They justify this contradiction by claiming both women and trans identified males have the same brain and are therefore the same. It's all bunk but that's what a lot of them believe.
@@applejackx97 I never watched it due to the creator being a fear mongerer who cannot do research to save his life. He claimed to Joe Rogan's face some astronomical number of kids transitioning and was fact checked on the spot and several orders of magnitude off. He made a movie about it and had no clue about how prevalent this actually is.
I'm a biological woman and I've never met a transwoman I 'identify' with. Hair, make-up, clothes, activity choices, home decor, jobs, etc., never made me 'feel' like a woman. I don't 'feel' more like a woman when I'm in a dress with my hair, make up & nails done, or when I'm building something in my garage wearing a t-shirt & jeans with sweat dripping down my face. It all 'feels' equally the same to me-- in other words, I'm just me and not thinking about being 'a woman.' 'Feeling' like a woman is something I have rarely experienced because I don't think about it almost at all... I just AM a woman, it's just an axiom like being alive. But if I had to explain what has made me 'feel' like a woman most in my life, it would probably be menstruation, pregnancy, childbirth, breastfeeding, being a mother to my children, and feeling vulnerable around some kinds of men because of past abuse-- basically, things that are inextricably related to my being female. If they wanna take the word 'woman' from us, fine. Just call me a biological female, then. Whatever you wanna call me or them, we're not the same. Our experiences are not the same. The biological differences separate us.
"If you're gender-critical, debate me." "Okay." "No, you're a guy. Get permission from ten gender-critical women and we'll talk." "Okay." "Those are gender-critical women, they don't count." Bruh.
I honestly find it funny how men who identify as women can claim a man can't understand how it is to be a woman. This then begs the question of what are they basing their concept of women and womanhood on? My experiences of these people tells me they tend to use tropes and stereotypes to form a basis. Or if they were married they tend to morph into some version of their wife.
Many or most of them are Autogynophilic meaning they are sexually aroused by their fantasy of themselves as women. What they are saying is "in the reference frame of my self-eroticism, you cannot understand my fantasy of being a woman." Does that make sense?
There's a really interesting discussion about how anglocentric fmthe trans conception of womanhood is. As an outward observer, it seems like to be a woman is to wear dresses and western style makeup. I wish that there was anyone I could have an actual good faith discussion with. Because there are several vacuums that it is interesting to imagine the trans pop-pathology in.
@@alexs7670I mean the entire movement is rooted in the post-modern west. These ideas and concepts are a product of the west, came from the west, and are primarily pushed by wealthy western liberals.
I mean the obvious question is if both a man and woman don't mean anything, then why is it necessary for a trans person to transition if neither are meaningful. Surely that would mean your genger identity would carry no weight and the need for transitioning is unnecessary in the first place.
Same thing with hrt and sex changes, biological sex doesn’t matter, but trying to do things that make you more like the opposite biological sex is somehow gender affirming?
Excuses excuses excuses, that's all I got from that challenge, especially when she was aware of your YT channel. If she was, she'd understand that you understand female socialization and how you factor that in when talking about this subject and that is valuable. And even though you acknowledge that socialism can be relevant in how one develops identity, this is why biological sex has to be that line of definition. Because people can be raised in all sorts of ways but our biology is what truly separates us in the most tangible way possible. And in the grand scheme of things, socialization is just decorative fluff and in the hands of trans-privilege activists, a distraction because hey know they can't really define trans ideology without it. It's why their ideology is so easy to troll and dismantle when you don't play into their shame game. On the point about the belief that gender critical is becoming conservative, the core of gender critical is rooted in leftism because it was kickstarted through feminism and so for that, it'll never be a conservative or right-wing ideology and deep down these trans-privilege activists know this but they're trying to fear monger leftists to not bother looking into it and coming across leftist GCs who are just using common sense. I mean if they want to play the guilt by association card, a lot of r@pists and gr@@mers are a part of the trans community so are all trans-identified people those things? Of course not and it goes both ways.
Sometimes gender defenders bring up people with androgen insensitivity, meaning genetic males who were born with external female characteristics (they even have a "vagina" that's just kind of a hole inside). Doctors pronounce them females at birth and they are raised as such. The recorded number of these people is about 0.002 - 0.005 % of the global population. My answer is very simple: we are what we are. Typical males are typical males. Same with typical females. Intersex people are intersex people. Perhaps if I was born with the androgen condition, I might identify as female too. But I was born as a typical male so I identify as male, and the terms for human male are "boy" and "man", therefore I identify as a man. I don't see any logic in a typical female, who was pronounced female at birth and was socially recognized as female, identifying as a man.
@@kwk111 Oh I'm very aware of how these trans-privilege activists love throwing people born with differences of sex development under the bus hoping that the person they're arguing against doesn't know enough about these people. The simple truth of the matter is that people born with DSDs still fall within the male and female sex class. An intesex person born with Klinefelter sydrome is male, while another intesex personborn with Turner Syndrome is female. In the most crudest of ways to explain, if you got a dick, you ain't a chick lol. People born with CAIS are genetically male but because of their phenotype which is female complete wit ha vagina, they are the true gray area where even though they biologically male, they have a genuine female phenotype which is why they are seen as women. But the reality is that only 1 in 99,000 people have this condition and the blunt reality is that trans-identified men are not CAIS males so it's a moot point and a waste of time to even argue about.
@@kwk111 most people do not "identify" as their sex, they simply recognize their sex is just what they are. Regarding the DSD of CAIS, being male requires an active SRYgene, and tge SRY gene in people born with CAIS, is not functional. If one does not have an active SRYgene, their reproductive system will not develop, so they will be infertile and their genitals will remain phenotypically female in appearance. Sex is ultimately defined by which gamete type one is structured towards producing, even if one is unable to produce those gametes. People with DSDs are not the same as people who are born unambiguously male or female, but who maladaptively deny the material objective reality of their sex due to any number of mental health, familial environmental or socio-cultural conditions which may result in them holding this belief.
@@Gingerblaze You're preaching to the choir, I know all that stuff. The word "identify" has really gone through the wringer in recent years, so it's no wonder we're not on the same page about it. Here's the traditional definition: Identify - establish or indicate who or what someone is I am a biological male, that's just a fact about myself. There, I just established/indicated that I'm male, so I literally identified as male. One can also establish or indicate something untrue about themselves, which is what I meant with the androgen disorder people. Perhaps if I was socialized as female from birth and naturally appeared female even when naked, if it was later confirmed that I'm actually male, I might still keep living "as a woman", besides telling the truth to my family, closest friends and potential romantic partners.
Honestly, just troll her. Bring a woman from your audience to the debadte and every time you answer, she just repeats what you said if she agrees. That way Joss can deba- ahahaha, I couldn't keep a straight face. (Edit) Alternatively, you could have asked "are you going to entirely base your case on lived experiences, because we could discuss your ideas that don't relate to lived experience".
A big problem with "x cant speak about the issues of z group" is that it is only used when someone disagrees. If they really believe it they will shut down their supporters too
You know, if they had just stuck with gender... It was all theirs to define and describe, an utterly alien component of the human experience none of the rest of us understood nor cared enough to push back on. It was distinct from both sex *and* orientation and only required reversed pronouns and an AGAB. They got so used to their language playground, they forgot it was only as big as the concept of gender... outside, consensual and material reality are enforced.
Consensual (whatever that means) and material reality have often been ignored and one of the big outcomes of that is quite often famine and cultural revolution which degrades the society and leads to the burning of books and the execution of the "bourgeois" and the "elite."
This video deserves to go viral. The sheer hypocrisy of Joss Prior exposes their lack of moral consistency; Joss is acting in completely bad faith and simply doesn't care. Also, I appreciate your nuance in saying that some men could be socialized as girls/women, and that maybe we could pretend they're women but obviously not try to change the definition of what a woman actually is. I feel like I am someone that was socialized in an extremely feminine way by my mother, and I would like for people to treat me "as a woman", but I know I am not actually a genuine woman.
Transexual is just the word doctors used to refer to transgender people before ICD-11. Except it's more complicated in some countries, however in my country that term is used as the term for the pre-ICD-11 (or DSM-5) diagnosis only.
