenger. The science he presents is still valid. What do you hope to accomplish by shooting the messenger?

          To your second point: I said later in my statement that “If you are born with reproductive organs that can bear children, you’re a female. Otherwise, you are a male.”

          Plenty of women are born with reproductive organs yet are infertile and can’t bear children. Do you consider them to be male?

          • alive in the river

            Clearly you are interjecting words that I have not written. I said, again, just in case you didn’t fully read what I wrote: “If you are born with reproductive organs that can bear children, you’re a female. Otherwise, you are a male.” Nowhere in that sentence did I say the organs had to be functioning to the point of sustaining a viable pregnancy, they just have to HAVE TO BE BORN WITH THEM.

            You can try with all your might to blow holes in my statement, but the fact remains: If you are born with reproductive organs that can bear children, you’re a female. Otherwise, you are a male.

          • Timothy Horton

            If you are born with reproductive organs that can bear children, you’re a female. Otherwise, you are a male.

            Biologically speaking, yes. But science now knows there’s much more to sex than just the physical plumbing. We’ve finally started paying attention to the psychological aspects, not just the physical. It’s a naturally occurring variation that sometimes the psychological and physical don’t match up. Turns out the psychological aspects are more important to a person’s well being than their junk.

          • alive in the river

            Again, just words. Where is the published scientific evidence, not opinion?

          • alive in the river

            I assume there is no credible evidence to support your position that “science knows there is more to sex than physical plumbing. We’ve started paying attention to the psychological aspects,…”.

            Because if there was, you would have shared it.

            You’re usually so quick to providing a snippy response in defense of LGBT activism in your own opinion.

          • Timothy Horton

            You can easily find the relevant research with a simple Google Scholar or PubMed search. Or you can read the position statements of the AMA, APA, or a dozen other scientific and medical associations.

            “Most scientists today agree that sexual orientation (including homosexuality and bisexuality) is the result of a combination of environmental, emotional, hormonal, and biological (genetic) factors. In other words, there are many factors that contribute to a person’s sexual orientation, and the factors may be different for different people.

            However, homosexuality and bisexuality are not caused by the way a child was reared by his or her parents, or by having a sexual experience with someone of the same sex when the person was young. Also, being homosexual or bisexual does not mean the person is mentally ill or abnormal in some way, although there may be social problems that result from prejudicial attitudes or misinformation.”

          • alive in the river

            That is a bunch of hogwash. I’ve read the APA and AMA’s position statements and is a bunch of malarkey. Nowhere in their statements do they cite any reasonable research. The only “research” that is shown is that of which includes the “suffering and psycological” damage due to social impacts/consequences due to their sexual “orientation”. Nowhere does it state that upon this research and studies, we have concluded (fill in the actual scientific study). Their position statement is nothing but a “we are ok with you and we won’t discriminate against you”. That’s not scientific, that is politically correct.

          • Timothy Horton

            That is a bunch of hogwash.

            We’ll add you to the long list of religious conservatives to lazy to do any research or reading themselves. Or are you just too afraid of what you’ll find?

            Here’s a paper you won’t look up and read, guaranteed.

            Genetic and environmental influences on sexual orientation and its correlates in an Australian twin sample.
            Bailey, J. Michael; Dunne, Michael P.; Martin, Nicholas G.
            Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol 78(3), Mar 2000, 524-536

          • alive in the river

            Label me whatever you’d like, but I know what is right in God’s eyes and what His design entails. None of it includes making a sexual idol out of a perverse behavior and worshiping it.

            If you’d like my other cheek, it is turned and offered free of charge for whatever else you’d like to label me as. But as surely as my God lives, all will peril aside from living His will.

          • Timothy Horton

            That’s exactly why I don’t waste my time with religious conservatives who demand scientific evidence then ignore it and start preaching when the evidence is presented.

          • alive in the river

            So you’re right. I don’t want to read filth. So since you’re the expert, what gene is it that is associated with “sexual orientation”?

          • Timothy Horton

            Why did you ask for published scientific evidence if you were going to brand it “filth” without even looking at it? Doesn’t make you look very honest, now does it.

  • Mike Painter

    Wow. I can’t believe it, but I actually agree with Brown. The video shocked me. I couldn’t believe how bad it was. My whole perception of Nye has changed. I am an advocate for gay rights, and I believe lewdness and promiscuity should never be embraced and celebrated, no matter your sexual orientation. I want nothing to do with the “extreme-left.”

  • Well, answer to my prayers.

  • jahreason

    The divisiveness of many Christian leaders hurts my soul. Who is your master? God or politics? I pray that you and others be Christians and lovers and followers of Christ before your political associations. Unfortunately, your blog displays that you put your politics before God.

    You view Bill Nye vile and vulgar, yet overlook the vulgarity of our current President and vote for him too. I implore you and pray that you turn away from the world and its man made division to seek Jesus and the spirit of God.

Inspiration
Gotta Serve Somebody
Joe Dallas
More from The Stream
Connect with Us