Conservatives Don’t Know What A Woman Is

[@beowyfe]

Dear conservatives... If gender and sex are the same thing, then how come I've always had gender but never had sex? Gottem 😎

[@Colin-kh6kp]

I mean, pretty much water tight if you ask me.

[@beowyfe]

@@Colin-kh6kp Just like me heheee 😎 (honestly, I don't even know what I'm implying but I'm sure there's an innuendo in there somewhere).

[@BrandonAB]

Said no woman ever.

[@thedeathseas]

And people say conservatives have only one joke...

[@stevonwhite8933]

@@thedeathseas How ya doing Carl, back to troll I see? Hope you have a good time.

[@LaylaSpellwind]

The amount of times I've said I'm a trans woman on the internet, and a transphobe has screamed at me, or my old youtube video asking a friend to pronounce a really long word, that I will never be a man. I love that.

[@johnstrife7]

there's no such thing as "T-R-@-N-S" just some mentally ill delusional people that can't accept reality and what they truly are

[@Amara87387]

It’s so weird, like, why are they so obsessed? Do they have so few hobbies?

[@NoEvidenceForGod]

Honest question, why have you told so many people on the internet you're trans?

[@LucyTheBox]

I sometimes have the urge to comment "you'll never be a man" to a transgender woman or "you'll never be a woman" to a transgender man, knowing full well what those terms mean. I've never actually done this because I'm scared it wouldn't be received well. That said, that transphobe was right, you'll never be a man!

[@captaincluck838]

ok does trans woman mean you are biologically a woman or a man? im not trying to be offensive i genuinely dont know

[@sloppynegan3663]

This comment section is full of coping conservatives lol

[@AJ-lm5dl]

Coping for what? We're not the ones who get stumped by a basic question like, "What is a woman?".

[@dalek_4252]

​@@AJ-lm5dlu have smol pp

[@Eudaletism]

My favorite counterexample to conservative logic is XY cis-women. They grow up not knowing they have an inactive Y chromosome, until they discover they are infertile and get tested.

[@Jacob-kx8go]

Yes! I discovered something called sywer syndrome (I think I spelled that right,) and while that's a very small portion of women, A) so are trans women, and B) they are still WOMEN despite XY chromosomes

[@littlehop364]

Give Tim pool his insecurity hat back

[@theelordpyro]

perfect xD

[@kylegidluck3486]

Except Tim doesn't own a toque that stylish!!

[@BSU3000]

God defunded his hairline.

[@caramelgumdrop393]

LMAO PLS

[@Colin-kh6kp]

The hat made its choice and I can’t blame it.

[@jakthebomb]

Matt Walsh promotes Hate Speech and should be held accountable for any future deaths of Trans Women that are harmed by those using the Trans Panic Defense.

[@AJ-lm5dl]

"Hate speech" doesn't exist. He's simply saying facts that you don't like and aren't able to refute. And people who call themselves "trans" have been k!lling themselves long before May made this documentary existing this lunacy. You're simply a fascist who wants to silence those with whom you disagree because you know that they're right.

[@damiantirado9616]

@@AJ-lm5dl lol you are aware that all the fascist hate trans people right? Adolf Hitler hated trans people, he would’ve loved Matt Walsh documentary. Matt Walsh has the right to his opinion but he doesn’t have the right to facts. There’s a reason why conservatives are afraid of debating leftists, they know they will loose.

[@Psp10112tjq]

​​@@AJ-lm5dl detransitioners exist . So do people with or without being trans do suicide . Nothing to do with promoting hate speech and saying it as ' facts ' .

[@dreweckhart6894]

I love how Vaush was so eager to cut the feed after he said “Good Luck” that the editors didn’t have time to do the usual fade out and instead had to freeze frame.

[@julianborges1569]

What is a woman?

[@ejcejc4113]

That's it, that's your argument? Lol

[@julianborges1569]

@@ejcejc4113 what is it?

[@lavistardust]

@@julianborges1569 have you even watched the video?

[@Hladovina]

Funny thing is that although Vaush made some solid, already known points about sex and gender he nevertheless shows how simple his worldview is. Through the whole video he keeps referring to the entire conservative population like they are one person he despises. That's why this is nothing more that preaching to his subscribers who come to his podcast to hear what they know he's going to say and he has to say those keywords and punchlines to keep his subs.And in the end - the video is useless since it cannot change anyone's mind because he keeps calling people babies and idiots.