@@SCDarkZide Transexual is the more accurate terminology, because no one creates fake boobs and a fake vagina because they want to be another "gender", those are sex traits.
Rachel, if you had been aware that it is possible to be socialised to be more stereotypically female, while acknowledging that you are a man and that it is acceptable to be remain a man , would you have decided to not undergo cosmetic medical procedures and changes to your social presentation?
@@KC_Streams KIng, you know that Jammiedodger made a video talking about how JK Rowling is a transphobe, with quotes. You know what to do. You know what to do.
Your assessment that society does not require adherents to trans ideology to be rationale, logical and internally consistent in their views as “sad” is misguided. It is a dangerous ideology that should make society angry as it has captured our media, academia, education, police and judicial system. eg: Tickle v Giggle!
i actually think gender critical is more progressive than a lot of mainstream gender ideology. trans ideology seems to reinforces stereotypical expressions and ideas of gender rather than breaking them down and letting people present how they want. so im a guy with long hair, i dress and look feminine and i like makeup. but according to trans ideology, a trans man (biological women that presents masculine) would also be a man. so despite us being literally polar opposites both biologically and socially, we are put in the same category. make it make sense
Where does this idea come from that having traits of the other gender must mean that a person is trans? I genuinely don't understand this. One thing concerns identity, the other thing concerns expression. There are correlations, but nobody would say that long hair makes you a woman, or that you can't be androgynous or have traits of both genders, especially since society as a large (as well as societies in overall) does not strictly agree on the complete set of male and female characteristics. F.e. long hair was very common and desirable as a male in the 70s, and it still is in some places of this world such as scandinavia, latin america, mongolia, and among several american indigenous populations. This idea that anyone believes otherwise probably sounds absurd to you because it's incompatible with observable reality. "It" being specifically anyone believing that, not the belief itself.
And secondly, trans people generally tend to be against stereotypical expressions. Just three days ago I met a person who started out in the emo scene before putting on makeup as an expression of gender. Over the course of the last few months I met several people in the CGL and Cosplay scenes. Often but not always, trans people want HRT and both boymode and girlmode in varying degrees. Can you please explain what stereotype is enforced by this?
@@SCDarkZide there's no way to define women or man socially without using stereotypes or conventions. if your saying that to be a women is a social thing, but then say that thing could be anything, you make the term meaningless because then literally anyone could be a "women".
@@SCDarkZideI'm not reading all that and to be honest arguing "well actually we believe this not that" is kind of pointless. What I can say is I notice both pro-trans people and especially trans-ID people subconsciously or through their behaviour supporting gender stereotypes. Anytime Matt Walsh says a TIF "isn't a man" he gets a lot of people going "well HE'S more masculine than you are" which I guess is a funny thing to do to a chud, but they'll post photos that show the person doing something stereotypically masculine things. Whenever he says a TIM isn't a woman people do the "well don't you want to FUCK this PRETTY LADY" and post and exaggeratedly feminine expression. This is all to say that A. he doesn't care. Reactionaries' understanding of man and woman is not based on (but behooves) expressions of masculinity/femininity and B. it's showing that they think this is a valid form of argument. People might say they're only using it to mock/in bad faith, but why would you regularly use arguments that aren't meant to convince someone and you don't believe in if this is such a serious issue? The point is, reactionary understandings of gender are more amenable to becoming pro-trans than through exploiting their existing patriarchal conceptions. Also you can literally just listen to what a lot of the gross fetishists say about what "being a woman* means to them. Sure, that may not be you, but the modern trans movement believes that a cuck-porn chastity cage porn addict is de facto the same as you because watching porn made them "discover their femininity". They don't go "oh, that's not a REAL trans person" because there's no such thing to them.
@@SCDarkZide Man/woman is either decided by social conventions, or by self-identity, or by biology. It can't be all those things at once but also sometimes only one of those things but also sometimes just some parts of each of those things. You can't have your cake and eat it too.
I've just learned that today is International Day of Pink. I mean, I still have my Transgender Day of Visibility decorations up - which supplanted Jesus and the Easter bunny, and now this! I just can't keep up.
I am GC and libertarian. However, my social sense is much more lefty, than typical "right". I do not consider myself conservative in anyway whatsoever.
The people who claim gatekeeping is a bad thing are either intelectually dishonest or lack the understanding of the importance of gatekeeping. Without gatekeeping words mean nothing - as we have seen from the problems surrounding the word "woman" and the concept of being non binary or queer which really have no real meaning whatsoever and apply to anyone who sticks their hands up. You can't pretend or claim to be a minority group or a protected characteristic when you can't define with terms who makes up that group - you're not marginalized if anyone can make the decision to magically become a part of that group - as that's effectively marginalizing yourself in which case zero accomodations should be made for people who are making themselves appear as victims as opposed to taking accountability for their own lives. Women have protection for example due to biological differences which are well established and historical context in the element of seperated spaces due to badly behaved men abusing them and having an advantage in the situation due to a wide average difference in physical strength. That's not saying "all men are going to do x" its simply saying "we have no way of knowing which men will or will not do x therefore better safe than sorry".
Not when the people gatekeeping what it means to be trans can’t actually define what it means to be trans in any logical way…they are causing the very problem you’re saying their gatekeeping should be avoiding.
@@Bonobo_JoJo no actually, I'd say being generally trans requires some form of medical transition or a diagnosis of gender dysphoria - it's a pretty clear cut definition of what being trans is - or it used to be before people began playing stupid games with words. On the other hand if you're just going to throw on some clothes or change your pronouns while not having made any actual effort to transition medically or you don't suffer from gender dysphoria you don't have the same lived experience as being trans and therefore it's not the same thing. Definitions matter for a reason as you either are something or you're not - particularly when it comes to a group of vulnerable people, as like life shows time and time again people love to pretend to be a vulnerable group for attention a lot of the time and in the process misrepresent and damage the rights of vulnerable groups while not actually having to deal with the problems those groups actually face. People are tired of others trying to seek attention by claiming to be whatever group they want when objectively they aren't and then those people simply do damage to groups and move on with their lives after with no issue - just like we've seen with the damage certain "trans activists" have caused the trans community. It's easy to pretend it's all the right wing causing issues but at the end of the day there are wolves in sheeps clothing in the actual movement which has made life more difficult for trans people just wanting to live their lives.
A channel called Novara Media posted a long video ten days ago of Judith Butler holding court. It’s a rich vein of gold for a reaction video, but it would be long and exhausting work. Absurdity and dishonesty to put Lily Alexandre to shame.
There is a bizarre demonising/ridiculing of men by trans activists, especially “cis het men” as they frequently refer. This feminine bias underpins the cult dynamics, and the other contradiction that diversity is celebrated but everyone has to think the same. Masculinity upholds the boundaries and allows for mutual respect of me/you.
It’s so bad that when I have been critical of gender online, every single time without fail I am accused of being a man! As soon as I say something they don’t like, the argument changes from the original topic into “You’re probably a man so you know nothing and you shouldn’t speak on this.” I AM A WOMAN 😂. These people automatically assume disagreeing means I am a man!!
What video? RationalityRules is a very cool channel. Love his vids! Why does he convince himself to agree with these positions when they can't be defended by reason and logic? very odd.
@@polymathable Go to his channel and check back a couple years. He did a video about how sex matters in sports, got dogpiled by people in his own community, who may (not sure I remember correctly) have threatened to kick him out of whatever skeptic society he was in, he posted at least one, maybe two reply videos, then retracted everything and started a series on why philosophers agree that gender is a social construct. It was absolutely crazy to watch.
@@arjay9745 oh yea, I recall. I saw that unfold in real time. He got convinced into abandoning a rational position. His first video was basically right, no idea why he backtrcked and dismissed his own arguments.
@@polymathableHe got even worse in a debate with Peter Boghossian and Colin Wright. I can’t even describe how bad his arguments were, you’d have to watch it.
I always like to say transgenderism is womanface (or manface), in reference to blackface. Everyone understands blackface is highly insulting, but somehow womanface is acceptable? I don't think so. I find womanface just as insulting as blackface.
