The 20,000 sexes in that fungus is absolute nonsense. Those are mating-types. This is like a guy saying that he’s usually attracted to women, but since he doesn’t feel attracted to his sister, she’s not a female, but a different new sex. Many fungus species have multiple mating types, and if they have the same mating type that means they are probably closely related or part of the same organism, and in that case nuclei will not be transferred. This is mostly so that they don’t constantly „mate“ with themselves.
I use something like that for my plant people in my fantasy setting. The plant folk don't have a gender like other species do, instead their "gender" is the coloration of their, well, petal analogies. This ensures when two fully grown nymphs decide to move on the next stage of their life their offspring will have as much diversity as possible. The personalities of the nymphs must also be compatible as they will merge into one being as they form a new mother tree. For nymphs that reach the age for offspring without finding a suitable mate, they instead find a grove of a mother tree and root themselves as a servant to the mother tree, serving as a grove tender and protector of the offspring. Some nymphs that become grove tenders to a young mother tree that are compatible with both beings forming the tree may find themselves able to pass on their genetics, but this is rare and a long shot option. Most nymphs becoming tenders do so accepting their genetic line ends with them to help the species have the best chance to survive.
@@PsychicFrogBoi Go ahead. They started originally as a way for players to be nymphs, dryads, or various fey creatures and blossomed (no pun.. okay pun slightly intended) into their current form by merging all the forest-dweller analogues into one.
I personally like to say doctors *observe and record* the sex of the baby. (And these days it’s usually well before birth, so even the “at birth” part is nonsense. 😂)
The term applies to intersex. A doctor sometimes does look at ambiguous genitals and choose between the sexes. That boxer who won gold in the Olympics was "assigned female at birth" and gender activists clung to that phrasing because they think it owned the "conservatives" who don't want males ruining womens' sports, but in fact just called out that this athlete wasn't really female.
because these animals in the wild neither have clinics nor social standards. Unlike human beings, we who choose to agree on common laws and norma to live in the Polis.
@TFYS223 the obvious answer is, we're not fish, we're humans. (Obvious caveat that we're obviously also members of all the same clades fish are, being chordate sarcopterygians, just evolved to a different morphology)
It’s honestly sad that people have this thing where “if a person doesn’t say they’re a man or a woman I can’t assume they are” I found out at the end of my last school year that many of my classmates assumed I was nonbinary…simply because of the simple fact that I occasionally wore suits. I prefer to wear the male style of suits with the dress pants and a tie, I don’t like pencil skirts. But I also wore dresses and have long hair, so everyone thought that since I’m feminine and also masculine that I cannot just be a girl, I have to be nonbinary… I grew up with an older brother and no sisters, so I have some masculine tendencies. I’m used to people asking me about it and stuff but the fact that just based on CLOTHES they’re assuming that I’m not a girl is crazy asf. I’m sorry, but you can 1000% tell when someone is a male or female. Even if they’re trans (unless they have blaire white levels of passing).
@jamesmcdonnell2455 dude, "identify as a woman" just means that you publicly say that you experience a preference to be female. The preference is what defines a woman, not the public pronouncement. And in exactly the same way that preference defines gay and straight. Please stop trying so hard to miss the point. It's not that complicated.
The real question is why animals with weird sexes are brought up to justify humans having sex on a spectrum. It implies those animals are the exception, not the rule. To put it another way, they're not saying that humans are like the rest of nature (implying sex is on a spectrum for most of nature) but that humans are the exceptions (and bringing up other exceptions to justify that). It's a very strange argument on their part.
@@ventriloquistmagician4735 The thing i found weird about this whole discussion is that both extreme end are using each extreme as an excuse to prove some sort of strawman while the moderates would really not give a fuck about the issues. Plus this video is kinda missing the point of crash course.Yes sex, sexuality and gender cant really be crushed into a tiny video to share but its absolutely absurd to say that the video is utter bullshit. Its just a form of compacted form of education. And the thing that gets me very weird about this guy is that he claims that a kid might watch the biology video and want to cut his genitals, but in no way did any of that video encourage kids to explore their gender identity. And the way he says that "On the slim chance that a kid might watch this video afterward might save him" How do you expect a kid to understand such concept about gender. THATS litterally why it was compacted in the first place.
@@monishgokulsing5903 brother, you have to understand that if you think people believing what they believed 10 years ago is extreme, you might be radicalized
Their goal is to contradict you, whether that supports their argument or not. The strategy they take is to show that you're wrong rather than show that they're right.
@captainalexaaa1796 It literally is a social construct. Bodies exist, but the interprative framework that we impose on bodies doesn't exist. We made it up. I don't understand why you tedious shitlords are so determined to miss the point.
They keep moving the goalposts, first it was "gender is a social construct, biological sex is a reality", then they moved it to "they are synonymous and a social construct".
I'm in college right now, and part of the History curriculum has Crash Course videos as supplementary material, and there were quite a few essay/response paper assignments related to them. The amount of complete non-sequiters, most of which boiled down to "white man bad" or "socialism would have solved every problem" is down right staggering.
Crash Course is one of those channels that is so popular and well-loved that when it dips into weird territory, most people brush it off or take it at face value with no questions.
It never breaks down into socialism would solve everything. They represent a political theory, and without fail represent its faults, usually with an entire video next to
Socialism has nothing to do with any of this. Look: here is what happened - in the 1970s the "left" saw itself as a champion of the underdog which meant the workers, the poorly paid, people who struggle with debt et cetera; now the Ayn Randian retort of Thatcherites was that Socialism celebrated failure and mediocrity whilst villainising success and that what we really wanted was everyone equally poor. To that end they worked to disempower unions, privatise public services and lower taxes for the rich. Consequently the establishment loved the tories because the establishment is largely controlled by billionairres who are enormously successful. Now on order to self-identify as champions of the underdog whilst at the same time appeal to the establishment that threw its weight behind Thatcher they would have to redefine "underdog" not in terms of wealth or class but in terms of identity groups, i.e. abandon socialism in favour of identitarianism. All this identity politics is not socialism but a ruse to compensate for the abandonment of socialism. Now when it began to get really vile was in the wake of the occupy wall street protests in the US and the MP expenses scandals in the UK and the bailouts of the banks, at which time the people's dissatisfaction with the institutions reached a crisis point and so identitarianism became hyperweaponised as a tool for division of the general public against each other. Do you really believe all the corporations flying the rainbow flag are socialist?!? Do you think Black Rock and Vanguard are socialist? Or Walt Disney or Starbucks or Raytheon? Is it even credible to you that these people are ardent Marxists or levellers?
@@markpostgate2551 The major corporation are not socialists but the new social paradigm is 100% neo-mrxist. I can easily believe independent creators, even ones as big as the Green brother, truly buy into it.
An amazing and unexpected consequence of this bs debate is that the general population, across both sides, have become about 5000% more knowledgeable about specific niche animals' reproductive biology. I don't begrudge the seahorse and clown fish taking up space in my head, I just never thought that this is how they would get there 🤷♀️
Gotta love when the discussion devolves to "Why can't I keep hold of all these straws?" How can these examples be considered significant from a 'scientific perspective', when from a mathematical one, they would be seen as 'outliers'?
There is a phenomenon where, assuming they are backed by an immanent reality unlike say flat earthers, the dissident side is more rigorous. This is true on sex differences, race differences, gender, etc, because to affirm the pc side requires no work whatsoever. You can just lean on it being the pc view. Both sidesing really doesn't work here
It's kind of funny how I heard the seahorse thing as a child and, instead of thinking: "Oh no! My concept of sex and gender has been completely altered!" I thought: "Wow... Papa seahorses are helping Mama seahorses. 😊" THAT'S how children think😂
@@runachan2910 Yep, I thought it was weird but a cool thing seahorses can do that humans can't. It didn't suddenly destroy my ideas of sex and gender 😆
I am surprised that they never told us about Kangooru's and that they have double-penis for males and two vaginas and wombs for females. To be twice as effective on making kids! I guess it is because they do not know it themselves, if they knew - they'd be everywhere.
"The split-gill fungus has over 20,00 sexes." Those are not sexes, they're mating types. "We're assigning sex." Sex is not assigned. "Sexuality" It's really important that he means sexual orientation, which is a part of sexuality. "You can't just boil it down to sperm and eggs because lots of people don't produce either." According to this logic, prepubescent boys and postmenopausal women don't have sexes. People like this also act like this is some novel concept that most of us don't already understand.
A trans activist's car won't start and he calls AAA. "Okay, got the address. What does your car look like?" "I don't have a car." "Then what are you calling us for?" "ACKSUALLY, I have a assemblage of car parts. But it doesn't work anymore, so it's not a car." "..."
I read and memorized my biology and anatomy text books in high school, because our biology teacher wasn't very smart and happened to be the "coach" of our science bowl team, leaving me to find new material. Scientists have pretty careful definitions to avoid things like "you're not a man if you don't currently produce sperm." Sex was defined in terms of the manufacturing equipment itself - a species-specific criterion - for the production of gametes, which is a general criterion regardless of species. It's also defined in terms of lifecycle. "You have X for the purpose of Y at some point in your lifecycle." No, activists, a sterile woman is still a woman, and you do not cease to be a man if you lose your bits in an industrial accident.
I've always wondered, what about mules? They can't reproduce, but we still classify them as male and female. Like you said, the sperm and eggs are signposts, not destinations.
Here's the thing about the fish example: Humans are not fucking fish. (Note that the use of "fucking" here is intended as an intensifier. I am not insinuating that you go and "fuck a fish"🤣🤣)
Actually the way these fish work is that from early fryhood, based on what kind of dolls they like, the fish discover who they truly are on the inside. They then find a special type of shrimp who will then prescribe hormones and surgery to them so that their sexed body can match their gendered personality.
Yeah wow it´s not like trans people are GNC and have similar interests to cis people, not like trans men really loved barbie, not like trans women being nerdy is a really prevalent stereotype NOT LIKE JESSI GENDER WHO KING CRITICAL REPLIED TO BEFORE MULTIPLE TIMES LITERALLY HAS A SEGMENT ON PRIDE CALLED NERD OUT How are you not ashamed of being so fucking disingenuous?? It´s impressive tbh
Yeah wow it´s not like trans people are GNC and have similar interests to cis people, not like trans men really loved barbie, not like trans women being nerdy is a really prevalent stereotype NOT LIKE JESSI GENDER WHO KING CRITICAL REPLIED TO BEFORE LITERALLY HAS A SEGMENT ON PRIDE CALLED NERD OUT How are you not ashamed of being so fucking disingenuous?? It´s impressive tbh
Yeah wow it´s not like trans people are GNC and have similar interests to cis people, not like trans men really loved barbie, not like trans women being nerdy is a really prevalent stereotype NOT LIKE JESSI GENDER WHO KING CRITICAL REPLIED TO BEFORE LITERALLY HAS A SEGMENT ON PRIDE CALLED NERD OUT
Also, even when fish can change sex from one to other - it is still just two sexes, not third. And about plants - a lot of plants are both male and female at same time. Still not makes it third sex and still not related to humans. In mushrooms there technically only two sexes, but thousands of mating types. It is like "male but one that work not for all females, but for specific ones". Which still not makes it something else.