[@lefterismagkoutas4430]

Matt Walsh should have interviewed Vaush as well lmao

[@randomuser5609]

@Eyeney What walsh did doesn't correct the given flaws this video has. I think you know that. In addition, we're at a point where asking questions can be considered "exposing".

[@AD-bb9np]

He's trying to change his own mind. You can tell he doesn't actually believe what he is saying.

[@Hladovina]

@Eyeney I know a ton of very reasonable conservative people or people who are not really conservative or even define themselves as anything more then just being alive who find this whole hysteria quite absurd, confusing, scary and mindless. Those who post about condoning violence on Telegram are people who are angry and are involved in echo chambers on telegram / Facebook etc - they're a a minority. Most people binge Netflix or just barbecue or hang out most of the day. Just normal, regular people going about their daily lives. I see the same extremism you see on those Telegram groups on both sides but most of regular people I meet find this whole issue to be so uncomfortable and absurd that they simply post inspirational quotes or music videos and avoid the subject online just so they don't invite hatred in their comments section. But when you actually talk to them without pressuring them to take a side - they side more on this documentary' side. I do find the author of the film to be quite irritating and clickbaity which is fine by me - it's quite normal for authors with large following to do that. He does however raise key issues no matter how irritating he is to me. I agree what the docs author did is the same thing but he opened at least 10 difficult subjects while Vausch choose the easiest and most generic subject to criticize. When you don't know what to attack - attack the weakest and most obvious spot everybody can agree on. He never addresses any of the subjects which are quite hard to defend. That's why this is a generic attack that could have been rendered by a very simple AI.

[@drewgoff652]

This is kinda just political youtubers in general. If you look at any (and I say that lightly cause I haven't watched *every single* politcal youtuber), they all use similar rhetoric. They will put everyone on the other side in one box because it is easier to generalize the other side instead of saying a massive chunk of the other side or something like that so it just flows better. It's also just more engaging when they use big bold claims against a group because people naturally like that sort of division, like a fan of a team sort of mentality and they want to feel like their side is far superior to everyone on the other. This is why I've tried to avoid these kind of videos because I don't like the idea of thinking that everyone on the other side thinks like X dude that a youtuber is tearing into and then wanting to go and find someone to debate and use these sort of tactics in bad faith. Everyone comes from different lives, have different experiences and I am infinitely more interested and learning about those views and why we might disagree instead of the usual "i'm gonna ruin this guy with facts and logic" that you see all over the internet.

[@Tmanaz480]

In the 60s and 70s, conservatives used to whine "with these long hairstyles I can't yell the boys from the girls." My comeback was "you got bad eyesight gramps".

[@God_gundam36]

Conservatives don't get to pull the "it's easy to point out trans people" When long and short hair is enough to stump them

[@aurthorshrid3611]

What a larper, a 65 year old wouldn’t not be watching vasush

[@ventimain6546]

@@aurthorshrid3611 You don't have to be alive in the 60s and 70s to know what was commonly said then. Your parents or grandparents could've told you, or older friends, or you've read newspapers written then etc.

[@petre1758]

@@aurthorshrid3611 why not?

[@thingswhynot]

@@aurthorshrid3611 you’re right, they *wouldn’t* not, which is why they’re here.

[@madnessoverload7824]

The chromosome argument is hilarious. Do conservatives have a supernatural ability to determine someone's chromosones at a glance? Why base your definition of womanhood around something so intangible? If i meet someone who presents and/or identifies as female, i'm gonna assume they're female. That's not only the most inclusive definition, but also the most useful in real life situations.

[@clc2432]

The chromosome argument is objectively factual, determined in utero and in the DNA of human remains. Trans-gender ideology elevates personal self-identification as "truth" and disregards objective facts. People can believe whatever they want and appear how ever they want, but the appropriation and reduction of "woman" to being whatever anyone feels it is, is irrational.

[@madnessoverload7824]

@@clc2432 Definitions are man-made, we can change them whenever we want. There's no "true" definition of a woman. Chromosomes only serve to dictate how the body develops, they don't detemine someone's identity and how they should be viewed in society. And the most useful thing we can do for the mental health of trans people is validating their gender identity, so this "trans ideology" is perfectly rational, unless, of course, you want people to suffer for being different.

[@clc2432]

@@madnessoverload7824 Definitions can only be "whatever you want" for you personally. Without commonly accepted definitions, society fractures apart. Be aware that you're substituting psychological belief for scientific and biological fact. The issue isn't about validating gender identity, it's about supporting the rights and well being of women.