This is a little off-topic, but I recently heard on a video that the brain controls the reproductive system, so I was thinking about male and female brains. They say that their brains and bodies don't match, but I was wondering, if they could transplant a woman's reproductive system into a "trans woman's body" (a man's body) would the man's brain be able to control that reproductive system or is a man's brain only able to control the hormones and whatever else is part of a man's reproductive system. Maybe the fact that a man's brain controls his natural reproductive system and it is stimulated by his own thoughts would be proof that his brain and his body match in the first place.
Okay I'm not a member YET but did you ever react to the infamous "aqua" Vaush debate he had with the phd guy? It's from a year ago so maybe not something you'd be interested in responding to now but I was so interested in your thoughts, I rewatched Destiny reacting to it last week and it is truly something lmao.
I think you somewhat overlook the fact that trans activists have rebuttals to some of the things you're saying, even if those rebuttals don't make any sense. Yes, gender-identity ideology says that anyone who identifies as trans is trans. But it also assumes (incorrectly) that nobody would identify that way unless they "really" are trans. From that it follows that if a person who is not "really" trans (like you) says they are trans, the person are only trolling or trying to make a political or theoretical point (as you are). Again, I'm not saying it makes sense, but the way you present it is not the full story.
What is the point of a non sensical rebuttal to valid questions and criticism? It's like saying I can do math fast. 2 + 2= 148. "Incorrect. " "Yeah but it was fast". What is the point of gender ideology if gender identity is only and vaguely and esoterically described as "identity" with cultural sterotypes" The concept of "faking or lying being trans" has no meaning under an open endeded and limitless identity. I *literally* just read a article that the possibilities of gender are infinite from a gender site. Meaning I can identify as trans for any reason, any amount of time. Any adult trans person can identify as boy or girl, since boys and girls are also genders and gender can be fluid. Social transitioning or external transition is not requires. You don't have to be "passing" because that could discrimination. Not required to wear a dress or wear make up. Well under that gender identity...the sky is the limit. This gender ideology is pandoras box. "Sex isnt the same as gender." But They're explaining gender as "social roles" and sterotypes expected of sex. How is this not sexism and enforcing the idea of gender stereotypes??? I thought progressives was expected to get rid of it, but the ideology is so pressed on being included Ina definition it distorted and expanded a definition so it can fit only to find out the deinitions they've prescribed are sociallt regressive. What Is wrong with just being being in the category "feminine man" who likes to wear dresses or make, and that a gender is based on sex as a linguistic category. And what is wrong with woman be defined as female human? Instead of saying a woman is a "social role" that is feminine that's expected to be in the kitchen,.or stay at home and raise kids. or likes pink? Why? Would anyone define man or woman as social roles???
I have this thing I call the "ideological half-space" (term borrowed from football) that I notice TRAs do a lot. When they're pressed on an issue, they'll "move into the half-space" and give an answer that somewhat answers that dilemma, but then give a contradictory answer on the opposite side (like how a player in midfield moves between the half-spaces). This comment is an illustration of that. You can't be a woman because I know you're faking, but nobody would ever fake being trans for malicious purposes.
😮gatekeepers transitioning to only people who medically NEED it us thr best thing for everyone, not everyone shluld be allowed to just randomly start fuvking with dangerous chemicals like that
18:17 one way that cults work is through flow of information. This means that essentially, cults need to discredit information of outsiders, to make cult information the only reliable source. How do you do that? Say only trans people can talk on trans issues. Its actually somewhat simple.
I recently discovered your channel, I was wondering if you could make a video outlining your views on trans people as a whole. For example, if you don't believe trans men can truly be men by their ontology and vice versa, do you still believe transitioning is still a valid solution for GD, and that it just shouldn't involve the classification of something against their biology? Or if you are against that then to what you believe the problem with these individuals with GD is and what the solution is? Idk just want to know your perspective as a whole. Also curious on your perspective on the mental health side of it all as well, suicide rates and all that. Speaking about the philosophy of it is cool and all but what always prevents me from truly leaping on the GC side is that I can't argue against the personal experience of these individuals. If they found that transitioning was the only solution to their mental health problems then what can I say?
"Lived experience" is a bunch of bollocks that exists only to ignore whatever arguments one considers inconvenient. Perceiving yourself a certain way doesn't make that a reality, in any sense of the word. Arguing that reality depends on perception is a smokescreen as well.
I'm not sure if I'm against people taking cross-sex hormones if they are aware of the consequences and have realistic expectations, sure it is detrimental to the person's health but lots of things are, people have the choice to do things they know are bad for them like smoking, drinking alcohol, eating unhealthy foods etc. But often it's not effective for alleviating dysphoria especially in men who have gone through male puberty who will possibly never "pass" as female, as is the goal for many trans-identified people. Looking on subreddits for trans people many trans identified men have unrealistic expectations for hrt.
You and I have the same position on this, particularly since the jury is still out scientifically about what causes gender dysphoria. I do believe it is a painful condition with a real, physiological basis that has yet to be fully understood. I have a trans curious sibling who also has a whole host of additional mental health issues. I got smeared as a transphobe (behind my back, no less) because I have been pushing for him to move very slowly with medical transition, only go so far as to make himself more comfortable, and to first address all of the other mental health problems he has. He has been taking estrogen and claims a lot of his mental anguish has gone away. (I always think to myself, but gender dysphoria wouldn't cause hallucinations and psychotic breaks...) It's hard to tell how much of this is a placebo and how much is actual healthcare. At the same time I'm not willing to say that this is just some delusion or fetish.
This is a comment for the algorithm, but I'm also curious about something you mentioned in passing. I don't think concept of colourblind racism makes much sense from a point of view of logic. Don't get me wrong, I can understand how you can be racist while pretending to be colourblind, but being racist while colourblind is a logical impossibility. Let's look at the example of an employer making a choice between a white and black employee, they can be the most raging racist in the world, but as long as the white person has objectively better qualification for the job, the act itself is not racist. Reason for that specifically is that being racist has an objective component and you can point it out based on evidence.
Ok so I have a theoretical definition of trans woman I would like to propose, and I'd be interested to hear anyones thoughts. Trans woman : Biological man who lives/attempts to live as if they are born of the opposite sex. It's not as pretty as the LGBT activists would probably like but I think it works without being dishonest about claiming yourself to be a women. I've been trying to come to terms with my own desire to be excedingly effeminate as a male. Started out as a ideology and now I'm just sticking with it because it's something I enjoy.
The acronym GC reeks of insult as Cisgender... Why everything towards normal people has to be nuanced in this way? Makes people not want to respect anyone about the matter... Should we respond accordingly? It would only be fair...
8:35 I find this argument a complete straw man because I don't know anyone who champions colourblindness who says we shouldn't acknowledge race at all. Rather we should acknowledge it only when relevant and stop bringing it up where it doesn't belong.
11:58 the irony here is that feminism is an inherently progressive thing. So it kind of doesnt fit into this socially political binary of left vs right, because its a progressive position mixed with a conservative one. Feminism, which by nature is progressive, sort of says you know women should have the right to marry eachother, women should have political power, etc etc. BUT also considers the fact that if you cant define what a woman is the entire point of the movement is pretty worthless. This makes it neither conservative nor progressive, but i'd call it a kind of logical progressive stance.
I think there is some misunderstand. Racial blindness is not the belief there is no context in which considering the problem through the lens for race is relevant, but rather, that the ultimate and only solution to racism as a systemic problem is equality before the law, and that making special legal or social concessions to people because of the circumstance of their birth is both unethical and counter productive regardless of particulars justification. It is the argument that something like, say, affirmative action is wrong BOTH because race based discrimination is morally wrong in all context, regardless of who the target is for benefit and loss, AND, as some conservatives argue, not actually helpful for resolving race disparities due to the fact that drop out rates for ethnic groups that are helped by AA are significant higher than those who receive no assistance, or are actively harmed by AA. So it is not that race is never a useful lens to understand the context of a situation (Thomas Swells Discrimination and Disparities is a book that spend quite a lot of time taking about things through a racial lens, and is largely a book the conservative right, at least in the US, generally endorses) but that the ultimate solution is legal equality, that attempting to use the law to somehow fix past acts of racism is both counterproductive and morally indefensible. As an example, a conservative would probably not disagree with using race to understand an attack made by someone who is a self-professed racist for whom holds racial prejudice against their victim, but would be opposed to using race as a means to, say, justify giving an armed robber a lighter criminal charge as a means to fight inequality in fellon convictions. I won't discount that there are some people who use the phrase as you mean it, but I do not think, at least among the intellectual underpinnings of most conservative movements (again, in the US, I don't know enough about the British conservative movement) is meant in so blunt a manner.