Don't tell them about the mushrooms. They'll start creaming themselves over how mushrooms are demisexual and on the aro/ace spectrum (I hate that I'm fluent in crazy).
@@HelpW4nted the "demisexual" is such a weird thing. Is porn so spread now among teens, that just regular usual normal relationship is now seen as some weird special sexuality?
@vasilyfamilienko4318 I've heard some explain it as a low libido, but a low libido isn't a sexuality either. No matter how you explain it, it just doesn't make sense to make it a sexuality.
@@HelpW4nted yeah, but in general "you only want to have sex with people you are friendly/established connection/etc" - is how most relationship works for bisexual, homosexual and heterosexual people. Why call it new sexuality or why even give it special name? It just feels weird to me and shows how government and society had failed kids and teens.
"All models are wrong, but some are useful" I dont think it is very useful longterm to try poking holes in their models since they can forever play what-aboutism and goal post shifting. Instead ask what use they are trying to get out of their new models and head it off there. I dont need a deep scientific or philosophical understanding to know dudes getting records in female sports is wrong.
These people just try to confuse everyone with nonsense. My favorite part is that they are arguing that homosexuals don’t exist, whether intentional or not.
That is what the gender loons want. They want to force lesbians and gay men to accept members of the opposite sex as potential partners "(trans lesbians" and "trans boys").
Calling critics "confusing", for describing how a confusing and contredictory system is used, is quite an odd choice of position. Homosexuality exists, exclusively, as an imposed social role. Nobody claimed it "doesn't exist"; the people imposing it and the concept have material baring.
26:14 - It occurs to me that this take, that "because averages on a given metric overlap between categories, the categories aren't discrete," would also collapse all forms of medical diagnosis. At least, it would if applied consistently as a rule of reasoning outside the domain of sex and gender. The fact that it isn't consistently applied is a clear sign that this is a post-hoc rationalization, not a genuine discovery.
Crash Course really fell off, or at least that's what it feels like. For me I noticed the lack of integrity when they released that Environmental Determinism video and called it racist when it quite literally is the least racist theory of how culture develops that has ever been submitted.
I’m an economist. A friend of mine highly recommended Crash Course to me many, many years ago, so I did go and watch it. After watching dozens of history videos, I decided to take a look at the economics ones. “It’s my specialty, so I can gauge how reliable the history ones are”, I thought. I won’t go into details, but I was very disappointed. I just stoped watching them and did my history learning through books instead. TL;DR: they always sucked
Man what kind of mental gymnastic would be required to try making that claim. The theory literally says the environment is responsible for everything. I am *almost* tempted to watch it and see but i'll be good and avoid the ragebait.
I know the paper thing was an ad, but if you ever need to read a paywalled article, you can message the paper authors. Just say you are interested in their work but are poor, and ask for a copy of it. They can always refuse, but usually they are pretty open about it.
@@misanthropicservitorofmars2116 Oh boy, I bet Dr. Money treated all his patients kindly and certainly didn't force any into heinous situations for his own agendas. 😊
Pro tip, the overwhelming majority of paid journals goes to the journal. Email the researchers and chances are they're more than happy to hand you their research.
It's bad enough when people cite other mammals for evidence of sex differences/gene expressions, but going all the way to fish?! C'mon! Is someone going to cite fungi having a much more complex reproduction now? Edit: I typed too soon. Plants? Seriously? Tell me you're not to be taken seriously without telling me you're not to be taken seriously.
@@Anon0-r5l The authors try to take the fact that the plants are quite a rare example of sometimes having hermaphroditic flowers, sometimes being dioecious, sometimes monoecious, to make some gender ideology point about the sex binary
Comparing to Fungi and plants was so weird. Potato can reproduce by being cut in half. Sea Stars and Rainworms as well. If you cut potato and put into the ground - you will get 2 potato clones. Does this mean that humans can do that too? If I cut my hand - there will be two me after that?
These trans activists really need to decide if "sex" and "gender" are refer to the same thing, or if they are different concepts. They seem to always flip between the two based on what supports their position at the time. Sex is observed at birth, it isn't assigned. Gender at birth is not noted in any way. Bathrooms are separated by sex, not by your inner sense of being. Same thing with sports. It's also worth noting that for 97% of the population the word "gender" is just used as a synonym for "sex".
They claim gender (man/woman) and sex (male/female) are different things, but then they feel the need to say "XY person" instead of "male" and "XX person" instead of "female". But sex and gender are different.......??? Also how can you be assigned anything at birth? We aren't assigned man or woman at birth, so trans activists should have no desire to change the "Male" or "Female" on their birth certificate and drivers license right? This is the line of questioning that lost me a lot of "friends" a few years ago.
It's semantical. Generally, we use male/female and man/woman interchangeably when referring to both sex and gender. This separation that crash course is stating as a fact is merely a potential solution to the confusion caused by the previous terms. It's rather silly that they present that as fact rather than as a theoretical solution. People also use the "XY" "XX" person thing to specify sex, as the language can be confusing, as previously stated. In general, the video misrepresents a lot of the terminology surrounding transgender people.
Exactly. There's a lot of insistance that sex and gender are different, but then they use the terms interchangeably. It's very confusing. I know no group is a monolith, but they need to agree in terms and definitions. Sadly, a lot of discussion can't happen because then people start calling others "transphobic", and it goes nowhere.
@@SamDavidComposer Ok, but if sex and gender are two different things, the language should be clearly seperate and not overlapping. It creates confusion otherwise, and gives many the impression that sex and gender are the same, while being told that they aren't.
@@jemts5586 The language we speak doesn’t define how we experience gender or sex. Besides, languages are messy and full of loopholes and confusions. Not to mention the fact that the difference between sex and gender has only been described for a short amount of time, not nearly long enough for languages to adapt to that. And yes, I agree that there should be a linguistic separation between the two, but as of now there is not, and the crash course video provided a potential answer to this problem. Despite that, the fact that there isn’t a separation doesn’t mean that the two are different l.
I had a guy tell me in 2012-2015 that snails have 72 genders and that means humans can have different identities. I kept telling him humans aren't snails but he wouldn't listen. =~= Yeah, that long time ago.
@@Chinshellbuford also a lot of gender laws came into reality by push from megacorporations and in stealth - like in Spain, Ireland, Australia, Sweden, Canada - people just woke up one day and they had new laws about gender, while no one knew it was even voted anywhere. King Critical have a good video called "Why Trans movement is not a Civil Rights Movement". It there mentions the thing above too - that first Governments, Corpporations, etc are doing changes and then people are dealing with it. While in CRM it is the opposite - people are trying to force government and corporations to listen to them.
I can't get over, not only how shocking it is that that video was intended to educate children with its misinformative nonsense, but how little widespread awareness there is that kids are being misled in this way.
The claim the terms 'men and women' refers to gender is outrageous, they've been around for centuries referring to sex, while the concept of gender just over half a century old. Its just postmodern wordplay to give credence to their theory, which would otherwise just be lofty ideas without base in reality
? This is how literally all languages evolve. I don't understand why you see something sinister in our use of a word. We're just trying to talk about our experiences using the only tools that are available to us. Please stop demonizing us and just come talk to us. We're normal people.
@@CadyAnBlack"just come talk to us" a huge portion of us, including me, are here because we talked to tr ans identified people, and/or their idiotic allies. That's why we peaked, lmao. Also, normal people don't argue that humans can change s ex, because that would be lying and lying about something so fundamental about human nature is not normal in the slightest.
It means that those are actually mating types and not sexes. Mating types are how many fungus species (and many other organisms) figure out if they are closely related to each other and prevent inbreeding. This fungus species has 4 different genes for that with a bunch of different alleles leading to over 20k combinations and therefor different mating types. Since it evolved independently from animals, it works a bit different. The gametes aren’t as specialised and they fuse into cells with two nuclei first. They just don’t do this if the mating type of the other cell is too similar aka it is too closely related.
just starting now but i'm excited enough to comment bc i havent watched crash course in YEARS and have been so worried about what they've been spouting lol like I remember being a teen/early 20s when crash course really started getting big and people were so excited to learn...... and its really disheartening seeing whats been claimed about sex/scientific reality in the mainstream, let alone by sources that have a wide audience and seem to have public trust as a valid resource for information :(
Another victory for the satanic jewish communist cabal of wealthy transgenders that control the world while sipping adrenachrome from their solid platinum champagne glasses
Same thing happened with german science shows, they used to be really high quality andreas actually founded. But in half of them the old hosts retired and the new hosts and sadly t he younger old hosts, started with this bs and the quality just went down the drain. Its really sad and concerning. Its even worse in germany, because they used this ideology as a reason to radically change the german language and imolement it in the media and in any government ministry. And that while 70% of the population is strictly against that change.
Gender is a linguistic construct for the purpose of GROUP REFERENCING. Look up the etymology of "gender". Woman, girl, mother, aunt, etc, are gendered words that reference the group known as females. Precieved roles and attitudes are merely consequential and can vary between individuals and societies, and apparently, this is what confuses the gender ideologues.
Thanks for laying this out! I lose patience quickly trying to explain this when the binary is obvious even to small children. People either talk themselves out of facing the logic around biological sex due to strong emotions or they're confused by a source they trust (a terrible form of child abuse). Let's end the confusion so these kids will be able to trust their bodies, learn to make peace with their body as it was created, and spend our time building meaningful lives as a community, instead.
Comparing to Fungi and plants was so weird. Potato can reproduce by being cut in half. Sea Stars and Rainworms as well. If you cut potato and put into the ground - you will get 2 potato clones. Does this mean that humans can do that too? If I cut my hand - there will be two me after that?
The fun part is that all the examples given necessitates the binary of male and female. Whether they switch or are both there is still a clear and distinct male and female divide. A binary still exists there are just species that facilitate that binary differently. The only close remote argument they have against the binary are organisms that asexually reproduce but in that case it isn’t applicable to human sexuality because last I checked no human has been able to asexually reproduce on their own.
Jeez I had a hard enough time to accept that humans where fishes and now I have to accept that we are plants aswell? It should not need to be said but what other species can do has no relevance for what humans can do.
The words "Sex" and "Gender" mean the same thing, but one is from a Latin origin and the other is from a Germanic origin. Sex being Latin, Gender being Germanic. Its like "Big" and "Large" are the same thing but one is of English origin and the other is of Norman French origin. The English language is full of these linguistic quirks
one of the most important skills to learn early in life is the difference between science and ideology, fact and fiction. Schools should teach how to distinguish the two, instead of mixing them. I wish you all the best for developing your clear thinking and the ability to stand up for it!