[@madnessoverload7824]

@@clc2432 Accepting trans women as women causes no harm to cis women. And genrally accepted definitions can and should change to fit our current understanding of the world. Sociology tells us that gender is a social construct, separate from sex, and psycholgy tells us that gender dysphoria is a serious condition that leads to high chances of suicide if left untreated. But these fields of study are conveniently ignored by conservatives. The only reason you cling to the chromosome argument is because you literally have nothing else. A fully transitioned trans woman is virtually identical to a cis woman. And don't give me the slippery-slope "crumbling of society" bullshit. Nobody's gonna start a war over the definition of womanhood.

[@MrCalebHoward]

I don't think you understand the word "intangible". Chromosomes determine not only sex, but several other TANGIBLE characteristics.

[@UlexiteTVStoneLexite]

I am a woman I am getting my mammary ducts removed because mine are pretty defective and tend to store dead skin cells and fluid in them. I have never breastfed but having had this condition since I was 17 makes the idea of breastfeeding slightly odd for me as well

[@beanieguitarguy4070]

That sounds really bad, I hope the surgery goes well for you!

[@UlexiteTVStoneLexite]

@@beanieguitarguy4070 it is quite annoying. The surgery should go well I've already had a few of them removed back when I was 18 but now all of them are doing it. My concern is having to pay for it

[@claudis.4015]

@@UlexiteTVStoneLexite Ugh! I had tumors before, too. Every month after my period it's still check-up time to see if anything has come back. Annoying. And painful, too. Good luck to you and a quick recovery afterwards 💜

[@UlexiteTVStoneLexite]

@@claudis.4015 Thanks

[@lillysmith6123]

@@UlexiteTVStoneLexite Imagine unironically living in a country where you need to pay for life-saving medical procedures.

[@stefanpieper3757]

Sorry man, but you didn't actually talk about the movie. You were just "debunking" talking points that you have heard at somepoint, and you got to choose which one to adress. If you had actually tried to engange the specific points and situations in the movie, this video would have been more useful. As it is, it's just you reiterating your general opinion on the matter; exactly what you accuse the movie of being in your finale statement. Also, telling your listeners to not watch it makes it look like you are trying to solidify an echo chamber. This video is not gonna convince anyone to change their mind.

[@pinip_f_werty1382]

He's already explained that he is okay with intellectual dishonesty if it can further his political views.

[@wojciechzokowski6184]

But this isn't a response to a movie? Even the title of the video is 'conservatives' not Matt Walsh. Movie was just an impuls to make the video

[@pinip_f_werty1382]

@@wojciechzokowski6184 That's mental gymnastics to the highest degree. Typical.

[@wojciechzokowski6184]

@@pinip_f_werty1382 why? He didn't watch the movie. It's one of his first statements. So it's obvious that he is responding to general points made by conservatives, not the movie

[@stefanpieper3757]

@@wojciechzokowski6184 1. Read the description. He references Matt Walsh immediatly. 2. He advices his audience not to watch the movie.

[@0l0f75]

Concerning the difference between different types of snow and the lack of words for them; the indigenous people of Lappland in northern sweden - called Samer - have more than 200 different words for snow, each with a different meaning regarding texture, volume, friction, etc. Since snow is so culturally relevant for them their language naturally developed all those words which is, atleast to me, very cool!

[@ms.aelanwyr.ilaicos]

It also illustrates the point he was making while he made that remark

[@beowyfe]

Oh God, Vaush got infected by the Tim Pool last time he went to the studio. It's been fun lads, but now we need to put Ol' Veller down. It's for his own good.

[@amellirizarry9503]

but he wears the beanie better

[@scottvelez3154]

Vim Pool

[@kittenwizard4703]

@@scottvelez3154 he is Tim Cool

[@hughmac13]

The most interesting part of this is that I didn't know until now that English kids, too, watch Ol' Yeller.

[@beowyfe]

@@hughmac13 oh I didn't, I just know it exists.

[@motleyminded85]

Interestingly, the documentary is about Liberals not being able to define woman. He interviews a lot of Liberal people, trans and ally, and nobody can tell him what a woman is. That's it.

[@LarryBonson]

Liberals are the source for this madness so it makes sense.

[@loloppololp9304]

Vaush is clearly a shill for a political agenda.

[@villamaxification]

It’s sad that the liberals can’t even define what a woman is . And it’s moronic that this tuber trying to defend them 😀😀😀

[@marcswanson]

Yeah, if they would define what a woman is they would contradict the mantra that everyone can be a woman

[@zephyrjmilnes]

That's actually not it. Like a blatant lie. Have you even watched it?