If someone is stopping you from the way you want to live independently, it's your own fault for allowing it. Nobody needs to give you permission or validate you. That's your own Responsibility.
You made a lot of good points. What I think about the trans community and what is a woman argument. it’s getting to the point we have to be more Pacific like we have to use the word female more but of course the trans community would say your transphobic but really, it’s not because if women it’s just a word and category like bioF/cis👈🏻 woman 👉🏻BioM/trans . so when a woman say I am a female they can’t get upset because you’re going by what you are by birth a female.
Also, they are kind of going back and forth with it . and contradict themselves when the boxer drama happened .she’s not a trans women but when she said I was born as a woman raise as a woman and fight as a woman I’m a woman. Then the trans community said this proves the right wing is wrong but really it contradicts themselves by using her words .
I really don't understand this channel. The argument that "there is a contradiction between saying a man can be a woman and saying man can't understand woman" is comepletely based on things nobody (outside of twitter) believes. Gender is performed, what a trans person, or just really any person, claims to have is the ability to determine how they feel inside and whether it is in accordance to their perceived gender and biological characteristics. Having an internal sense of identity that includes gender is not the same as the satirical assertion of being an attack helicopter because a person says that they are. Gender is also performed, that means it also relies on how other people see you. Saying that X is Y does not magically make it Y. Here, X is solipsism and Y is whatever he calls trans ideology. As Pope Francis said: opposition is often created from not understanding.
"Gender is also performed, that means it also relies on how other people see you." So you wouldn't mind me calling a transwoman a man because that's how I perceive them?
Gender is no more a performance than being a goth or a tomboy or a cowboy or something. Why aren't these genders? Masculinity and femininity are based on averages and norms. Is Jeffree Star a different gender from The Rock or an Amazonian Tribesman? Is a man from today a different gender from a man from 2,000 years ago? Performance of gender varies based on culture, class, age etc but one thing does not.
Gender is no more a performance than being a goth or a cowboy or a tomboy. Why aren't these genders? "Performance of gender" varies based on culture, class, age etc but one thing does not. Is JamesCharlse a different gender from The Rock or an uncontacted tribesman? Is a man from today a different gender from a man from 2000 years ago?
@@Gingerblaze I honestly try not to waste to much time on GC people since everything you say to them accomplishes nothing positive and usually ends to needless argument (the same can be said about the nasty trannies on Twitter and the like). Focusing primarily on his opening analysis…. He claims that trans people claim that they are in fact not trans but cis in their perception of sexuality and that being a cis woman boils down to an arbitrary self ID. Myself and every other trans person that I know do not conceptualize ourselves in such a way. We instead identify as TRANS and what makes us trans is gender dysphoria. Before I went on hrt I never called myself a woman. Years later I now call myself a trans woman which is distinct from cis woman and a type of feminine expression in the female gender category. At no point have I ever claimed that my sex is female. However my body’s phenotype has been hybridized so again the description of having a “trans body” is important to distinguish me from both men and women (which is important in medical situations). Does this suffice?
Yep, like hell i even agree there is even. Yes men can very much understand women, its not like its not communicable and empathy and learning from experience exist, if its explained well, anyone can. But no its just a jordan peterson word salad. And i agree the is some taxic gatekeeping , but thats, not even the point, not does it give any argumennt to gender criticals. Gender is a thing people always identified by, look at different societies, with different other genders, yes its a self identifyier in mix with society, always was. Its just redicilous to say no cis people should evertalk about it, because a lot are inforemed enough to know spread misinfo, so dunno the gatekeeping, he didnt even talk about gatekeeping at all , gigh.
@@nicolebaker8674You seem 5 plus years behind on this topic, and the "me and my friends" is akin to "How could Trump win? No one I know voted for him!". There are plenty of prominent tr@nz people, activists and advocates, who claim you do not need dysphoria to be tr@nz, and you can get labelled with some unfortunate terms if you disagree. There are tr@ns w@men claiming to be female,. (There are plenty of examples, but a prominent one would be Rachel Levine, who was referred to, and referred to themself as "the first female assistant secretary for health"). Many do so through selfID. Beyond that, "I am a woman" means "I am a female" to the gender critical.
The rebuttal that the definition is circular should stop. The definition is "A woman is anyone who identifies as a woman". It seems circular when we assume that there is one objective thing women are that everyone can compare themselves to. Instead, the idea is that everyone has been exposed to words like "man" and "woman" and will have their own idea of what that is, which can be different from person to person. So, really the definition is (probably) "A woman is anyone whose sense of self is congruent with their sense of what women are". That even applies to gender critical people. If your sense of what women are is "adult human females" and your sense of self is that you are an "adult human female", then you identify as a woman, therefore you are one. Do I love this definition? No. But it's not circular in the same way that "A woman is a woman" is.
Yes it is. It is exactly as circular as ‘a woman is anyone who identifies as a woman’. Language is a tool with which people communicate ideas. Communication is a hell of a lot harder when the same word means completely different things to different people because it’s definition has been stripped of descriptive content.
@@ApophisTw0Thousand6309 I agree. But I've never heard anyone say "I identify as X" before the trans movement, so it's appropriate to spend some time understanding what they mean by that. For one they probably don't mean "A woman is anyone who says they are a woman". What's funny is that they are obsessed with symbols instead of semantics. They want to be called a woman no matter what you or I mean by that, they only care about what that word means to them.
It is not really that really that contradictory. Since if you tommorow realised that you are infact a woman all along you would have atorrety to speak on the experience of a TRANS woman. you wouldn't really have much to say on the experience of a cis-woman(biological woman) because they are a completely different category.
So when does the absurdity stop? People can only speak on their particular configuration? Can someone with a DSD speak on the experience of a woman or only DSDs? Can I only speak on a biracial man's experience? Unpacked, that means that people can only speak on THEIR experience, regardless of any silly identity they prescribe to. Or is there a hierarchy? Self-Sex-Family-Group-Tribe-Race-Nation-blah blah blah
Yeah simultaneously believing men can't understand what it's like to be a woman and that men can be woman is some Olympic level mental gymnastics😅
They justify this contradiction by claiming both women and trans identified males have the same brain and are therefore the same. It's all bunk but that's what a lot of them believe.
They get around that by saying they were ALWAYS women
No one is doing that. You don’t understand what man means.
@@howardhutton6806 I think you need to watch the "What is a woman?" Documentary.
@@applejackx97 I never watched it due to the creator being a fear mongerer who cannot do research to save his life. He claimed to Joe Rogan's face some astronomical number of kids transitioning and was fact checked on the spot and several orders of magnitude off. He made a movie about it and had no clue about how prevalent this actually is.
I'm a biological woman and I've never met a transwoman I 'identify' with. Hair, make-up, clothes, activity choices, home decor, jobs, etc., never made me 'feel' like a woman. I don't 'feel' more like a woman when I'm in a dress with my hair, make up & nails done, or when I'm building something in my garage wearing a t-shirt & jeans with sweat dripping down my face. It all 'feels' equally the same to me-- in other words, I'm just me and not thinking about being 'a woman.' 'Feeling' like a woman is something I have rarely experienced because I don't think about it almost at all... I just AM a woman, it's just an axiom like being alive. But if I had to explain what has made me 'feel' like a woman most in my life, it would probably be menstruation, pregnancy, childbirth, breastfeeding, being a mother to my children, and feeling vulnerable around some kinds of men because of past abuse-- basically, things that are inextricably related to my being female.
If they wanna take the word 'woman' from us, fine. Just call me a biological female, then. Whatever you wanna call me or them, we're not the same. Our experiences are not the same. The biological differences separate us.
What a perfect comment.
Thank you for sharing!
"If you're gender-critical, debate me."
"Okay."
"No, you're a guy. Get permission from ten gender-critical women and we'll talk."
"Okay."
"Those are gender-critical women, they don't count."
Bruh.