As far as I know, Crash Course was initially designed to be very similar to that of the American Advanced Placement (AP) program. The purpose of AP was to provide students with the possibility of earning credits in secondary education that could potentially vertically move to cover credits in post-secondary education. I and many classmates would often review Crash Course videos in an attempt to supplement (or, irresponsibly replace) our studies prior to the AP test in a bid to attempt to get a 4 or 5. (It never worked for me.) Strange to see such an unscientific presentation as a teaching aid for such a scientifically critical field.
None of the complexities of the natural world offend conservative views, but acknowledging that an immanent reality can show non-pc things is anathema to the left
It's always incredible to me how they say gender is a social construct, yet we can't suppress gender expression that leads to worse health outcomes because they're born that way
Plant nerd here: The "tropical ginger switches gender every afternoon" is not true. The gender of the plant is determined in the big picture sense, meaning that the production of both male and female flowers doesn't actually mean it is "switching" gender. It is common for plants to be able to produce both male and female flowers, sometimes simultaniously. Some can even form both male and female parts on the same flower, which is what a "true hermaphodite" is in the plant word. It's so common to "switch" that even pumpkins, melons and cucumbers do this as a normal function for fertilisation.
Animal lover here- Gender roles are actually very commonly observed in nature, and most often in mammals. Lions and wolves and other such social species are prime examples of this. For example, in the absence of a strong alpha male, a female lions may step into that role, going as far as displaying increased aggression and even growing a mane!
Do other animals display complex rational thought, such as abstractly conceptualizing gender as a product of their society and choosing which applies better to them as a result?
As an undergraduate math student, I am pretty sure the complex number set C is in fact a continuous field. You are right about one thing however, that is a spectrum usually refers to a one dimensional continuum. However regardless of number of dimension, a spectrum (which is a continuum) will always allow more variety than any discrete system (which a binary system falls into) that's more points between 0-1 than the entire collection of binary numbers of any digits(dimension), that is just a mathematical fact.
You are correct, but this does not speak to the fact that discrete things do not exist in nature, or that discrete things cannot be enveloped by complex(in the non-mathematical sense) systems, or even binary things.
@@AlquimistEd Except binary does exist in nature, meaning discrete systems do. Animals that sexually reproduce, same as plants, do so using a BINARY system, I.E. a female produces eggs in some capacity and a male produces the sperm that fertilizes the eggs. This is, biologically, true for all species. Even those who can change their sex, they do so utterly and entirely, even on a genetic and physiological level. Humans however cannot do this. We cannot genetically and physiologically change our reproductive sex. Sex is, and always has been, BINARY. Until around 2014 Sex and Gender were used interchangeably. Not trting to be aggressive just point out a fallacy.
@@CommanderRedEXE Except... That's literally not true. Sexual reproduction does not neccesitate a binary. It is just the exchange of genetic information between two organisms, through gametes, to create a new individual. There is Sexual reproduction between gametes of the same size, which are not usually binary (Isogamy), there is Sexual reproduction where the individuals are not ''Male'' or ''Female'' as in they both produce the big and the small gametes at the same time, and there is where they change the gametes they produce as a function of their enviroment. Even if you take the last two examples as a binary, the first one isn't, and it isn't some ''weird'' thing, it's the way most unicellular eukaryotes and some multicellular ones reproduce. Sexual reproduction is not binary by definition. You seem to be confused about how organisms change sex. No species changes genetically in order to change it's sex. The fact that they can change their sex is proof of it itself, they already possess the genetic information to be the other sex, they just weren't expressing it. A change in their enviroment usually triggers this response. About physiology... Oh buddy... Where to even start? If humans couldn't physiologically change our reproductive sex, we would be extinct! There would be no puberty, which is by definition a physiological change on reproductive sex. A function (physio) of reproductive organs changes. Menopause is another easy example. Birth control wouldn't work, hell, menstruation and pregnancy are physiological changes in reproductive sex. The fact is, no, sex isn't and hasn't always been binary. It's mostly binary for animals (not even eukaryotes) and all over the place for plants. That's the most you can say.
@@TurquoiseAndAjenjum Two females is still two females, when someone is female and male at same time it is not something else. It never creates something else, just because such system is most efficient and will bring the most offsprings that can survive and reproduce. As simple as that.
I haven't seen this video you're responding to, but when I was in High School, they used to show a couple videos from Crash Course, and they were pretty solid.
TL;DR a very masculine woman and very feminine man are still apart of a binary, and not a spectrum. Theres simply a lot of variation between the two sexes.
FYI, if there's ever a paper you really want to read, but it's locked behind a paywall, if you can get ahold of one of the authors, they'll almost always be willing to give you a copy for free.
Noticed many of the comments under Crash Course's original video remind me of comments I'd see under a religious video explaining why the tale if Noah's Ark is backed up by science. I do sympathize. They've found a video that confirms their biases and helps them make sense of a lot of conflicting feelings within themselves. They want to be told that it is the science that is incorrect, not themselves in order to silence that dissonance. The stuff is the postmodern version of "intelligent design"
Gender ideology and "wokeness" really do mimic religions in several ways and it's honestly frightening how quickly this new divisive pseudo-religion arose
When I first read about the Plato vs Diogenes debate on man being a featherless biped (with the famous "Behold - a man!" moment), I couldn't believe how people back then could have such ridiculous debates over such obvious things. Well. Here we are now, debating over men being men and women being women. Clown world. 😅
As a woman🤪 ... I actually wouldn't mind it if we started referring to ourselves as male or female as a replacement for man and woman, as it is technically completely humanistic and as we realize now, quite profound, but also acknowledges that we are creatures amongst all the other sorts--even insinuats we have something in commonwith plants. I think male and female have the potential to gain a real positive connotation
It's just man/woman and boy/girl, are more specific terms, we also have the same type of terms for other animals. i.e.: lion, lioness; rooster, hen. We already use male and female for humans in certain situations.
Yes, but other animals in the animal Kingdom have not forgotten and let go of the significance of their biological sex in life and law We are the only species that seems to struggle with this 🤔
Roxy Tickle, a so called "transwoman" is a female according to his birth certificate. Not only in Australia but in many western countries is document forgery legal.
“I’m not saying it’s obviously wrong to define gender that way…”. Well, being a circular definition, it’s logically invalid, hence objectively wrong. Yes, it’s wrong to say that!
“Complex” numbers are really poorly named. So-called because each complex number is a “complex” of two components (“real” and “imaginary”(which are also poorly named. try instead “Measuring”/“Direct” and “Lateral” numbers.)). But everyone thinks “complex” means “complicated”. A better name would be “rotating numbers” or something similar.
@@johnnotrealname8168 Complex numbers are points in the complex plane and multiplications between them correspond to rotations of those points about the origin.
@@johnnotrealname8168 Every complex number is uniquely defined from its distance from the origin (0) and its angle measured counterclockwise from the positive side of the “real” axis. When two complex numbers are multiplied, the resulting complex number has the sum of their angles and the product of their magnitudes. This angle-adding property makes them very useful in any sort of math that involves rotations, and chances are that if complex numbers are involved in something, you can also think of that thing in terms of rotations (and scaling).
You raise the most logical points so eloquently. "We tend to bring a lot of prescriptive judgements and expectations and imposed roles in our designation of boys and girls, and later men and women, and yeah, obviously that's wrong - people should be free to live how they want, and express themselves how they want within reason - but what if we just said that whether you're a boy or girl, man or woman, is about whether you're biologically male or biologically female, and then just didn't add all the sexist crap on top of that? What would be the issue there?" ^ My main point in this debate around gender ideology.
Wrong. Viewing sex as something that exists purely in the plumbing leads logically to transgenderism. Men and women are inherently different and exist to serve different roles. America must return to this as soon as possible, lest we face replacement by races who understand how to perpetuate themselves.
@bluedreamer6564 I pointed out that while troonism is evil and wrong, gender does go deeper than plumbing and how a man who fails to act as a man and think as a man is by definition defective. This especially applies to women, with the majority of modern "liberated" women being good only as scrap meat.
As someone with a degree in genetics its as simple as: If there is a Y they are a guy Klinefelters syndrome (xxy): still a guy Intersex people still have either a Y chromosome or they do not Tp argue they have a different biological sex is like arguing that having polydactyl or downs syndrome makes you a different sex
If you want to read an academic paper, never read the published, paywalled version. Email the author(s) and ask for a copy. They're almost always able and very willing. More often than not, they'll also answer follow-up questions if you ask nicely.
At around 2:55 the claim was made that spectra are not the best way to handle complexities by using a number line and complex numbers as an example. Complex numbers are on number lines they are just not plotted very often since their use is infrequent. Complex numbers can and are plotted in algebra, geometry, calculus, etc…
Ever since I started watching you, I hoped you would tackle the sex spectrum video by SciShow. Now this aint that, but it’s the next best thing and I appreciate it nonetheless.
My favorite part is how the original video, despite having 100k views, only has ~90 comments. Definitely not a cult or anything that has to stifle out all discourse in favor of spreading their message.
From what I know about homosexual behavior in giraffes, it’s because of the mounting after some neck battles, which includes sometimes a larger older female giraffe trying to mount a younger male giraffe. Generally overexaggerated by certain activist types for political purposes imo.
Yeah, I don't think that animals experience sexual attraction/sexuality/sexual orientation/etc. the same way that humans do. One reason among many being that humans are capable of finding things aesthetically pleasing, whereas I don't think it has been found that animals are capable of that.
Humans don't have genders, they have sexes. Any biological organism that sexually reproduces has a sex - for humans this is Male, Female or (in extremely rare - e.g. 0.001% of people - instances of actual genetic diseases like Kleinfelter's) Intersex. Simultaneously, inanimate objects cannot have a sex because that is a biological descriptor - it would be nonsensical to say that a word, or a toy, or a pair of pants was 'female". But it is sometimes useful as a practical matter to create or highlight their associations with the kind of behaviors and roles that the biological sexes are associated with, and so inanimate objects can have genders - it can make sense to say that a toy or a pair of pants is _feminine_ if it has a strong relation, association, similarity, connection, etc to human females. That's it, that's the whole story and there is nothing more complicated - biological organisms have sexes, inanimate objects (can) have genders, and in the case of human beings for almost all intents and purposes there are only two sexes. We can definitively say then that there is no such thing as a "transgender" person, since human beings do not have genders any more than a Toyota Camry has a sex. "Transvestite", somehow considered to be derogatory today, is actually a much more accurate descriptor, because it merely identifies a kind of person who dresses in the clothes or accessories that are commonly associated with the opposite sex, e.g. A man who wears dresses and high heeled pumps. If one is born a man they are still a man their entire lives regardless of what they do, and it is no more a matter of identity or choice than one's species is. They're still free to wear a dress, or lipstick, or call themselves mary, or anything else, but they are still just a man doing all those things. Even surgically mutilating themselves and remove parts of their bodies or having attached parodies of a female body does not change that.