[@Aegius]

16:38 is where he finally defines woman: "My definition of gender, which is someone who identifies as one..." Question: Identifies as what? You admit that it is a circular definition and then state that it doesn't matter, but it does. Your definition is meaningless and useless.

[@jeambapt]

@Anaven M1 tips for you: if your definition contains the word it’s supposed to define, like yours does, then it’s circular and meaningless.

[@friendlyG771]

David, you're just wrong. I studied linguistic philosophy for my BA. That's not how language works. There are a lot of competing philosophies of language, but almost all of them agree that definitions can be self referential. Woman is a social role. Female is a grouping of sexual characteristics (both primary and secondary). It's that easy. In what way does being born defab biologically predispose someone to wearing their hair long? You know these are two different concepts, you're just pretending not to because this way you get to be a jerk about it and feel smug.

[@friendlyG771]

@@jeambapt That's not true. What is an American? A person who identifies as an American. Boom. It's that simple.

[@Horny_Fruit_Flies]

@@friendlyG771 Boom, it's not that simple, your example is actually so absurd that it's unbelievable. If I'm born in China, have only a chinese citizenship, have never been to America, can't speak English and can't even name the president of the US, identifying as an American doesn't make me an American. Someone just "identifying" as something isn't good enough. That's the whole point. And David didn't bring up any properties of a woman and its relation to sex, you're jumping the gun there, maybe read more carefully what other people are writing instead of rushing down the dialogue tree. The argument is that a definition of woman that is EXCLUSIVELY a matter of identifying as one is useless, as it has no other properties.

[@ghostpeople9991]

@@friendlyG771 wow a tree is a tree. Nope circular still have no description or anything. A cat is a furry, four legged mammal that has been mostly domesticated, commonly raised as pets, etc. You can define a lot there so yes closed definition. Female in language has nearly always referred to women in the genetic and excessive in genital. There are cross dressers and people faking being a women, but that was more or a faker taking on female characteristics to manipulate males and other females into thinking they were female for a goal. You can see this with some animals, male A super large and lots of females, male B smaller still large with decent females, and male C small almost female like enough male A doesnt recognized them right away so they can reproduce and cuck the male A, doesnt work on male B because he has just enough he knows everyone. So yeah... define women without traits that effect everyone. Because fathers can be the most loving and caring parent and mothers can be the biggest as$holes in the world. Those are personality. Likes to sleep with men, gay men, and bi men also like men but are men, also same with women. Literally all we have to define men and women is genetics and genital expression because a women ends up being on a person with a vagina, and genetically that way. If they were a man that under went surgery cool you a transwoman not a full woman but that okay yoy made your choice. Trans because transitioned if you don't transition you are not trans because you are still a man or women that is the same. You are more or less gay or straight. Depending on what you like and going to want to transition too but still defined. Wait did I just answer the movie? Jk that is not a question for me

[@jo0rd73]

I wonder how they were able to genetically test the M&M woman for XX chromosomes when they were pissed that she got an outfit change that wasn’t as arousing to them ?

[@lljkgktudjlrsmygilug]

"When you can't tell the sex, go by gender presentation." -Conservatives (And most people)

[@katyungodly]

Because you can never tell someone's sex just by looking at them. It is an anti-trans strawman to argue about chromosomes and genitals, because we don't know those things about people when we meet them on the street, yet we can still tell who is a man/woman or not most times.

[@jo0rd73]

@@katyungodly Oh yes I know, it’s just an extremely terrible argument. Even if you explain that to them you can’t check these details for everyone you meet on the street and they say “well you assume that….” Boom you’ve backed them into a corner and they have to accept gender being separate and more important for when you call someone a man or woman. If they won’t accept that there’s just no point engaging further because they’re being irrational and unwilling to critically think about the position they stand for.

[@JoseRS1186]

Considering she's just a circle and the only change was her footwear, the outrage just seemed to out a lot of conservative foot fetishists.

[@lsmmoore1]

Especially since if you genetically tested an M&M, the only thing that COULD be revealed is the DNA of some of the cocoa beans used to make said candy (if indeed anything could be revealed at all, considering that it takes only 4 cocoa beans to make a milk chocolate candy bar).

[@gigachad3925]

My buddy voorsh out here in that beanie lookin' like he just ordered the most expensive item from Starbucks.

[@sethsoarenson7414]

"Is mayonnaise a woman?" -conservatives, probably

[@gregoryjones7712]

what is a Black person ? anyone or thing that identifies as a black person LOL

[@danielcrafter9349]

@@gregoryjones7712 - no, because one is intrinsically defined, the other extrinsically Take some time to think about it a bit

[@caramelgumdrop393]

@@gregoryjones7712 you tried it

[@frumtheground]

I thought mayonaise was an instrument.