Their position so flimsy they had to move the requirements around in order to remain on top of a crumbling building. Maybe it's made out of tofu dreg.
Gotta exclude the women from the argument, otherwise you would be excluding women from the argument.
I honestly find it funny how men who identify as women can claim a man can't understand how it is to be a woman. This then begs the question of what are they basing their concept of women and womanhood on?
My experiences of these people tells me they tend to use tropes and stereotypes to form a basis. Or if they were married they tend to morph into some version of their wife.
Or their mothers
Many or most of them are Autogynophilic meaning they are sexually aroused by their fantasy of themselves as women. What they are saying is "in the reference frame of my self-eroticism, you cannot understand my fantasy of being a woman." Does that make sense?
Seriously 2018 six years ago, damn hearing it like that, traveling and sleeping around, I need to get my together and become an conservative I guess
There's a really interesting discussion about how anglocentric fmthe trans conception of womanhood is. As an outward observer, it seems like to be a woman is to wear dresses and western style makeup.
I wish that there was anyone I could have an actual good faith discussion with. Because there are several vacuums that it is interesting to imagine the trans pop-pathology in.
@@alexs7670I mean the entire movement is rooted in the post-modern west. These ideas and concepts are a product of the west, came from the west, and are primarily pushed by wealthy western liberals.
just tell her your non binary
I mean the obvious question is if both a man and woman don't mean anything, then why is it necessary for a trans person to transition if neither are meaningful. Surely that would mean your genger identity would carry no weight and the need for transitioning is unnecessary in the first place.
❤
Same thing with hrt and sex changes, biological sex doesn’t matter, but trying to do things that make you more like the opposite biological sex is somehow gender affirming?
I'm a non conforming man, I'm sure if I lied and said I was a woman she would believe me and than I could debate her😂
Excuses excuses excuses, that's all I got from that challenge, especially when she was aware of your YT channel. If she was, she'd understand that you understand female socialization and how you factor that in when talking about this subject and that is valuable. And even though you acknowledge that socialism can be relevant in how one develops identity, this is why biological sex has to be that line of definition. Because people can be raised in all sorts of ways but our biology is what truly separates us in the most tangible way possible. And in the grand scheme of things, socialization is just decorative fluff and in the hands of trans-privilege activists, a distraction because hey know they can't really define trans ideology without it. It's why their ideology is so easy to troll and dismantle when you don't play into their shame game.
On the point about the belief that gender critical is becoming conservative, the core of gender critical is rooted in leftism because it was kickstarted through feminism and so for that, it'll never be a conservative or right-wing ideology and deep down these trans-privilege activists know this but they're trying to fear monger leftists to not bother looking into it and coming across leftist GCs who are just using common sense. I mean if they want to play the guilt by association card, a lot of r@pists and gr@@mers are a part of the trans community so are all trans-identified people those things? Of course not and it goes both ways.
Sometimes gender defenders bring up people with androgen insensitivity, meaning genetic males who were born with external female characteristics (they even have a "vagina" that's just kind of a hole inside). Doctors pronounce them females at birth and they are raised as such. The recorded number of these people is about 0.002 - 0.005 % of the global population.
My answer is very simple: we are what we are. Typical males are typical males. Same with typical females. Intersex people are intersex people. Perhaps if I was born with the androgen condition, I might identify as female too. But I was born as a typical male so I identify as male, and the terms for human male are "boy" and "man", therefore I identify as a man. I don't see any logic in a typical female, who was pronounced female at birth and was socially recognized as female, identifying as a man.
@@kwk111 Oh I'm very aware of how these trans-privilege activists love throwing people born with differences of sex development under the bus hoping that the person they're arguing against doesn't know enough about these people. The simple truth of the matter is that people born with DSDs still fall within the male and female sex class. An intesex person born with Klinefelter sydrome is male, while another intesex personborn with Turner Syndrome is female. In the most crudest of ways to explain, if you got a dick, you ain't a chick lol.
People born with CAIS are genetically male but because of their phenotype which is female complete wit ha vagina, they are the true gray area where even though they biologically male, they have a genuine female phenotype which is why they are seen as women. But the reality is that only 1 in 99,000 people have this condition and the blunt reality is that trans-identified men are not CAIS males so it's a moot point and a waste of time to even argue about.
@@kwk111 most people do not "identify" as their sex, they simply recognize their sex is just what they are. Regarding the DSD of CAIS, being male requires an active SRYgene, and tge SRY gene in people born with CAIS, is not functional. If one does not have an active SRYgene, their reproductive system will not develop, so they will be infertile and their genitals will remain phenotypically female in appearance.
Sex is ultimately defined by which gamete type one is structured towards producing, even if one is unable to produce those gametes. People with DSDs are not the same as people who are born unambiguously male or female, but who maladaptively deny the material objective reality of their sex due to any number of mental health, familial environmental or socio-cultural conditions which may result in them holding this belief.
@@Gingerblaze You're preaching to the choir, I know all that stuff. The word "identify" has really gone through the wringer in recent years, so it's no wonder we're not on the same page about it. Here's the traditional definition:
Identify - establish or indicate who or what someone is
I am a biological male, that's just a fact about myself. There, I just established/indicated that I'm male, so I literally identified as male. One can also establish or indicate something untrue about themselves, which is what I meant with the androgen disorder people.
Perhaps if I was socialized as female from birth and naturally appeared female even when naked, if it was later confirmed that I'm actually male, I might still keep living "as a woman", besides telling the truth to my family, closest friends and potential romantic partners.
Honestly, just troll her.
Bring a woman from your audience to the debadte and every time you answer, she just repeats what you said if she agrees. That way Joss can deba- ahahaha, I couldn't keep a straight face.
(Edit) Alternatively, you could have asked "are you going to entirely base your case on lived experiences, because we could discuss your ideas that don't relate to lived experience".
I identify as a doctor, I should be allowed to practice medicine, anything else is gatekeeping, I’ve read a lot of medical books please?
A big problem with "x cant speak about the issues of z group" is that it is only used when someone disagrees. If they really believe it they will shut down their supporters too
You know, if they had just stuck with gender... It was all theirs to define and describe, an utterly alien component of the human experience none of the rest of us understood nor cared enough to push back on. It was distinct from both sex *and* orientation and only required reversed pronouns and an AGAB.
They got so used to their language playground, they forgot it was only as big as the concept of gender... outside, consensual and material reality are enforced.
Consensual (whatever that means) and material reality have often been ignored and one of the big outcomes of that is quite often famine and cultural revolution which degrades the society and leads to the burning of books and the execution of the "bourgeois" and the "elite."
This video deserves to go viral. The sheer hypocrisy of Joss Prior exposes their lack of moral consistency; Joss is acting in completely bad faith and simply doesn't care. Also, I appreciate your nuance in saying that some men could be socialized as girls/women, and that maybe we could pretend they're women but obviously not try to change the definition of what a woman actually is. I feel like I am someone that was socialized in an extremely feminine way by my mother, and I would like for people to treat me "as a woman", but I know I am not actually a genuine woman.
right Transexuals are transexuals, men are men, women are women, and transgender idk what that is.
Transexual is just the word doctors used to refer to transgender people before ICD-11. Except it's more complicated in some countries, however in my country that term is used as the term for the pre-ICD-11 (or DSM-5) diagnosis only.
@@SCDarkZide Transexual is the more accurate terminology, because no one creates fake boobs and a fake vagina because they want to be another "gender", those are sex traits.
Rachel, if you had been aware that it is possible to be socialised to be more stereotypically female, while acknowledging that you are a man and that it is acceptable to be remain a man , would you have decided to not undergo cosmetic medical procedures and changes to your social presentation?
to Rachel Richards, Thank you, Sister. Much love ❤️
I like King Crtiical because he has a big healthy face and says very big words and he is cool
My face is big
As opposed to unhealthy faces
F
@@KC_Streams KIng, you know that Jammiedodger made a video talking about how JK Rowling is a transphobe, with quotes. You know what to do. You know what to do.
Your assessment that society does not require adherents to trans ideology to be rationale, logical and internally consistent in their views as “sad” is misguided. It is a dangerous ideology that should make society angry as it has captured our media, academia, education, police and judicial system. eg: Tickle v Giggle!