Complex numbers are shown on the complex plane. Its like the number line but 2d. The number line is the x axis of the complex plane. To be clear, complex numbers have 2 components but each one exists on a simple number line. We usually plot the imaginary component as the y axis. You can show the square root of -1 on a number line of "i"s.
"Man" and "woman" do NOT refer to one's gender, they refer to one's sex. This can literally be corroborated with every single culture in the world, including the overwhelming majority of cultures that don't even have the concept of gender, only that of sex. And this idea of having a specific word for an individual of a certain sex (and age, because it's not just man and woman, it's also boy and girl) is something that every culture also uses for other animals. Chickens have hens and roosters, cattle have cows and bulls, etc.
Hey King Critical, I'm still curious on a future video on Vaush vs Saanvi, with the "are trans-men, men?" Debate, as that's the video that helped me first break-free from the sexist trans ideology, thank you, keep up the great work!
@@KC_Streams Awesome, awesome, I'm excited to listen to what you have to say on that video's content, I hope my constant mentioning of it on your video's comment sections does not come off as rude/pressuring, I just trust your point of view on this topic more than any other RUclipsrs
Prager University did an excellent video on how to fix trans people. Send them to Mexico to have them have forcible intercourse, and they'll realize very quickly what they really are. It worked on the one guy in "Detrans".
Just a small detail but I like this new "style" where you actively react to the video like your watching it with us like your talking to the channel themselves. Makes it a lot more captivating then just talking about the video
Thanks for making this video. It's nice to see someone actually go through and break the "amorphous sludge" that is their "arguments'. I enjoyed having my brain actually being able to think for itself about these topics rather than be told what to think by people. You're inspiring
About fungi, most sexually reproductive fungi are isogamous (gametes of the same size) it would be as accurate to say that all fungi are the same sex as it would be to say every individual fungus has its own unique sex
The fungus thing is weird, I haven't read into it much but it looks like they have two genes said to correspond to sex? It has something to do with how they pair up and it causes something comparable to a "sex" but it's not AT ALL the same as in mammals or plants.
Great video. The definition of Gender as social expectations and performance derived from sex-role stereotyping is a pretty accurate description of this phenomenon. It also shows how nonfunctional the idea of gender being primarily a self-identity really is.
Logic being applied to sex and gender? Say it isn't so! Lol (sarcasm) Kids, if you're confused about your gender it's either because you're being lied to and manipulated, or because you have a trauma around acknowledging your biological sex. It should be pretty easy to tell in 99.9% of people which bio sex their body was designed for. And if you can't tell, that's something you ask your doctor about - not something you decide on your own ;)
11:20 in quotes. Since that's technically just they have the equipment for both. Like a computer can hold a 1 and a 0 but that doesnt mean that it has a 0.5 in it.
1:48 second in and you have my sub. Excellent breakdown of spectrums and binaries as categorical systems. I am excited to see what your argument is going to be. Also as to why you probably haven't seen this discussed is due to the assumptions made to support the spectrum position and how those by their own merit do not meet the requirements to be studied scientifically
Wellll, my immunology educated butt will tell you the flu is sometimes life threatening and it depends on the combo of the, if I remember correctly, 8 spools of viral genetic material that end up in the variant. Stupid virus spreads and mutates in birds. I kid you not, they sample birds it tends to infect to predict flu strains. So some variants end up like the spanish flu and others end up as a Im sore and want to lay down in bed all day, all the way to manageable full body blegh. They are all typically worse than your average cold in symptoms at minimum. The majority of vairants are also typically not very contagious, prime reason why the spanish flu was as deadly as it was, it combined high mortality in symptoms mutation with super contagion mutation. Honestly, I just like the chance to use my degree to go into details on things. Its not useful for my daily job.
LOL it doesn't matter how much you refute their claims, they'll just make up more nonsense. I mean just look at how they take a simple idea and make it really complicated so that they can basically say it's the opposite of what it is.
While I don't personally agree with plenty of your points. You're the first respectful and understandable person I saw making a conservative argument in gender discourse.
Ok, I think with utmost sincerity that people like those should stop saying such vague and confusing things, they obviously seem afraid to take a more strict and consistent posture because they don't want to alienate people, and while on one hand I believe whatever way anybody feels about their biological sexual characteristics and the gender roles they've been forced into are deeply personal to each person and not something other people can dictaminate, on the other hand said affirmation falls more in the realm of psychology and sociology than biology, and if they're trying to tie the former two to the later they must do so using consistent and non-self-contradicting theoretical frameworks that do no give room to confusion or missuse. That said, just becase these kind o definitions are flawed does not mean that gender isn't a real thing, becase it isn't really that hard to create consistent models for it given everything we know about intersexuality, how hormones affect the brain, how neurodivergence may play a role in it, and how neither of these things need to be cured, just managed; the idea of having different genders and gender roles is just an expression of that, one that is useful and doesn't necessarily need to lead to biology denial or surgery, which is what many people seem to be afraid of. Not that surgery shouldn't be considered as a solution for people who suffer from body disphoria (as long as it isn't caused by any other psychological or neurological condition that can be treated, emphasis on CAN because there's no established treatment for body disphoria besides surgery). People have a RIGHT to be happy as long as it doesn't hurt anybody else and I'm not a paternalising as*hole who puts in doubt people's ability to choose what's best for themselves just because he thinks he knows better than them how they will feel in the long run.
The entire concept relies on a cartesian duality between the mind and the body. It's a metaphysical belief that a body can be implanted with a different gendered mind/spirit. It's a religious belief. The mind is not separate from the body, they are one and the same. We sense and process information through our body and the mind is not separate from the biology it's connected to. They could just say they don't want to be held to social norms anymore. They don't, instead they come up with total gibberish explanations to rationalize their behaviour.
I prefer to think of gender as other people’s presumption that you would make a good potential mating partner or potential mating rival, presuming consent.
KC: “We need to understand the sexes holistically” Also KC: “All psychological distinction between the sexes is because of patriarchy (except for perhaps a few specific examples).”
I'm off to play postmodernist football. It's the same as regular football except the goalposts move.
IM DEADDD
😂😂😂
Good one 😂
That would actually be a neat twist on football: the goalposts actively try to avoid the ball
This is funny 😃
The 20,000 sexes in that fungus is absolute nonsense. Those are mating-types. This is like a guy saying that he’s usually attracted to women, but since he doesn’t feel attracted to his sister, she’s not a female, but a different new sex. Many fungus species have multiple mating types, and if they have the same mating type that means they are probably closely related or part of the same organism, and in that case nuclei will not be transferred. This is mostly so that they don’t constantly „mate“ with themselves.
I use something like that for my plant people in my fantasy setting. The plant folk don't have a gender like other species do, instead their "gender" is the coloration of their, well, petal analogies. This ensures when two fully grown nymphs decide to move on the next stage of their life their offspring will have as much diversity as possible. The personalities of the nymphs must also be compatible as they will merge into one being as they form a new mother tree.
For nymphs that reach the age for offspring without finding a suitable mate, they instead find a grove of a mother tree and root themselves as a servant to the mother tree, serving as a grove tender and protector of the offspring. Some nymphs that become grove tenders to a young mother tree that are compatible with both beings forming the tree may find themselves able to pass on their genetics, but this is rare and a long shot option. Most nymphs becoming tenders do so accepting their genetic line ends with them to help the species have the best chance to survive.
*Inserts random "fun guy" joke
@sintanan469 you mind if I steal this idea for my dnd games? That's some good world building
@@PsychicFrogBoi Go ahead. They started originally as a way for players to be nymphs, dryads, or various fey creatures and blossomed (no pun.. okay pun slightly intended) into their current form by merging all the forest-dweller analogues into one.
I think theyve lost the gender argument by trying to compare us to fungus. But maybe that's just me.
We never *assign* a sex to anyone. We assess it
I personally like to say doctors *observe and record* the sex of the baby. (And these days it’s usually well before birth, so even the “at birth” part is nonsense. 😂)
The term applies to intersex. A doctor sometimes does look at ambiguous genitals and choose between the sexes. That boxer who won gold in the Olympics was "assigned female at birth" and gender activists clung to that phrasing because they think it owned the "conservatives" who don't want males ruining womens' sports, but in fact just called out that this athlete wasn't really female.
So it seems this phrase (assigned sex at birth), like "transphbia" is being grossly misused and has lost it's intended meaning.
@@jemts5586 Transphobia isn’t real
@@kiowah231乁║ ˙ 益 ˙ ║ㄏ
I can't help but notice that none of those examples require gender affirming care clinics.
We should start a support group for clown fish who have had 'femininity' thrust upon them by societal pressure.
@@foxronyo I see what you're getting at but it's more likely sea water pressure. 😜
because these animals in the wild neither have clinics nor social standards. Unlike human beings, we who choose to agree on common laws and norma to live in the Polis.
Quite dystopian isnt it? Its a surgery center made to enforce societal gender roles, except said roles are inverted.
@@caralho5237 (New) gender norms
Do you "identify" as human, or are you simply human? Sex/gender is the same. I don't "identify" as a man, I simply am a man.
Yeah but fish changing genders hurr durr
@TFYS223 the obvious answer is, we're not fish, we're humans. (Obvious caveat that we're obviously also members of all the same clades fish are, being chordate sarcopterygians, just evolved to a different morphology)
It’s honestly sad that people have this thing where “if a person doesn’t say they’re a man or a woman I can’t assume they are”
I found out at the end of my last school year that many of my classmates assumed I was nonbinary…simply because of the simple fact that I occasionally wore suits. I prefer to wear the male style of suits with the dress pants and a tie, I don’t like pencil skirts. But I also wore dresses and have long hair, so everyone thought that since I’m feminine and also masculine that I cannot just be a girl, I have to be nonbinary…
I grew up with an older brother and no sisters, so I have some masculine tendencies. I’m used to people asking me about it and stuff but the fact that just based on CLOTHES they’re assuming that I’m not a girl is crazy asf. I’m sorry, but you can 1000% tell when someone is a male or female. Even if they’re trans (unless they have blaire white levels of passing).
@jamesmcdonnell2455 dude, "identify as a woman" just means that you publicly say that you experience a preference to be female. The preference is what defines a woman, not the public pronouncement. And in exactly the same way that preference defines gay and straight. Please stop trying so hard to miss the point. It's not that complicated.
@@JoJo-fan-right-here You can even tell Blaire is a dude. Uncanny valley
How does this support the trans claim?
Some fish can change sex, mamals can't, ergo we should pretend they can?
Soo stupid..
You see electric eels can shock things so we all have hidden electric superpowers trust me bro.
@cryamistellimek9184
My wool socks and acrylic carpet says you're right
It obliterates the trans identity. If we're all on a spectrum, then we're all non-binary, so there's nothing to transition from or to.
There is no “trans claim.” We just exist and you’re pissing yourself about it.
It’s like how they say homosexuality is found in nature. So is cannibalism, so is rape, so is incest. Etc.