[@CalopsitaVanderbilt1911]

@@frumtheground i thougt it was a French dance style

[@Piewohh]

You criticized those who define woman as "adult female human being" and yet you didn't provide an alternative definition, just extremely weak arguments that make no sense and have nothing to do with the topic at hand lmao

[@Nozverah2]

They're scientific fact. Physical sex isn't indicative of gender & neither are secondary sex characteristics. Women can have broad Shoulders & adams apples, even penises. A great example is Michelle Obama & she's an organic woman. If I didn't know she was a woman & a birthing person I would've thought she was Terry Cruise in drag so this stuff definitely sort of makes sense. This is considered medical fact now according to psychology & neuroscience. One hell of a decade we're living in.

[@AJ-lm5dl]

Lol. That's kind of what leftists do.

[@O_ORashad]

Conservatives do have a definition for "woman." It's "Adult human female." The whole purpose of the documentary is to highlight the fact that many people are either afraid to attempt to define what a woman is, or simply have no definition. Your argument for conservatives believing sex and gender are two different things is probably the dumbest take I've heard on this topic. When people say "a real man," and name certain personality traits, they aren't saying that a woman with said traits can be a man. They aren't even saying men who dont have those traits aren't men. All they're saying is that it is ideal for men to have those traits. This whole "gender ideology," argument is dumb. Everyone who has a personality that doesn't align with what would be expected of their gender ends up questioning their identity. This ideology is not helping people.

[@gabrielbrew4530]

Quite the opposite, what you call “gender ideology” (which I’m assuming is an understanding that gender is socially constructed) can and often does empower people to fully embody their gender even when that means incongruences between gender expression and societal expectations. I’d argue what’s more harmful is having YOUR gender ideology, of ‘ gender ideals’, reducing gender to biology when it obviously exceeds it, pressuring people to conform to what society tells them they can be, I could go on…

[@bulldogpearl]

Exactly Rashad

[@erenjaeger1738]

It's not just conservative have the definition of the word woman. It's literally on Google definition. Adult human female.

[@jpbm1873]

That's not the conservative definition of the word. That's the definition of the word in the english language.

[@AD-bb9np]

I remember being a kid in the 80s when they told us the differences between boys and girls and nobody was confused.

[@drossvids]

Oh god, the beanie got him

[@michaeltoastman]

Vaush, despite having never seen Phineas and Ferb, is somehow completely right that Doofensmirtz would create a transgenderinator. He's trans himself, probably.

[@dragonslibrary9207]

Perry the Platypus took that day off, as no evil was done ☺

[@anonymousinfinido2540]

@@dragonslibrary9207 Nah, perry is his friend, under the guise of destroying the machine, he will drop it in a conservative house or steal the blue print and give it to phineas and ferb and instead doofensmirtz will make shawarma-inator.

[@dragonslibrary9207]

@@anonymousinfinido2540 If any of their friends came out as trans Phineas and Ferb would build a machine to rewrite somebody's entire body structure in seconds

[@anonymousinfinido2540]

@@dragonslibrary9207 why, phineas and ferb seemed cool, they are more likely to be pro-lgbtq.

[@TheReddShinobi13]

@@dragonslibrary9207 the best allies

[@bananatreelabs1137]

The way you describe linguistic ambiguity reminds me of how toki pona works. At the core of this conlang's philosophy is taking an idea and breaking it down so you can describe what it means to you with its 120(ish) word vocabulary. Describing things in different or totally different ways based on how you feel about it or context about what it is doing is all completely valid.

[@yikwonjang2978]

That is how language evolves and that's why English language of 1700 is different from today. However, it is wrong to force using pronounces that others don't want to use. They say it is hate crime not to use the pronounce they some people demand. That is wrong.

[@bananatreelabs1137]

@@yikwonjang2978 I'm not sure I know what commenting about English (a natural language) changing over time has to do really with a constructed language really, or pronouns either. Might you be able to clarify what you mean?

[@boserboser6870]

@@yikwonjang2978 but they do use the pronouns that you say they dont want to use. just not for people they disagree with the identity of. and disagreeing with someones view of themself as if you know them better than they do is pretty arrogant

[@Bubblebiskit2200]

toki pona jumpscare

[@taikamiya8214]

I remember when David Pakman debated Michael Knowles... and Knowles defined woman as "That which isn't a man". This cracked me up.

[@kp63]

I mean is he wrong? Haha.