I heard king critical has as many as 11 women who agree with him actually
i actually think gender critical is more progressive than a lot of mainstream gender ideology. trans ideology seems to reinforces stereotypical expressions and ideas of gender rather than breaking them down and letting people present how they want.
so im a guy with long hair, i dress and look feminine and i like makeup. but according to trans ideology, a trans man (biological women that presents masculine) would also be a man. so despite us being literally polar opposites both biologically and socially, we are put in the same category. make it make sense
Where does this idea come from that having traits of the other gender must mean that a person is trans? I genuinely don't understand this. One thing concerns identity, the other thing concerns expression. There are correlations, but nobody would say that long hair makes you a woman, or that you can't be androgynous or have traits of both genders, especially since society as a large (as well as societies in overall) does not strictly agree on the complete set of male and female characteristics. F.e. long hair was very common and desirable as a male in the 70s, and it still is in some places of this world such as scandinavia, latin america, mongolia, and among several american indigenous populations.
This idea that anyone believes otherwise probably sounds absurd to you because it's incompatible with observable reality. "It" being specifically anyone believing that, not the belief itself.
And secondly, trans people generally tend to be against stereotypical expressions. Just three days ago I met a person who started out in the emo scene before putting on makeup as an expression of gender. Over the course of the last few months I met several people in the CGL and Cosplay scenes.
Often but not always, trans people want HRT and both boymode and girlmode in varying degrees. Can you please explain what stereotype is enforced by this?
@@SCDarkZide there's no way to define women or man socially without using stereotypes or conventions. if your saying that to be a women is a social thing, but then say that thing could be anything, you make the term meaningless because then literally anyone could be a "women".
@@SCDarkZideI'm not reading all that and to be honest arguing "well actually we believe this not that" is kind of pointless. What I can say is I notice both pro-trans people and especially trans-ID people subconsciously or through their behaviour supporting gender stereotypes.
Anytime Matt Walsh says a TIF "isn't a man" he gets a lot of people going "well HE'S more masculine than you are" which I guess is a funny thing to do to a chud, but they'll post photos that show the person doing something stereotypically masculine things. Whenever he says a TIM isn't a woman people do the "well don't you want to FUCK this PRETTY LADY" and post and exaggeratedly feminine expression.
This is all to say that A. he doesn't care. Reactionaries' understanding of man and woman is not based on (but behooves) expressions of masculinity/femininity and B. it's showing that they think this is a valid form of argument. People might say they're only using it to mock/in bad faith, but why would you regularly use arguments that aren't meant to convince someone and you don't believe in if this is such a serious issue? The point is, reactionary understandings of gender are more amenable to becoming pro-trans than through exploiting their existing patriarchal conceptions.
Also you can literally just listen to what a lot of the gross fetishists say about what "being a woman* means to them. Sure, that may not be you, but the modern trans movement believes that a cuck-porn chastity cage porn addict is de facto the same as you because watching porn made them "discover their femininity". They don't go "oh, that's not a REAL trans person" because there's no such thing to them.
@@SCDarkZide Man/woman is either decided by social conventions, or by self-identity, or by biology. It can't be all those things at once but also sometimes only one of those things but also sometimes just some parts of each of those things.
You can't have your cake and eat it too.
I've just learned that today is International Day of Pink. I mean, I still have my Transgender Day of Visibility decorations up - which supplanted Jesus and the Easter bunny, and now this! I just can't keep up.
Bigot 😛😉😉😉
I am GC and libertarian. However, my social sense is much more lefty, than typical "right". I do not consider myself conservative in anyway whatsoever.
The people who claim gatekeeping is a bad thing are either intelectually dishonest or lack the understanding of the importance of gatekeeping.
Without gatekeeping words mean nothing - as we have seen from the problems surrounding the word "woman" and the concept of being non binary or queer which really have no real meaning whatsoever and apply to anyone who sticks their hands up.
You can't pretend or claim to be a minority group or a protected characteristic when you can't define with terms who makes up that group - you're not marginalized if anyone can make the decision to magically become a part of that group - as that's effectively marginalizing yourself in which case zero accomodations should be made for people who are making themselves appear as victims as opposed to taking accountability for their own lives.
Women have protection for example due to biological differences which are well established and historical context in the element of seperated spaces due to badly behaved men abusing them and having an advantage in the situation due to a wide average difference in physical strength. That's not saying "all men are going to do x" its simply saying "we have no way of knowing which men will or will not do x therefore better safe than sorry".
Not when the people gatekeeping what it means to be trans can’t actually define what it means to be trans in any logical way…they are causing the very problem you’re saying their gatekeeping should be avoiding.
@@Bonobo_JoJo no actually, I'd say being generally trans requires some form of medical transition or a diagnosis of gender dysphoria - it's a pretty clear cut definition of what being trans is - or it used to be before people began playing stupid games with words.
On the other hand if you're just going to throw on some clothes or change your pronouns while not having made any actual effort to transition medically or you don't suffer from gender dysphoria you don't have the same lived experience as being trans and therefore it's not the same thing.
Definitions matter for a reason as you either are something or you're not - particularly when it comes to a group of vulnerable people, as like life shows time and time again people love to pretend to be a vulnerable group for attention a lot of the time and in the process misrepresent and damage the rights of vulnerable groups while not actually having to deal with the problems those groups actually face.
People are tired of others trying to seek attention by claiming to be whatever group they want when objectively they aren't and then those people simply do damage to groups and move on with their lives after with no issue - just like we've seen with the damage certain "trans activists" have caused the trans community. It's easy to pretend it's all the right wing causing issues but at the end of the day there are wolves in sheeps clothing in the actual movement which has made life more difficult for trans people just wanting to live their lives.
A channel called Novara Media posted a long video ten days ago of Judith Butler holding court. It’s a rich vein of gold for a reaction video, but it would be long and exhausting work. Absurdity and dishonesty to put Lily Alexandre to shame.
Thanks for the suggestion!
Take a look at what you piss with. There's your answer.
I’m my best friends wife?
they're pisisng with their mouths ngl
I don’t piss.
There is a bizarre demonising/ridiculing of men by trans activists, especially “cis het men” as they frequently refer. This feminine bias underpins the cult dynamics, and the other contradiction that diversity is celebrated but everyone has to think the same. Masculinity upholds the boundaries and allows for mutual respect of me/you.
It’s so bad that when I have been critical of gender online, every single time without fail I am accused of being a man! As soon as I say something they don’t like, the argument changes from the original topic into “You’re probably a man so you know nothing and you shouldn’t speak on this.” I AM A WOMAN 😂. These people automatically assume disagreeing means I am a man!!
Dude your camera quality is AMAZING
and she loves his mic more than his face
He's literally a terf
@@googleuser3163 Not really.
Ex-gender-critical would be Rationality Rules (Stephen Woodford). That was crazy to watch.
What video?
RationalityRules is a very cool channel. Love his vids!
Why does he convince himself to agree with these positions when they can't be defended by reason and logic? very odd.
@@polymathable Go to his channel and check back a couple years. He did a video about how sex matters in sports, got dogpiled by people in his own community, who may (not sure I remember correctly) have threatened to kick him out of whatever skeptic society he was in, he posted at least one, maybe two reply videos, then retracted everything and started a series on why philosophers agree that gender is a social construct. It was absolutely crazy to watch.
@@arjay9745 oh yea, I recall. I saw that unfold in real time. He got convinced into abandoning a rational position.
His first video was basically right, no idea why he backtrcked and dismissed his own arguments.
@@polymathableHe got even worse in a debate with Peter Boghossian and Colin Wright. I can’t even describe how bad his arguments were, you’d have to watch it.
I always like to say transgenderism is womanface (or manface), in reference to blackface.
Everyone understands blackface is highly insulting, but somehow womanface is acceptable? I don't think so. I find womanface just as insulting as blackface.
A thoughtful and intelligent talk and I'm in agreement
I wonder what other criteria you should meet to get the privilege to talk to this person. Probably who's easier to dismiss.
Great video! Thank you! I might be far-right but you've been right so far on this video 🎉
I refuse to use the term cis.
Secondly self ID is basically meaningless.
I think a big part of it is that these people are just awful..
alot of these people forget what the RF in TERF stands for.