The real question is why animals with weird sexes are brought up to justify humans having sex on a spectrum. It implies those animals are the exception, not the rule.
To put it another way, they're not saying that humans are like the rest of nature (implying sex is on a spectrum for most of nature) but that humans are the exceptions (and bringing up other exceptions to justify that).
It's a very strange argument on their part.
yeah the human-seahorse link is not a strong argument
I dont think people are putting sex on a spectrum tho, i think its gender at the end?
@@monishgokulsing5903 same thing
@@ventriloquistmagician4735 The thing i found weird about this whole discussion is that both extreme end are using each extreme as an excuse to prove some sort of strawman while the moderates would really not give a fuck about the issues. Plus this video is kinda missing the point of crash course.Yes sex, sexuality and gender cant really be crushed into a tiny video to share but its absolutely absurd to say that the video is utter bullshit. Its just a form of compacted form of education. And the thing that gets me very weird about this guy is that he claims that a kid might watch the biology video and want to cut his genitals, but in no way did any of that video encourage kids to explore their gender identity. And the way he says that "On the slim chance that a kid might watch this video afterward might save him" How do you expect a kid to understand such concept about gender. THATS litterally why it was compacted in the first place.
@@monishgokulsing5903 brother, you have to understand that if you think people believing what they believed 10 years ago is extreme, you might be radicalized
I don’t even understand why TRA’s lap on about this. Intersex people are a completely different thing to trans people.
I remember I was the audience in a debate making this exact point...in secondary school like at 15 years old.
Their goal is to contradict you, whether that supports their argument or not. The strategy they take is to show that you're wrong rather than show that they're right.
@@azure_berries interesting. You’re right now I’m thinking about it.
Their logic is just to use people misunderstanding and ignorance of intersex to blur the line between male and female.
They don't care about any of the conditions (or "exotic cultural phenomena") they use in arguments. They only care about "winning" the argument.
Scishow did quickly retract misinformation they spread about GMOs. I feel like it's gonna take longer for them to redress this.
Scishow did an equally bad video on this topic a few years ago. Title is 'Science Proves There are More than Two Human Sexes'
Same situation as with the eugenics movement and will be remembered as such.
Did SchShow ever correct their misinformation said in their Sex Spectrum video?
@@sociavibe5492 nope
@@sociavibe5492 I couldn't take them seriously after that video.
No way I always thought biological sex was a social construct
@captainalexaaa1796 It literally is a social construct. Bodies exist, but the interprative framework that we impose on bodies doesn't exist. We made it up. I don't understand why you tedious shitlords are so determined to miss the point.
Gravity is a social construct and spectrum.
@@Skenderbeuismyhero
Einstein would unironicaly agree
They keep moving the goalposts, first it was "gender is a social construct, biological sex is a reality", then they moved it to "they are synonymous and a social construct".
@@Kwadratura No, but he would happily say it's a fictitious force, like centrifugal force.
I'm in college right now, and part of the History curriculum has Crash Course videos as supplementary material, and there were quite a few essay/response paper assignments related to them.
The amount of complete non-sequiters, most of which boiled down to "white man bad" or "socialism would have solved every problem" is down right staggering.
Crash Course is one of those channels that is so popular and well-loved that when it dips into weird territory, most people brush it off or take it at face value with no questions.
It never breaks down into socialism would solve everything. They represent a political theory, and without fail represent its faults, usually with an entire video next to
@@hope-cat4894Im not even GC but i agree
Socialism has nothing to do with any of this. Look: here is what happened - in the 1970s the "left" saw itself as a champion of the underdog which meant the workers, the poorly paid, people who struggle with debt et cetera; now the Ayn Randian retort of Thatcherites was that Socialism celebrated failure and mediocrity whilst villainising success and that what we really wanted was everyone equally poor. To that end they worked to disempower unions, privatise public services and lower taxes for the rich. Consequently the establishment loved the tories because the establishment is largely controlled by billionairres who are enormously successful. Now on order to self-identify as champions of the underdog whilst at the same time appeal to the establishment that threw its weight behind Thatcher they would have to redefine "underdog" not in terms of wealth or class but in terms of identity groups, i.e. abandon socialism in favour of identitarianism. All this identity politics is not socialism but a ruse to compensate for the abandonment of socialism.
Now when it began to get really vile was in the wake of the occupy wall street protests in the US and the MP expenses scandals in the UK and the bailouts of the banks, at which time the people's dissatisfaction with the institutions reached a crisis point and so identitarianism became hyperweaponised as a tool for division of the general public against each other. Do you really believe all the corporations flying the rainbow flag are socialist?!? Do you think Black Rock and Vanguard are socialist? Or Walt Disney or Starbucks or Raytheon? Is it even credible to you that these people are ardent Marxists or levellers?
@@markpostgate2551 The major corporation are not socialists but the new social paradigm is 100% neo-mrxist. I can easily believe independent creators, even ones as big as the Green brother, truly buy into it.
An amazing and unexpected consequence of this bs debate is that the general population, across both sides, have become about 5000% more knowledgeable about specific niche animals' reproductive biology.
I don't begrudge the seahorse and clown fish taking up space in my head, I just never thought that this is how they would get there 🤷♀️
Gotta love when the discussion devolves to "Why can't I keep hold of all these straws?"
How can these examples be considered significant from a 'scientific perspective', when from a mathematical one, they would be seen as 'outliers'?
There is a phenomenon where, assuming they are backed by an immanent reality unlike say flat earthers, the dissident side is more rigorous. This is true on sex differences, race differences, gender, etc, because to affirm the pc side requires no work whatsoever. You can just lean on it being the pc view. Both sidesing really doesn't work here
It's kind of funny how I heard the seahorse thing as a child and, instead of thinking: "Oh no! My concept of sex and gender has been completely altered!" I thought: "Wow... Papa seahorses are helping Mama seahorses. 😊"
THAT'S how children think😂
@@runachan2910 Yep, I thought it was weird but a cool thing seahorses can do that humans can't. It didn't suddenly destroy my ideas of sex and gender 😆
I am surprised that they never told us about Kangooru's and that they have double-penis for males and two vaginas and wombs for females. To be twice as effective on making kids! I guess it is because they do not know it themselves, if they knew - they'd be everywhere.
TLDR:
A binary is more complex than a spectrum because you can have two spectrums, one in each side of the Binary.
Like how certain infinites are bigger than each other. There are more decimal numbers between a single whole number than their are whole numbers
"The split-gill fungus has over 20,00 sexes."
Those are not sexes, they're mating types.
"We're assigning sex."
Sex is not assigned.
"Sexuality"
It's really important that he means sexual orientation, which is a part of sexuality.
"You can't just boil it down to sperm and eggs because lots of people don't produce either."
According to this logic, prepubescent boys and postmenopausal women don't have sexes. People like this also act like this is some novel concept that most of us don't already understand.
Well observed.
Didnt you know that getting your nuts crushed is actually a sex change operation /s
And we aren't mushrooms anyway, so its irrelevant to human biological sex.
A trans activist's car won't start and he calls AAA.
"Okay, got the address. What does your car look like?"
"I don't have a car."
"Then what are you calling us for?"
"ACKSUALLY, I have a assemblage of car parts. But it doesn't work anymore, so it's not a car."
"..."
I read and memorized my biology and anatomy text books in high school, because our biology teacher wasn't very smart and happened to be the "coach" of our science bowl team, leaving me to find new material.
Scientists have pretty careful definitions to avoid things like "you're not a man if you don't currently produce sperm." Sex was defined in terms of the manufacturing equipment itself - a species-specific criterion - for the production of gametes, which is a general criterion regardless of species. It's also defined in terms of lifecycle. "You have X for the purpose of Y at some point in your lifecycle." No, activists, a sterile woman is still a woman, and you do not cease to be a man if you lose your bits in an industrial accident.
I've always wondered, what about mules? They can't reproduce, but we still classify them as male and female. Like you said, the sperm and eggs are signposts, not destinations.
They always try to use infertility as a gotcha too like as if they think the reproductive systems just seize to exist and thus sex doesn't matter
Here's the thing about the fish example: Humans are not fucking fish.
(Note that the use of "fucking" here is intended as an intensifier. I am not insinuating that you go and "fuck a fish"🤣🤣)
Lol
You mean they don't engage in intercourse with fish? I wouldn't bet on that... ;)
Depends how hot the fish is.
@@frishter 😂 Aw damn, I didn't even think about that
We are arguably fish but, that's irrelevant because not every fish can do that anyway. There's just a few species that can
Actually the way these fish work is that from early fryhood, based on what kind of dolls they like, the fish discover who they truly are on the inside. They then find a special type of shrimp who will then prescribe hormones and surgery to them so that their sexed body can match their gendered personality.
Now it actually makes sense!
Are we still going on about this? How many times do you have to be told GNC trans people exist?
Yeah wow it´s not like trans people are GNC and have similar interests to cis people, not like trans men really loved barbie, not like trans women being nerdy is a really prevalent stereotype NOT LIKE JESSI GENDER WHO KING CRITICAL REPLIED TO BEFORE MULTIPLE TIMES LITERALLY HAS A SEGMENT ON PRIDE CALLED NERD OUT
How are you not ashamed of being so fucking disingenuous?? It´s impressive tbh
Yeah wow it´s not like trans people are GNC and have similar interests to cis people, not like trans men really loved barbie, not like trans women being nerdy is a really prevalent stereotype NOT LIKE JESSI GENDER WHO KING CRITICAL REPLIED TO BEFORE LITERALLY HAS A SEGMENT ON PRIDE CALLED NERD OUT
How are you not ashamed of being so fucking disingenuous?? It´s impressive tbh
Yeah wow it´s not like trans people are GNC and have similar interests to cis people, not like trans men really loved barbie, not like trans women being nerdy is a really prevalent stereotype NOT LIKE JESSI GENDER WHO KING CRITICAL REPLIED TO BEFORE LITERALLY HAS A SEGMENT ON PRIDE CALLED NERD OUT
Also, even when fish can change sex from one to other - it is still just two sexes, not third.
And about plants - a lot of plants are both male and female at same time. Still not makes it third sex and still not related to humans.
In mushrooms there technically only two sexes, but thousands of mating types. It is like "male but one that work not for all females, but for specific ones". Which still not makes it something else.
Don't tell them about the mushrooms. They'll start creaming themselves over how mushrooms are demisexual and on the aro/ace spectrum (I hate that I'm fluent in crazy).
@@HelpW4nted the "demisexual" is such a weird thing. Is porn so spread now among teens, that just regular usual normal relationship is now seen as some weird special sexuality?
@vasilyfamilienko4318 I've heard some explain it as a low libido, but a low libido isn't a sexuality either. No matter how you explain it, it just doesn't make sense to make it a sexuality.
@@HelpW4nted yeah, but in general "you only want to have sex with people you are friendly/established connection/etc" - is how most relationship works for bisexual, homosexual and heterosexual people. Why call it new sexuality or why even give it special name? It just feels weird to me and shows how government and society had failed kids and teens.
the worst thing about this argument is that it literally does not apply to humans. we are common mammals, great apes and normal mammals.