[@Stop_The_Car]

@@kp63 *holds up chicken* Behold, Knowles' woman!

[@kp63]

@@Stop_The_Car Can you define it

[@Stop_The_Car]

@@kp63 Sure, a person with the qualities traditionally associated with females. Knowles' definition is too vague. Hence the Diogenes reference I made.

[@davidjeanmichel8358]

@@Stop_The_Car no, your definition is only cultural, you can be a women who have no qualities traditionnaly associated with females. a dragqueen is not a woman, a woman with men's traits is still a woman.

[@grutsthefoodman3645]

I keep getting commercials for Walsh's documentary and I can't stop it.

[@pdenny6326]

Then just watch it.

[@edwinamendelssohn5129]

Watch it

[@EXPSanity]

get an ad blocker. not like theres other ads you want to watch, are there?

[@jessecuevas6456]

You said it clearly, to my delight actually. “Abnormalities”…. Exactly. Some people are born with 1 arm. Do we conclude humans don’t have 2 arms?? It’s an abnormality

[@UlexiteTVStoneLexite]

We conclude that humans typically have two arms but an individual having one arm is still a human

[@Tymbus]

No. "normal" is a value judgement not a fact. Woman is a category of social being part of which is currently defined in its relationship to physical characteristics. There I used word woman without being essantialist. And these categories change over time so the origins of man is from mon or mann which referred to any person, so any woman could be a man. This usage is still found in words such as human and mankind.

[@davidjeanmichel8358]

@@UlexiteTVStoneLexite yes, an individual with 1 arm is still an human, and a men with long hair and mascara is still a men. thx.

[@jessecuevas6456]

@@Tymbus “normal” was used as common, typically expected. “Man” & “woman” are the words designated for human males & females. Like buck & doe for deer. Stallion & mare for horses. Rooster & hen. And… Man & woman.

[@UlexiteTVStoneLexite]

@@davidjeanmichel8358 men more mascara all the time just look at Ozzy Osbourne and Johnny Depp.

[@mikey_fresh4629]

Honest review from someone that is fairly neutral as far as politics is concerned: Production value was good, probably more than would be expected from such a low-budget endeavor. I think anyone can watch this film and at the very least not feel inclined to nod out part way through. 7/10 The format was fair, probably more fair than would be expected from what you would assume would be a fully partisan undertaking. Walsh asked (lobbed) softball questions and didn't interrupt the participants. No trickery or unfair wordplay from the host. 8/10 As far as bias, I felt Walsh gave the majority of time to the "opposing viewpoint." The confirmation bias viewpoints were scattered in, obviously, but didn't hold precedence. 8/10 Overall review: If someone is willing to interview not only proponents of a political or sociological viewpoint, but rather experts, educators, and political representatives, ask them softball questions and sit patiently while they awkwardly sit silent and then choose to either deflect motive back to the interviewer OR flat-out run away...at the very least that should make you question your own beliefs, or at the very least the people in charge of reinforcing the beliefs you hold. No political documentary is going to end in stalemate, that's a given, but for Matt Walsh to be willing, time and time again, to give these "thought leaders" the length of rope they need to hang themselves and to quietly sit back and watch them tie the noose...says a lot about how important social currency (and actual monetary gain) is to some people that they're willing to embarrass themselves on camera to maintain their status as a political ally. Again, not a huge politics person, but I do like to check in on the hot-button issues. The Daily Wire may think that "thousands and thousands" of viewers is significant viewership for this film, which may seem paltry to most, but their advertising campaign was certainly effective enough to get me to pay $14 for a month's membership just to watch this. If you're on the side of pro-transgender views, the fact that Walsh spoke very little in an effort to allow his opponents to speak as much as possible and dig their own graves...pretty damning stuff.

[@AD-bb9np]

When are you releasing it for free?

[@garymcderp1146]

Pretty good summary of the documentary. He’s getting death threats now from people that didn’t even bother watching it. And those that DID watch it are pissed because Walsh asked simple questions and the radical leftists basically hung themselves. It’s the same as people losing their minds over the LibsOfTikTok accounts, accusing them of somehow “endangering” radical leftists when the entire account is just re-posts of idiotic posts made by libs themselves. “How dare you quote me?” And it’s the same with this documentary. He just lets these people talk and any rational and objective viewer sees the absurdity of these ideologies. And then they get mad because it was put out there for everyone to see.