This is a little off-topic, but I recently heard on a video that the brain controls the reproductive system, so I was thinking about male and female brains. They say that their brains and bodies don't match, but I was wondering, if they could transplant a woman's reproductive system into a "trans woman's body" (a man's body) would the man's brain be able to control that reproductive system or is a man's brain only able to control the hormones and whatever else is part of a man's reproductive system. Maybe the fact that a man's brain controls his natural reproductive system and it is stimulated by his own thoughts would be proof that his brain and his body match in the first place.
Another based video 🙏
Okay I'm not a member YET but did you ever react to the infamous "aqua" Vaush debate he had with the phd guy? It's from a year ago so maybe not something you'd be interested in responding to now but I was so interested in your thoughts, I rewatched Destiny reacting to it last week and it is truly something lmao.
That would be a good thing to react to! I definitely could see myself choosing to react to it in the next few weeks
I think you somewhat overlook the fact that trans activists have rebuttals to some of the things you're saying, even if those rebuttals don't make any sense. Yes, gender-identity ideology says that anyone who identifies as trans is trans. But it also assumes (incorrectly) that nobody would identify that way unless they "really" are trans. From that it follows that if a person who is not "really" trans (like you) says they are trans, the person are only trolling or trying to make a political or theoretical point (as you are). Again, I'm not saying it makes sense, but the way you present it is not the full story.
What is the point of a non sensical
rebuttal to valid questions and criticism?
It's like saying I can do math fast. 2 + 2= 148.
"Incorrect. "
"Yeah but it was fast".
What is the point of gender ideology if gender identity is only and vaguely and esoterically described as "identity" with cultural sterotypes"
The concept of "faking or lying being trans" has no meaning under an open endeded and limitless identity. I *literally* just read a article that the possibilities of gender are infinite from a gender site.
Meaning I can identify as trans for any reason, any amount of time.
Any adult trans person can identify as boy or girl, since boys and girls are also genders and gender can be fluid.
Social transitioning or external transition is not requires. You don't have to be "passing" because that could discrimination. Not required to wear a dress or wear make up.
Well under that gender identity...the sky is the limit. This gender ideology is pandoras box.
"Sex isnt the same as gender." But They're explaining gender as "social roles" and sterotypes expected of sex.
How is this not sexism and enforcing the idea of gender stereotypes???
I thought progressives was expected to get rid of it, but the ideology is so pressed on being included Ina definition it distorted and expanded a definition so it can fit only to find out the deinitions they've prescribed are sociallt regressive.
What Is wrong with just being being in the category "feminine man" who likes to wear dresses or make, and that a gender is based on sex as a linguistic category. And what is wrong with woman be defined as female human?
Instead of saying a woman is a "social role" that is feminine that's expected to be in the kitchen,.or stay at home and raise kids. or likes pink?
Why? Would anyone define man or woman as social roles???
I have this thing I call the "ideological half-space" (term borrowed from football) that I notice TRAs do a lot. When they're pressed on an issue, they'll "move into the half-space" and give an answer that somewhat answers that dilemma, but then give a contradictory answer on the opposite side (like how a player in midfield moves between the half-spaces).
This comment is an illustration of that. You can't be a woman because I know you're faking, but nobody would ever fake being trans for malicious purposes.
@@aceinspadesz4882 - if the goal is to understand trans activist ideology, then part of that is understanding their ridiculous rebuttals.
😮gatekeepers transitioning to only people who medically NEED it us thr best thing for everyone, not everyone shluld be allowed to just randomly start fuvking with dangerous chemicals like that
The gate will be kept, for the Emperor, for Malcador Fortuna
The free speech platforms broke before the TERFs broke! The Emperor protects.
18:17 one way that cults work is through flow of information. This means that essentially, cults need to discredit information of outsiders, to make cult information the only reliable source.
How do you do that? Say only trans people can talk on trans issues. Its actually somewhat simple.
I love your videos
As a transperson (a man who identifies as a woman who in turn identifies as a man - again...) I aprove of this message😂
I recently discovered your channel, I was wondering if you could make a video outlining your views on trans people as a whole.
For example, if you don't believe trans men can truly be men by their ontology and vice versa, do you still believe transitioning is still a valid solution for GD, and that it just shouldn't involve the classification of something against their biology? Or if you are against that then to what you believe the problem with these individuals with GD is and what the solution is? Idk just want to know your perspective as a whole.
Also curious on your perspective on the mental health side of it all as well, suicide rates and all that.
Speaking about the philosophy of it is cool and all but what always prevents me from truly leaping on the GC side is that I can't argue against the personal experience of these individuals. If they found that transitioning was the only solution to their mental health problems then what can I say?
I'd be happy to make a video like that at some point!
"Lived experience" is a bunch of bollocks that exists only to ignore whatever arguments one considers inconvenient. Perceiving yourself a certain way doesn't make that a reality, in any sense of the word. Arguing that reality depends on perception is a smokescreen as well.
I'm not sure if I'm against people taking cross-sex hormones if they are aware of the consequences and have realistic expectations, sure it is detrimental to the person's health but lots of things are, people have the choice to do things they know are bad for them like smoking, drinking alcohol, eating unhealthy foods etc. But often it's not effective for alleviating dysphoria especially in men who have gone through male puberty who will possibly never "pass" as female, as is the goal for many trans-identified people. Looking on subreddits for trans people many trans identified men have unrealistic expectations for hrt.
You and I have the same position on this, particularly since the jury is still out scientifically about what causes gender dysphoria. I do believe it is a painful condition with a real, physiological basis that has yet to be fully understood.
I have a trans curious sibling who also has a whole host of additional mental health issues. I got smeared as a transphobe (behind my back, no less) because I have been pushing for him to move very slowly with medical transition, only go so far as to make himself more comfortable, and to first address all of the other mental health problems he has.
He has been taking estrogen and claims a lot of his mental anguish has gone away. (I always think to myself, but gender dysphoria wouldn't cause hallucinations and psychotic breaks...) It's hard to tell how much of this is a placebo and how much is actual healthcare. At the same time I'm not willing to say that this is just some delusion or fetish.
This is a comment for the algorithm, but I'm also curious about something you mentioned in passing.
I don't think concept of colourblind racism makes much sense from a point of view of logic. Don't get me wrong, I can understand how you can be racist while pretending to be colourblind, but being racist while colourblind is a logical impossibility. Let's look at the example of an employer making a choice between a white and black employee, they can be the most raging racist in the world, but as long as the white person has objectively better qualification for the job, the act itself is not racist.
Reason for that specifically is that being racist has an objective component and you can point it out based on evidence.
Race is not just skin color and employees don't just magically remain "of indiscernible gender" after they got hired.
I meant "of indiscernible race". Oh well.
@@SCDarkZide I fail to see how that is relevant, could you elaborate?
Ok so I have a theoretical definition of trans woman I would like to propose, and I'd be interested to hear anyones thoughts.
Trans woman : Biological man who lives/attempts to live as if they are born of the opposite sex.
It's not as pretty as the LGBT activists would probably like but I think it works without being dishonest about claiming yourself to be a women. I've been trying to come to terms with my own desire to be excedingly effeminate as a male. Started out as a ideology and now I'm just sticking with it because it's something I enjoy.
The acronym GC reeks of insult as Cisgender...
Why everything towards normal people has to be nuanced in this way?
Makes people not want to respect anyone about the matter...
Should we respond accordingly? It would only be fair...
8:35 I find this argument a complete straw man because I don't know anyone who champions colourblindness who says we shouldn't acknowledge race at all. Rather we should acknowledge it only when relevant and stop bringing it up where it doesn't belong.
Empathy to another person or gender and nationality being gatekept because you are a different gender to them is so ignorant and blatantly stupid.
11:58 the irony here is that feminism is an inherently progressive thing. So it kind of doesnt fit into this socially political binary of left vs right, because its a progressive position mixed with a conservative one.
Feminism, which by nature is progressive, sort of says you know women should have the right to marry eachother, women should have political power, etc etc. BUT also considers the fact that if you cant define what a woman is the entire point of the movement is pretty worthless.
This makes it neither conservative nor progressive, but i'd call it a kind of logical progressive stance.