"All models are wrong, but some are useful"
I dont think it is very useful longterm to try poking holes in their models since they can forever play what-aboutism and goal post shifting. Instead ask what use they are trying to get out of their new models and head it off there. I dont need a deep scientific or philosophical understanding to know dudes getting records in female sports is wrong.
I like that quote
Minor point (wouldn't normally bother, but it helps with the algorithm): 'ova' is the plural of 'ovum'.
@@patavinity1262 that makes so much sense. Consistent with spectrum becoming spectra
@@KC_Streams Yep it's the classic Latin 2nd declension neuter ending.
Even more minor point: the plural of "stadium" is "stadia".
@@AnthonyBSusan QE2 said "stadiums" once, and it got added to the dictionary. The Queen's (now King's) English, and all that.
These people just try to confuse everyone with nonsense. My favorite part is that they are arguing that homosexuals don’t exist, whether intentional or not.
That is what the gender loons want. They want to force lesbians and gay men to accept members of the opposite sex as potential partners "(trans lesbians" and "trans boys").
Calling critics "confusing", for describing how a confusing and contredictory system is used, is quite an odd choice of position.
Homosexuality exists, exclusively, as an imposed social role. Nobody claimed it "doesn't exist"; the people imposing it and the concept have material baring.
@@Capybarrrraaaa homosexuality is an sexual orientation not a fucking role, moron!
@@CapybarrrraaaaYou're a special kind of idiot lmao
@@CapybarrrraaaaYes or no, can sexual orientation change?
26:14 - It occurs to me that this take, that "because averages on a given metric overlap between categories, the categories aren't discrete," would also collapse all forms of medical diagnosis. At least, it would if applied consistently as a rule of reasoning outside the domain of sex and gender. The fact that it isn't consistently applied is a clear sign that this is a post-hoc rationalization, not a genuine discovery.
It's informally called the continuum fallacy, if you're curious.
There are tall women therefore sex is not real
Crash Course really fell off, or at least that's what it feels like. For me I noticed the lack of integrity when they released that Environmental Determinism video and called it racist when it quite literally is the least racist theory of how culture develops that has ever been submitted.
I’m an economist. A friend of mine highly recommended Crash Course to me many, many years ago, so I did go and watch it. After watching dozens of history videos, I decided to take a look at the economics ones. “It’s my specialty, so I can gauge how reliable the history ones are”, I thought. I won’t go into details, but I was very disappointed. I just stoped watching them and did my history learning through books instead. TL;DR: they always sucked
Man what kind of mental gymnastic would be required to try making that claim. The theory literally says the environment is responsible for everything. I am *almost* tempted to watch it and see but i'll be good and avoid the ragebait.
@@williamjenkins4913 tbf they removed the video and later apologized for calling it racist.
I know the paper thing was an ad, but if you ever need to read a paywalled article, you can message the paper authors. Just say you are interested in their work but are poor, and ask for a copy of it. They can always refuse, but usually they are pretty open about it.
Thanks. But yeah at least it was a useful way to segue to mentioning my patreon
“Sex and gender are totally different. Sex does not determine gender. So of course sexuality refers to what gender you’re attracted to.”
How sensible!
@@societopathyobserved9785 Funny they never called it "genderality" then, isn't it,?
Genderality lmao
John Money is an incredibly sensible man!
Sexuality wouldn't even determine what "gender" I'm attracted to under their own rules, it would determine sex. I'm not attracted to trains females
@@misanthropicservitorofmars2116 Oh boy, I bet Dr. Money treated all his patients kindly and certainly didn't force any into heinous situations for his own agendas. 😊
Pro tip, the overwhelming majority of paid journals goes to the journal. Email the researchers and chances are they're more than happy to hand you their research.
That is useful! Thanks!
For anything else, SciHub is your friend
The crash course video at one point says “gender refers to being… no gender at all” what?
Gender can be anything and nothing at the same time! Just like the sexist evil term that is 'woman'.
It's bad enough when people cite other mammals for evidence of sex differences/gene expressions, but going all the way to fish?! C'mon! Is someone going to cite fungi having a much more complex reproduction now?
Edit: I typed too soon. Plants? Seriously? Tell me you're not to be taken seriously without telling me you're not to be taken seriously.
Read the paper on Solanum plastisexum
@@TheThreatenedSwan What about it?
@@Anon0-r5l The authors try to take the fact that the plants are quite a rare example of sometimes having hermaphroditic flowers, sometimes being dioecious, sometimes monoecious, to make some gender ideology point about the sex binary
Comparing to Fungi and plants was so weird. Potato can reproduce by being cut in half. Sea Stars and Rainworms as well.
If you cut potato and put into the ground - you will get 2 potato clones.
Does this mean that humans can do that too? If I cut my hand - there will be two me after that?
@@vasilyfamilienko4318 only if you burry the hand in fertile soil apparently. But when it flowers, don't eat the fruits, they are toxic
Accidentally called Nemo's dad Marvin instead of Marlin. Unwatchable. Disproves all points
Wow that wasn't even really a mistake I just totally forgot he was called Marlin until reading this comment. I wrote Marvin in the script
These trans activists really need to decide if "sex" and "gender" are refer to the same thing, or if they are different concepts. They seem to always flip between the two based on what supports their position at the time. Sex is observed at birth, it isn't assigned. Gender at birth is not noted in any way. Bathrooms are separated by sex, not by your inner sense of being. Same thing with sports.
It's also worth noting that for 97% of the population the word "gender" is just used as a synonym for "sex".
Gender is synonymous with sex because it was synonymous with sex for 40 years before this biological denialism took root in academia.
Gender isn’t real. It’s a stupid term by over educated low iq pedo’s last century.
"Gender can just be the reality of us being wrong" - honestly a brilliant observation! Almost definition-worthy.
They claim gender (man/woman) and sex (male/female) are different things, but then they feel the need to say "XY person" instead of "male" and "XX person" instead of "female". But sex and gender are different.......???
Also how can you be assigned anything at birth? We aren't assigned man or woman at birth, so trans activists should have no desire to change the "Male" or "Female" on their birth certificate and drivers license right? This is the line of questioning that lost me a lot of "friends" a few years ago.
It's semantical. Generally, we use male/female and man/woman interchangeably when referring to both sex and gender. This separation that crash course is stating as a fact is merely a potential solution to the confusion caused by the previous terms. It's rather silly that they present that as fact rather than as a theoretical solution. People also use the "XY" "XX" person thing to specify sex, as the language can be confusing, as previously stated. In general, the video misrepresents a lot of the terminology surrounding transgender people.
Exactly. There's a lot of insistance that sex and gender are different, but then they use the terms interchangeably. It's very confusing. I know no group is a monolith, but they need to agree in terms and definitions. Sadly, a lot of discussion can't happen because then people start calling others "transphobic", and it goes nowhere.
@@jemts5586 Using the language interchangeably doesn’t necessarily negate what they say about sex and gender being different things.
@@SamDavidComposer Ok, but if sex and gender are two different things, the language should be clearly seperate and not overlapping. It creates confusion otherwise, and gives many the impression that sex and gender are the same, while being told that they aren't.
@@jemts5586 The language we speak doesn’t define how we experience gender or sex. Besides, languages are messy and full of loopholes and confusions. Not to mention the fact that the difference between sex and gender has only been described for a short amount of time, not nearly long enough for languages to adapt to that. And yes, I agree that there should be a linguistic separation between the two, but as of now there is not, and the crash course video provided a potential answer to this problem. Despite that, the fact that there isn’t a separation doesn’t mean that the two are different l.
I had a guy tell me in 2012-2015 that snails have 72 genders and that means humans can have different identities. I kept telling him humans aren't snails but he wouldn't listen. =~=
Yeah, that long time ago.
So sad ( W )
Literally what someone with unmedicated schizophrenia would say too. It's bizarre most of society has accepted it.
@@Anon0-r5l
People we're being forced, threatened,
And assaulted
Just for all of this to be accepted by everyone else...even though it could kill tons
@@Chinshellbuford also a lot of gender laws came into reality by push from megacorporations and in stealth - like in Spain, Ireland, Australia, Sweden, Canada - people just woke up one day and they had new laws about gender, while no one knew it was even voted anywhere.
King Critical have a good video called "Why Trans movement is not a Civil Rights Movement". It there mentions the thing above too - that first Governments, Corpporations, etc are doing changes and then people are dealing with it. While in CRM it is the opposite - people are trying to force government and corporations to listen to them.
@@vasilyfamilienko4318 Recommend that video to everyone - I watched it before and it really puts things in perspective
I can't get over, not only how shocking it is that that video was intended to educate children with its misinformative nonsense, but how little widespread awareness there is that kids are being misled in this way.
womp womp
Why do you think parents have been fighting school boards
@@Pyr0Ben Your pfp says everything we need to know.
The claim the terms 'men and women' refers to gender is outrageous, they've been around for centuries referring to sex, while the concept of gender just over half a century old.
Its just postmodern wordplay to give credence to their theory, which would otherwise just be lofty ideas without base in reality
? This is how literally all languages evolve. I don't understand why you see something sinister in our use of a word. We're just trying to talk about our experiences using the only tools that are available to us. Please stop demonizing us and just come talk to us. We're normal people.
@@CadyAnBlack go away with your pathetic self pity.
@@CadyAnBlack Because words can be used to manipulate people, genius.
You presuppose that 'sex' was even used consistently, when it wasn't and isn't.
@@CadyAnBlack"just come talk to us" a huge portion of us, including me, are here because we talked to tr ans identified people, and/or their idiotic allies. That's why we peaked, lmao. Also, normal people don't argue that humans can change s ex, because that would be lying and lying about something so fundamental about human nature is not normal in the slightest.
"20,000 sex's!" I want to know what that means as well.
it means it's not a spectrum 😂
It means that those are actually mating types and not sexes. Mating types are how many fungus species (and many other organisms) figure out if they are closely related to each other and prevent inbreeding. This fungus species has 4 different genes for that with a bunch of different alleles leading to over 20k combinations and therefor different mating types. Since it evolved independently from animals, it works a bit different. The gametes aren’t as specialised and they fuse into cells with two nuclei first. They just don’t do this if the mating type of the other cell is too similar aka it is too closely related.
@@nablamakabama488 That's very interesting, thanks for the info!
@nablamakabama488 thank you I was way confused
@@nablamakabama488cool
just starting now but i'm excited enough to comment bc i havent watched crash course in YEARS and have been so worried about what they've been spouting lol like I remember being a teen/early 20s when crash course really started getting big and people were so excited to learn...... and its really disheartening seeing whats been claimed about sex/scientific reality in the mainstream, let alone by sources that have a wide audience and seem to have public trust as a valid resource for information :(
Another victory for the satanic jewish communist cabal of wealthy transgenders that control the world while sipping adrenachrome from their solid platinum champagne glasses
Same thing happened with german science shows, they used to be really high quality andreas actually founded. But in half of them the old hosts retired and the new hosts and sadly t he younger old hosts, started with this bs and the quality just went down the drain. Its really sad and concerning. Its even worse in germany, because they used this ideology as a reason to radically change the german language and imolement it in the media and in any government ministry. And that while 70% of the population is strictly against that change.