[@mikey_fresh4629]

@Sky Gardener Gert Comfrey MTS, LMFT (Gender Affirming Therapist, biological woman) - MW: "What is a woman?" RESPONSE: "Yeah, that's a great question. I'm not a woman so I can't answer that." Michelle Forcier, MD (Pediatrician, Professor) - Refuses to admit Santa Claus isn't real because admitting so would invalidate a four year old's belief that they are not their biological gender. MW: "If I see a chicken laying eggs and I say 'that's a female chicken' did I assign 'female' or am I just observing a physical reality that's happening in the world?" RESPONSE: "Does the chicken have gender identity? Does the chicken cry? Does the chicken commit suicide?" MW: "One of the drugs you use is Lupron, right?" RESPONSE: "Yeah." MW: "...which has actually been used to chemically castrate sex offenders?" RESPONSE: "You know what? I don't think we should continue with this interview." Dr. Patrick Grzanka (Professor of Women, Gender, and Sexuality Studies) (my favorite interview BTW) - MW: "If we're talking about a trans woman, has all of the male characteristics...couldn't we plainly say that this person is a male?" RESPONSE: "It's, like, why are you asking that question? I want to understand why that's so important." MW: "I'm not even talking about social context, I'm just trying to start by getting to the truth." RESPONSE: "I'm really uncomfortable with that language, 'getting to the truth'." MW: "Why is that uncomfortable?" RESPONSE: "It sounds actually deeply transphobic to me and if you keep probing we're going to stop the interview." MW: "What is a women?" RESPONSE: (hesitates) "Why do you ask that question?" (refuses to answer) "What's your definition?" (refuses to answer) "What other answers have you gotten?" FINAL ANSWER: A person that identifies as a woman. MW: "Can you define the word 'woman' without using the word 'woman'? RESPONSE: "It's a curious question..." (proceeds to not answer) Congressman Mark Takano (D-California) - Walks away from interview after 3 minutes 7 seconds after giving a bumbling, incoherent response to one question about women not wanting to see male genetalia in their locker rooms. MW: "I just wanted to know 'what is a woman?'" OFFSCREEN RESPONSE: "And you're not going to find out." Random Person on the Street: "Women only know what women are?" MW: "Are you a cat?" RP: "No." MW: "Can you tell me what a cat is?" RP: (runs away) MW: "What is a woman? Can you tell me that?" Group of women with signs and shirts that say "The Burden is Undue" "If MEN Could Get Pregnant We Wouldn't be Having this Convo!" "Women Don't Owe You Sh*t": Look at each other nervously and laugh. Don't answer. Naia Okami (Transgender Activist) - thinks he's a wolf. You'll just have to see it for yourself. So I know I used a lot of dialogue there, but it can't really be put into just words, you have to watch it. Some interviewees, like Gert Comfrey, are very civil and very confident in their answers, they just have nothing of substance to say. Others like Dr. Grzanka and Rep. Takano, you can actually see the fear in their eyes when they realize the corner they've backed themselves into. So yeah, I think quite a few of these people will look back in total embarrassment. Maybe. They honestly might be well beyond the point of self awareness.

[@VaultOfTheFuture]

Great review!!!

[@pinip_f_werty1382]

Good shit man. Speak THE truth. Not YOUR truth.

[@WEAREALLJUSTMEAT]

The line between so called reptiles and so called birds is my favorite example of that arbitrarity

[@Truttle1]

The line I think is the most arbitrary in society that I have thought of is the lines between music genres. I can recognize rock music, but I can't really define what makes a particular piece of music "rock music." And all the characteristics of rock music are often found in non-rock music. And then there's songs like Old Town Road which is both a country song and a rap song, but it got taken off the country charts because some people thought it wasn't country even though I personally think it does sound like country (probably because I don't listen to enough country, but oh well).

[@debordeleur2005]

There's a difference between "the line is arbitrary" (but wherever you put it you can then objectively categorize things) and "there is no line, a woman is someone who says she's a woman"

[@WEAREALLJUSTMEAT]

@@debordeleur2005 identifies as*

[@debordeleur2005]

@@WEAREALLJUSTMEAT Basically the same thing, you don't have a way to distinguish between someone saying they are a woman truthfully and someone who is lying

[@gamerinatrance3618]

@@debordeleur2005 And that matters because?

[@UnlimitedRadioButNoSoap]

tallness is relative, it changes from room to room

[@spitxfire99]

Spoiler alert, voosh never manages to answer the question in this video.

[@NickTheGreatAndPowerful]

He did, though, it's a series of arbitrary social prescriptions based around but not exclusive to the female sex.