I think there is some misunderstand. Racial blindness is not the belief there is no context in which considering the problem through the lens for race is relevant, but rather, that the ultimate and only solution to racism as a systemic problem is equality before the law, and that making special legal or social concessions to people because of the circumstance of their birth is both unethical and counter productive regardless of particulars justification.
It is the argument that something like, say, affirmative action is wrong BOTH because race based discrimination is morally wrong in all context, regardless of who the target is for benefit and loss, AND, as some conservatives argue, not actually helpful for resolving race disparities due to the fact that drop out rates for ethnic groups that are helped by AA are significant higher than those who receive no assistance, or are actively harmed by AA.
So it is not that race is never a useful lens to understand the context of a situation (Thomas Swells Discrimination and Disparities is a book that spend quite a lot of time taking about things through a racial lens, and is largely a book the conservative right, at least in the US, generally endorses) but that the ultimate solution is legal equality, that attempting to use the law to somehow fix past acts of racism is both counterproductive and morally indefensible. As an example, a conservative would probably not disagree with using race to understand an attack made by someone who is a self-professed racist for whom holds racial prejudice against their victim, but would be opposed to using race as a means to, say, justify giving an armed robber a lighter criminal charge as a means to fight inequality in fellon convictions.
I won't discount that there are some people who use the phrase as you mean it, but I do not think, at least among the intellectual underpinnings of most conservative movements (again, in the US, I don't know enough about the British conservative movement) is meant in so blunt a manner.
If someone is stopping you from the way you want to live independently, it's your own fault for allowing it. Nobody needs to give you permission or validate you. That's your own Responsibility.
You made a lot of good points. What I think about the trans community and what is a woman argument. it’s getting to the point we have to be more Pacific like we have to use the word female more but of course the trans community would say your transphobic but really, it’s not because if women it’s just a word and category like bioF/cis👈🏻 woman 👉🏻BioM/trans . so when a woman say I am a female they can’t get upset because you’re going by what you are by birth a female.
Also, they are kind of going back and forth with it . and contradict themselves when the boxer drama happened .she’s not a trans women but when she said I was born as a woman raise as a woman and fight as a woman I’m a woman. Then the trans community said this proves the right wing is wrong but really it contradicts themselves by using her words .
Inuendo Studios is a joke. I get that there might be knowledge there, after all broken clocks, but I can't stand that guy.
What does GC mean?
Gender critical
Gender critical. Just means you don't think women have weiners
Gender critical
Game Cube
Galactic conquest
you're actually all insane
I really don't understand this channel.
The argument that "there is a contradiction between saying a man can be a woman and saying man can't understand woman" is comepletely based on things nobody (outside of twitter) believes.
Gender is performed, what a trans person, or just really any person, claims to have is the ability to determine how they feel inside and whether it is in accordance to their perceived gender and biological characteristics. Having an internal sense of identity that includes gender is not the same as the satirical assertion of being an attack helicopter because a person says that they are. Gender is also performed, that means it also relies on how other people see you. Saying that X is Y does not magically make it Y. Here, X is solipsism and Y is whatever he calls trans ideology.
As Pope Francis said: opposition is often created from not understanding.
That's a lot of words to say absolutely nothing of substance. Also, nobody cares how you feel on the inside.
"Gender is also performed, that means it also relies on how other people see you."
So you wouldn't mind me calling a transwoman a man because that's how I perceive them?
Gender is delusion, only sex is real.
Gender is no more a performance than being a goth or a tomboy or a cowboy or something. Why aren't these genders? Masculinity and femininity are based on averages and norms. Is Jeffree Star a different gender from The Rock or an Amazonian Tribesman? Is a man from today a different gender from a man from 2,000 years ago? Performance of gender varies based on culture, class, age etc but one thing does not.
Gender is no more a performance than being a goth or a cowboy or a tomboy. Why aren't these genders? "Performance of gender" varies based on culture, class, age etc but one thing does not. Is JamesCharlse a different gender from The Rock or an uncontacted tribesman? Is a man from today a different gender from a man from 2000 years ago?
This guy just gorges on word salad. I didn’t hear any real rebukes, just Peterson style self inflation.
Can you time stamp an example then refute it?
@@Gingerblaze I honestly try not to waste to much time on GC people since everything you say to them accomplishes nothing positive and usually ends to needless argument (the same can be said about the nasty trannies on Twitter and the like).
Focusing primarily on his opening analysis….
He claims that trans people claim that they are in fact not trans but cis in their perception of sexuality and that being a cis woman boils down to an arbitrary self ID.
Myself and every other trans person that I know do not conceptualize ourselves in such a way. We instead identify as TRANS and what makes us trans is gender dysphoria.
Before I went on hrt I never called myself a woman. Years later I now call myself a trans woman which is distinct from cis woman and a type of feminine expression in the female gender category.
At no point have I ever claimed that my sex is female.
However my body’s phenotype has been hybridized so again the description of having a “trans body” is important to distinguish me from both men and women (which is important in medical situations).
Does this suffice?
Yep, like hell i even agree there is even. Yes men can very much understand women, its not like its not communicable and empathy and learning from experience exist, if its explained well, anyone can.
But no its just a jordan peterson word salad. And i agree the is some taxic gatekeeping , but thats, not even the point, not does it give any argumennt to gender criticals.
Gender is a thing people always identified by, look at different societies, with different other genders, yes its a self identifyier in mix with society, always was.
Its just redicilous to say no cis people should evertalk about it, because a lot are inforemed enough to know spread misinfo, so dunno the gatekeeping, he didnt even talk about gatekeeping at all , gigh.
@@nicolebaker8674You seem 5 plus years behind on this topic, and the "me and my friends" is akin to "How could Trump win? No one I know voted for him!". There are plenty of prominent tr@nz people, activists and advocates, who claim you do not need dysphoria to be tr@nz, and you can get labelled with some unfortunate terms if you disagree. There are tr@ns w@men claiming to be female,. (There are plenty of examples, but a prominent one would be Rachel Levine, who was referred to, and referred to themself as "the first female assistant secretary for health"). Many do so through selfID. Beyond that, "I am a woman" means "I am a female" to the gender critical.
The rebuttal that the definition is circular should stop. The definition is "A woman is anyone who identifies as a woman". It seems circular when we assume that there is one objective thing women are that everyone can compare themselves to. Instead, the idea is that everyone has been exposed to words like "man" and "woman" and will have their own idea of what that is, which can be different from person to person. So, really the definition is (probably) "A woman is anyone whose sense of self is congruent with their sense of what women are". That even applies to gender critical people. If your sense of what women are is "adult human females" and your sense of self is that you are an "adult human female", then you identify as a woman, therefore you are one.
Do I love this definition? No. But it's not circular in the same way that "A woman is a woman" is.
Yes it is. It is exactly as circular as ‘a woman is anyone who identifies as a woman’.
Language is a tool with which people communicate ideas. Communication is a hell of a lot harder when the same word means completely different things to different people because it’s definition has been stripped of descriptive content.
@@ApophisTw0Thousand6309 I agree. But I've never heard anyone say "I identify as X" before the trans movement, so it's appropriate to spend some time understanding what they mean by that. For one they probably don't mean "A woman is anyone who says they are a woman".
What's funny is that they are obsessed with symbols instead of semantics. They want to be called a woman no matter what you or I mean by that, they only care about what that word means to them.
It is not really that really that contradictory. Since if you tommorow realised that you are infact a woman all along you would have atorrety to speak on the experience of a TRANS woman. you wouldn't really have much to say on the experience of a cis-woman(biological woman) because they are a completely different category.
If they are completely different, why do they share a label?
@AlquimistEd I'm 100% sure what you mean. Do you mean why they both fall under the category woman.
@@kingkingo1841 you can't ''realize you're a woman'' when you're not one....
@@kingkingo1841 yes
So when does the absurdity stop? People can only speak on their particular configuration? Can someone with a DSD speak on the experience of a woman or only DSDs? Can I only speak on a biracial man's experience? Unpacked, that means that people can only speak on THEIR experience, regardless of any silly identity they prescribe to. Or is there a hierarchy? Self-Sex-Family-Group-Tribe-Race-Nation-blah blah blah
Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
All hate all the time