Gender is a linguistic construct for the purpose of GROUP REFERENCING. Look up the etymology of "gender".
Woman, girl, mother, aunt, etc, are gendered words that reference the group known as females.
Precieved roles and attitudes are merely consequential and can vary between individuals and societies, and apparently, this is what confuses the gender ideologues.
Videos like this is one of many reasons I unsubscribed from CrashCourse.
Gender is a polite way we developed so we do not say "sex". Gender and sex are the exact same thing.
In their original meanings no. The word gender refers to endings on words such as luna being female and almuerzo being male. Sex refers to creatures.
Thanks for laying this out! I lose patience quickly trying to explain this when the binary is obvious even to small children.
People either talk themselves out of facing the logic around biological sex due to strong emotions or they're confused by a source they trust (a terrible form of child abuse).
Let's end the confusion so these kids will be able to trust their bodies, learn to make peace with their body as it was created, and spend our time building meaningful lives as a community, instead.
Comparing to Fungi and plants was so weird. Potato can reproduce by being cut in half. Sea Stars and Rainworms as well.
If you cut potato and put into the ground - you will get 2 potato clones.
Does this mean that humans can do that too? If I cut my hand - there will be two me after that?
The fun part is that all the examples given necessitates the binary of male and female. Whether they switch or are both there is still a clear and distinct male and female divide. A binary still exists there are just species that facilitate that binary differently. The only close remote argument they have against the binary are organisms that asexually reproduce but in that case it isn’t applicable to human sexuality because last I checked no human has been able to asexually reproduce on their own.
Jeez I had a hard enough time to accept that humans where fishes and now I have to accept that we are plants aswell? It should not need to be said but what other species can do has no relevance for what humans can do.
The words "Sex" and "Gender" mean the same thing, but one is from a Latin origin and the other is from a Germanic origin.
Sex being Latin, Gender being Germanic.
Its like "Big" and "Large" are the same thing but one is of English origin and the other is of Norman French origin.
The English language is full of these linguistic quirks
I got shown this video a few months back as part of 10th grade curriculum in California. never bought into it, but I’m sure many of my peers have.
one of the most important skills to learn early in life is the difference between science and ideology, fact and fiction. Schools should teach how to distinguish the two, instead of mixing them.
I wish you all the best for developing your clear thinking and the ability to stand up for it!
As far as I know, Crash Course was initially designed to be very similar to that of the American Advanced Placement (AP) program. The purpose of AP was to provide students with the possibility of earning credits in secondary education that could potentially vertically move to cover credits in post-secondary education.
I and many classmates would often review Crash Course videos in an attempt to supplement (or, irresponsibly replace) our studies prior to the AP test in a bid to attempt to get a 4 or 5. (It never worked for me.)
Strange to see such an unscientific presentation as a teaching aid for such a scientifically critical field.
May you be blessed by the great algorithm.
None of the complexities of the natural world offend conservative views, but acknowledging that an immanent reality can show non-pc things is anathema to the left
It's always incredible to me how they say gender is a social construct, yet we can't suppress gender expression that leads to worse health outcomes because they're born that way
(spoiler warning: neither their irregular sexuality nor illogical identity are deterministically biological)
Plant nerd here: The "tropical ginger switches gender every afternoon" is not true. The gender of the plant is determined in the big picture sense, meaning that the production of both male and female flowers doesn't actually mean it is "switching" gender. It is common for plants to be able to produce both male and female flowers, sometimes simultaniously. Some can even form both male and female parts on the same flower, which is what a "true hermaphodite" is in the plant word. It's so common to "switch" that even pumpkins, melons and cucumbers do this as a normal function for fertilisation.
Animal lover here-
Gender roles are actually very commonly observed in nature, and most often in mammals. Lions and wolves and other such social species are prime examples of this. For example, in the absence of a strong alpha male, a female lions may step into that role, going as far as displaying increased aggression and even growing a mane!
Do other animals display complex rational thought, such as abstractly conceptualizing gender as a product of their society and choosing which applies better to them as a result?
As an undergraduate math student, I am pretty sure the complex number set C is in fact a continuous field. You are right about one thing however, that is a spectrum usually refers to a one dimensional continuum. However regardless of number of dimension, a spectrum (which is a continuum) will always allow more variety than any discrete system (which a binary system falls into) that's more points between 0-1 than the entire collection of binary numbers of any digits(dimension), that is just a mathematical fact.
You are correct, but this does not speak to the fact that discrete things do not exist in nature, or that discrete things cannot be enveloped by complex(in the non-mathematical sense) systems, or even binary things.
@@AlquimistEd Except binary does exist in nature, meaning discrete systems do. Animals that sexually reproduce, same as plants, do so using a BINARY system, I.E. a female produces eggs in some capacity and a male produces the sperm that fertilizes the eggs.
This is, biologically, true for all species. Even those who can change their sex, they do so utterly and entirely, even on a genetic and physiological level.
Humans however cannot do this. We cannot genetically and physiologically change our reproductive sex.
Sex is, and always has been, BINARY. Until around 2014 Sex and Gender were used interchangeably.
Not trting to be aggressive just point out a fallacy.
@@CommanderRedEXE Except... That's literally not true. Sexual reproduction does not neccesitate a binary. It is just the exchange of genetic information between two organisms, through gametes, to create a new individual. There is Sexual reproduction between gametes of the same size, which are not usually binary (Isogamy), there is Sexual reproduction where the individuals are not ''Male'' or ''Female'' as in they both produce the big and the small gametes at the same time, and there is where they change the gametes they produce as a function of their enviroment. Even if you take the last two examples as a binary, the first one isn't, and it isn't some ''weird'' thing, it's the way most unicellular eukaryotes and some multicellular ones reproduce. Sexual reproduction is not binary by definition.
You seem to be confused about how organisms change sex. No species changes genetically in order to change it's sex. The fact that they can change their sex is proof of it itself, they already possess the genetic information to be the other sex, they just weren't expressing it. A change in their enviroment usually triggers this response.
About physiology... Oh buddy... Where to even start? If humans couldn't physiologically change our reproductive sex, we would be extinct! There would be no puberty, which is by definition a physiological change on reproductive sex. A function (physio) of reproductive organs changes. Menopause is another easy example. Birth control wouldn't work, hell, menstruation and pregnancy are physiological changes in reproductive sex.
The fact is, no, sex isn't and hasn't always been binary. It's mostly binary for animals (not even eukaryotes) and all over the place for plants. That's the most you can say.
@@TurquoiseAndAjenjum Two females is still two females, when someone is female and male at same time it is not something else. It never creates something else, just because such system is most efficient and will bring the most offsprings that can survive and reproduce. As simple as that.
I haven't seen this video you're responding to, but when I was in High School, they used to show a couple videos from Crash Course, and they were pretty solid.
Nah. You just didn’t know better.
All the comments on the video crash course made was also incredibly monitored and censored. Only ~90 comments and none of them are critical
TL;DR a very masculine woman and very feminine man are still apart of a binary, and not a spectrum. Theres simply a lot of variation between the two sexes.
FYI, if there's ever a paper you really want to read, but it's locked behind a paywall, if you can get ahold of one of the authors, they'll almost always be willing to give you a copy for free.
Noticed many of the comments under Crash Course's original video remind me of comments I'd see under a religious video explaining why the tale if Noah's Ark is backed up by science. I do sympathize. They've found a video that confirms their biases and helps them make sense of a lot of conflicting feelings within themselves. They want to be told that it is the science that is incorrect, not themselves in order to silence that dissonance. The stuff is the postmodern version of "intelligent design"
true, but the issue is a global flood
Gender ideology and "wokeness" really do mimic religions in several ways and it's honestly frightening how quickly this new divisive pseudo-religion arose
Humans have 2 sexes "nuh unh see there's these fish yo"
Okay humans have two sexes
" nuh unh there's these mushrooms yo"
🤦
When I first read about the Plato vs Diogenes debate on man being a featherless biped (with the famous "Behold - a man!" moment), I couldn't believe how people back then could have such ridiculous debates over such obvious things.
Well. Here we are now, debating over men being men and women being women. Clown world. 😅
As a woman🤪 ...
I actually wouldn't mind it if we started referring to ourselves as male or female as a replacement for man and woman, as it is technically completely humanistic and as we realize now, quite profound, but also acknowledges that we are creatures amongst all the other sorts--even insinuats we have something in commonwith plants. I think male and female have the potential to gain a real positive connotation
TBH it's a good way to avoid having to say "men and boys" or "women and girls" when trying to refer to all males and all females
It's just man/woman and boy/girl, are more specific terms, we also have the same type of terms for other animals. i.e.: lion, lioness; rooster, hen.
We already use male and female for humans in certain situations.
Yes, but other animals in the animal Kingdom have not forgotten and let go of the significance of their biological sex in life and law We are the only species that seems to struggle with this 🤔
Roxy Tickle, a so called "transwoman" is a female according to his birth certificate. Not only in Australia but in many western countries is document forgery legal.
@@foop9It's probably the magic mushrooms that led us to this lol
“I’m not saying it’s obviously wrong to define gender that way…”. Well, being a circular definition, it’s logically invalid, hence objectively wrong. Yes, it’s wrong to say that!
“Complex” numbers are really poorly named. So-called because each complex number is a “complex” of two components (“real” and “imaginary”(which are also poorly named. try instead “Measuring”/“Direct” and “Lateral” numbers.)). But everyone thinks “complex” means “complicated”. A better name would be “rotating numbers” or something similar.
At that point I think complex does fit. How do numbers rotate?
@@johnnotrealname8168 Complex numbers are points in the complex plane and multiplications between them correspond to rotations of those points about the origin.
@@johnnotrealname8168 Every complex number is uniquely defined from its distance from the origin (0) and its angle measured counterclockwise from the positive side of the “real” axis. When two complex numbers are multiplied, the resulting complex number has the sum of their angles and the product of their magnitudes.
This angle-adding property makes them very useful in any sort of math that involves rotations, and chances are that if complex numbers are involved in something, you can also think of that thing in terms of rotations (and scaling).
@@jakobr_ Thank You for this. I might remember this.
@@Jack-hd3ov So complex numbers are just angles?
You raise the most logical points so eloquently.
"We tend to bring a lot of prescriptive judgements and expectations and imposed roles in our designation of boys and girls, and later men and women, and yeah, obviously that's wrong - people should be free to live how they want, and express themselves how they want within reason - but what if we just said that whether you're a boy or girl, man or woman, is about whether you're biologically male or biologically female, and then just didn't add all the sexist crap on top of that? What would be the issue there?"
