Oct 28, 2026 · 1h 22m
Debate pits Christian patriarchy against feminist autonomy
DEVIL'S ADVOCATE: Rachel Wilson vs. Skyler Turden Debate Feminism! | Louder with Crowder
The argument tests whether equality means equal rights and personal choice or distinct sex-based duties organized around male authority.
- 1Rachel Wilson defends Christian patriarchy as a system of protection, provision, motherhood, and sex-based duties.
- 2Skyler Turden argues that bodily autonomy, legal equality, and voluntary choices should define women’s social and political freedom.
- 3The debate links feminism to suffrage, work, marriage, abortion, childcare, political power, and competing accounts of historical oppression.
Don't miss
Rachel Wilson’s closing vision of Christian patriarchy crystallizes the debate over motherhood, male authority, protection, provision, and women’s duties.
The brief
Skyler Turden returns from time on disability to debate Rachel Wilson, whose book argues that women’s liberation has an overlooked occult and anti-Christian history.
Wilson defends Christian patriarchy as protection and provision, while Turden argues that legal equality, bodily autonomy, and personal choice matter more than prescribed sex-based duties.
Their historical dispute ranges from suffrage and coverture to marital abuse, divorce, property rights, and whether marriage protected women or left them without legal recourse.
The argument widens to abortion, childcare, work, welfare, political leadership, military service, and whether women’s expanded political power has increased liberty or dependence.
In closing, Wilson describes an ideal of motherhood, male authority, protection, and provision; Turden calls it a restrictive return to the past and argues for rights joined with empathy.
Weekly email
State of the Pod, every Monday
The week's most-discussed names and stories from podcasts, with the moments behind them. Free, five minutes, unsubscribe in one click.