^ My main point in this debate around gender ideology.
Wrong. Viewing sex as something that exists purely in the plumbing leads logically to transgenderism. Men and women are inherently different and exist to serve different roles. America must return to this as soon as possible, lest we face replacement by races who understand how to perpetuate themselves.
@@bluedreamer6564 WTF?! My post got deleted.
@@Nemo12417 What post??
@bluedreamer6564 I pointed out that while troonism is evil and wrong, gender does go deeper than plumbing and how a man who fails to act as a man and think as a man is by definition defective. This especially applies to women, with the majority of modern "liberated" women being good only as scrap meat.
As someone with a degree in genetics its as simple as:
If there is a Y they are a guy
Klinefelters syndrome (xxy): still a guy
Intersex people still have either a Y chromosome or they do not
Tp argue they have a different biological sex is like arguing that having polydactyl or downs syndrome makes you a different sex
If you want to read an academic paper, never read the published, paywalled version. Email the author(s) and ask for a copy. They're almost always able and very willing. More often than not, they'll also answer follow-up questions if you ask nicely.
At around 2:55 the claim was made that spectra are not the best way to handle complexities by using a number line and complex numbers as an example. Complex numbers are on number lines they are just not plotted very often since their use is infrequent. Complex numbers can and are plotted in algebra, geometry, calculus, etc…
Ever since I started watching you, I hoped you would tackle the sex spectrum video by SciShow. Now this aint that, but it’s the next best thing and I appreciate it nonetheless.
My favorite part is how the original video, despite having 100k views, only has ~90 comments. Definitely not a cult or anything that has to stifle out all discourse in favor of spreading their message.
a literal 5 year old understands sex is "Binary" as Master Yoda once said, Always 2, there are.
Only 19 minutes late and finally ruining my childhood. As it should be.
From what I know about homosexual behavior in giraffes, it’s because of the mounting after some neck battles, which includes sometimes a larger older female giraffe trying to mount a younger male giraffe. Generally overexaggerated by certain activist types for political purposes imo.
Yeah, I don't think that animals experience sexual attraction/sexuality/sexual orientation/etc. the same way that humans do. One reason among many being that humans are capable of finding things aesthetically pleasing, whereas I don't think it has been found that animals are capable of that.
@@Anon0-r5l some are able to, but most don't.
Humans don't have genders, they have sexes. Any biological organism that sexually reproduces has a sex - for humans this is Male, Female or (in extremely rare - e.g. 0.001% of people - instances of actual genetic diseases like Kleinfelter's) Intersex.
Simultaneously, inanimate objects cannot have a sex because that is a biological descriptor - it would be nonsensical to say that a word, or a toy, or a pair of pants was 'female". But it is sometimes useful as a practical matter to create or highlight their associations with the kind of behaviors and roles that the biological sexes are associated with, and so inanimate objects can have genders - it can make sense to say that a toy or a pair of pants is _feminine_ if it has a strong relation, association, similarity, connection, etc to human females.
That's it, that's the whole story and there is nothing more complicated - biological organisms have sexes, inanimate objects (can) have genders, and in the case of human beings for almost all intents and purposes there are only two sexes.
We can definitively say then that there is no such thing as a "transgender" person, since human beings do not have genders any more than a Toyota Camry has a sex.
"Transvestite", somehow considered to be derogatory today, is actually a much more accurate descriptor, because it merely identifies a kind of person who dresses in the clothes or accessories that are commonly associated with the opposite sex, e.g. A man who wears dresses and high heeled pumps. If one is born a man they are still a man their entire lives regardless of what they do, and it is no more a matter of identity or choice than one's species is. They're still free to wear a dress, or lipstick, or call themselves mary, or anything else, but they are still just a man doing all those things. Even surgically mutilating themselves and remove parts of their bodies or having attached parodies of a female body does not change that.
"Gender-Inclusive Biology" where the conclusions are always forgone.
As soon as you upload videos and I notice, I immediately watch, as it's great hearing you disprove trans-ideology.
Complex numbers are shown on the complex plane. Its like the number line but 2d. The number line is the x axis of the complex plane.
To be clear, complex numbers have 2 components but each one exists on a simple number line. We usually plot the imaginary component as the y axis. You can show the square root of -1 on a number line of "i"s.
32:26 Yes!!! Hence sexuality, not genderality.
Exactly, no one is attracted to "I identify as".
"Man" and "woman" do NOT refer to one's gender, they refer to one's sex.
This can literally be corroborated with every single culture in the world, including the overwhelming majority of cultures that don't even have the concept of gender, only that of sex.
And this idea of having a specific word for an individual of a certain sex (and age, because it's not just man and woman, it's also boy and girl) is something that every culture also uses for other animals. Chickens have hens and roosters, cattle have cows and bulls, etc.
Hey King Critical, I'm still curious on a future video on Vaush vs Saanvi, with the "are trans-men, men?" Debate, as that's the video that helped me first break-free from the sexist trans ideology, thank you, keep up the great work!
I'll check it out at some point definitely!
@@KC_Streams Awesome, awesome, I'm excited to listen to what you have to say on that video's content, I hope my constant mentioning of it on your video's comment sections does not come off as rude/pressuring, I just trust your point of view on this topic more than any other RUclipsrs
Let me save you the time : No. They're women pretending to be men.
Prager University did an excellent video on how to fix trans people. Send them to Mexico to have them have forcible intercourse, and they'll realize very quickly what they really are. It worked on the one guy in "Detrans".
Just a small detail but I like this new "style" where you actively react to the video like your watching it with us like your talking to the channel themselves. Makes it a lot more captivating then just talking about the video
Glad you like it!
Thanks for making this video. It's nice to see someone actually go through and break the "amorphous sludge" that is their "arguments'. I enjoyed having my brain actually being able to think for itself about these topics rather than be told what to think by people. You're inspiring
About fungi, most sexually reproductive fungi are isogamous (gametes of the same size)
it would be as accurate to say that all fungi are the same sex as it would be to say every individual fungus has its own unique sex
First error in the video. Those are two circles.
The fungus thing is weird, I haven't read into it much but it looks like they have two genes said to correspond to sex? It has something to do with how they pair up and it causes something comparable to a "sex" but it's not AT ALL the same as in mammals or plants.
Great video. The definition of Gender as social expectations and performance derived from sex-role stereotyping is a pretty accurate description of this phenomenon. It also shows how nonfunctional the idea of gender being primarily a self-identity really is.
Logic being applied to sex and gender? Say it isn't so! Lol (sarcasm)
Kids, if you're confused about your gender it's either because you're being lied to and manipulated, or because you have a trauma around acknowledging your biological sex. It should be pretty easy to tell in 99.9% of people which bio sex their body was designed for. And if you can't tell, that's something you ask your doctor about - not something you decide on your own ;)
I'd love to add an insightful comment, but I was distracted by Frodo gazing into my soul for three-quarters of an hour
11:20 in quotes. Since that's technically just they have the equipment for both. Like a computer can hold a 1 and a 0 but that doesnt mean that it has a 0.5 in it.
1:48 second in and you have my sub. Excellent breakdown of spectrums and binaries as categorical systems. I am excited to see what your argument is going to be. Also as to why you probably haven't seen this discussed is due to the assumptions made to support the spectrum position and how those by their own merit do not meet the requirements to be studied scientifically
31:35 Nitpick: The Flu is life threatening. That's why we give the elderly, their carers and people with weakened immune systems a flu jab each year.
That's a fair point. That was my young healthy adult privilege talking
Wellll, my immunology educated butt will tell you the flu is sometimes life threatening and it depends on the combo of the, if I remember correctly, 8 spools of viral genetic material that end up in the variant. Stupid virus spreads and mutates in birds. I kid you not, they sample birds it tends to infect to predict flu strains.
So some variants end up like the spanish flu and others end up as a Im sore and want to lay down in bed all day, all the way to manageable full body blegh. They are all typically worse than your average cold in symptoms at minimum.
The majority of vairants are also typically not very contagious, prime reason why the spanish flu was as deadly as it was, it combined high mortality in symptoms mutation with super contagion mutation.
Honestly, I just like the chance to use my degree to go into details on things. Its not useful for my daily job.
LOL it doesn't matter how much you refute their claims, they'll just make up more nonsense. I mean just look at how they take a simple idea and make it really complicated so that they can basically say it's the opposite of what it is.
While I don't personally agree with plenty of your points. You're the first respectful and understandable person I saw making a conservative argument in gender discourse.
Using another species is no way of arguing in favour of human beings having more than 2 sexes/genders.
Ok, I think with utmost sincerity that people like those should stop saying such vague and confusing things, they obviously seem afraid to take a more strict and consistent posture because they don't want to alienate people, and while on one hand I believe whatever way anybody feels about their biological sexual characteristics and the gender roles they've been forced into are deeply personal to each person and not something other people can dictaminate, on the other hand said affirmation falls more in the realm of psychology and sociology than biology, and if they're trying to tie the former two to the later they must do so using consistent and non-self-contradicting theoretical frameworks that do no give room to confusion or missuse.
That said, just becase these kind o definitions are flawed does not mean that gender isn't a real thing, becase it isn't really that hard to create consistent models for it given everything we know about intersexuality, how hormones affect the brain, how neurodivergence may play a role in it, and how neither of these things need to be cured, just managed; the idea of having different genders and gender roles is just an expression of that, one that is useful and doesn't necessarily need to lead to biology denial or surgery, which is what many people seem to be afraid of.
Not that surgery shouldn't be considered as a solution for people who suffer from body disphoria (as long as it isn't caused by any other psychological or neurological condition that can be treated, emphasis on CAN because there's no established treatment for body disphoria besides surgery).
People have a RIGHT to be happy as long as it doesn't hurt anybody else and I'm not a paternalising as*hole who puts in doubt people's ability to choose what's best for themselves just because he thinks he knows better than them how they will feel in the long run.
5:00 His dad’s name is Marlin, but “Marvin” made me laugh
thanks allot , for the first time I've understood gender and sex. this is good.
The entire concept relies on a cartesian duality between the mind and the body. It's a metaphysical belief that a body can be implanted with a different gendered mind/spirit. It's a religious belief. The mind is not separate from the body, they are one and the same. We sense and process information through our body and the mind is not separate from the biology it's connected to. They could just say they don't want to be held to social norms anymore. They don't, instead they come up with total gibberish explanations to rationalize their behaviour.
I prefer to think of gender as other people’s presumption that you would make a good potential mating partner or potential mating rival, presuming consent.
It didn't make the argument because there is no coherent argument because it's not true.
He didn't didn't.
Maybe he'd like to be called it though? 🤔 🤣
KC: “We need to understand the sexes holistically”
Also KC: “All psychological distinction between the sexes is because of patriarchy (except for perhaps a few specific examples).”
Yeah, he's a bit too much of a radical feminist at points, among other things, but I still overall appreciate his contributions to the GC movement.