[@spitxfire99]

@@NickTheGreatAndPowerful In other words, it's meaningless lmao You can't have an idea be based on the qualities of a biological category and then insist that it's "arbitrary".

[@MrCalebHoward]

@@NickTheGreatAndPowerful Sex isn't arbitrary.

[@TheQueenofNeckbeards]

@@uh-ohspaghettio7826 because those spaces aren’t biologically segregated. they can’t be, because you can’t do a dna test every time a woman wants to use a bathroom to find out if she’s trans or not. ultimately letting trans chicks use woman’s bathrooms and shit like that keeps them safe, since it’s not just totally humiliating but also dangerous for someone who presents super feminine to be in a mens restroom. literally just let them piss and shit in peace. As long as they’re not bothering anyone else, unlike the cis chicks who harass any slightly androgynous person in a bathroom, why the fuck does it matter? The only exception to this is some rare cases in sports but that’s a super niche issue that’s just blown out of proportion by transphobes.

[@Aichomancer]

@@MrCalebHoward yes it is. We're just doing our best to define what biology already does on its own regardless of what the dumb hairless apes have to say about it.

[@justinrieger5329]

I've been listening to Jordan Peterson and Matt Walsh and Ben for about 2 years now and not once have i ever heard any of them say that 1. Gender and Sex are the same, rather they are different but very closely intertwined, and 2. that males/females are only males/females if they follow male/female respective traits to a T, i.e. women cleaning/men providing. Jordan especially has said on live interviews that men can have feminine, even majority feminine personality traits/characteristics and vise versa for women, but that doesnt mean that either arent a man or a woman respectively. I came here to listen to a separate view from the documentary, with hopefully some information/science that backs up your side of things, but i didnt really get that. All i got was "conservatives lie to you", about something ive never heard said from any of the conservatives youve mentioned. You can be a man with 9/10 feminine personality traits/characteristics, think youre a woman, say youre a woman, dress like a woman, surgically "change" to appear like a woman, but you still can never be a woman. That is the conservative viewpoint. When you speak of "Sexual Expression" like being tall = being a man, youre describing characteristics, but those characteristics do not define or determine sex or gender. When it comes to your chromosome argument, yes there are variances where people have abnormal chromosomes, which is a microscopic % of the population, to which depending on their genitals and viewpoints, they typically side with one gender or the other. But to say that these are the same cases as people with normal chromosomes, who feel like they are of the opposite sex, is a totally different thing, youre comparing apples to oranges, especially as there are now a much larger % of the population who are trans not because of chromosome abnormalities. Onto the next subject: I've also never heard a conservative say "you are only a woman if you have completely working anatomy of a woman and correct chromosomes, if you do not you're not considered a woman". Most conservative viewpoints if not all on this ive heard are: if youre born with normal chromosomes, and have anatomy of one or the other sex, then you are that sex. That's it. doesnt matter if youre a woman born without a womb or if you have a condition where any part of the anatomy doesnt function properly. You say trans people could "fit" into the intersex category, but how can they? most trans people claim to be either male or female, so they dont even put themselves in that category, also again, intersex people have abnormal chromosomes, and the vast majority of trans people do not. So this whole anatomy argument youre talking about is just false and also is not even remotely part of the "what is a woman" documentary if you even watched it. Additionally you say its possible for men to breastfeed, men do have the bioducts for this but unfortunately they cannot, even with estrogen, lactate actual breastmilk and there have been 0 studies and 0 modern cases proving otherwise. Which leads me to my last point of criticism on your video, which is that you mention biologists and science, but you never use one credible source of information to back up anything youre saying, yet you say conservatives have no hold on either of the two. Interesting.

[@NickTheGreatAndPowerful]

1) Go back to whatever hole you crawled out of. 2) Two seconds on Google says men can lactate in the right circumstances.

[@tamarabeaudry9596]

Thank you for writing this sir/madam. I had every inquiry you talked about as I was skeptical as well, especially about the tall and short thing. I also came here looking for a different perspective and well a little surprised how aggressive he is against conservative... though I find your response better than this youtuber.

[@corylong8333]

Thanks for posting. I also came here hoping to find an honest, well thought out rebuttal to the claims in the documentary but this was super disappointing. I don't think this guy has an idea what conservatives really think. He's either not very bright or resentful and bitter. I'm guessing the later.

[@corylong8333]

@Christopher Grant Those people sound poorly informed and I'm glad that's not the party's position on trans people. Also, Vaush seems poorly informed about the conservative party and you can see his resentment in the way he dishonestly frames their positions and consistently mock their claims. Small mindedness is rife on both sides, apparently.

[@Odddit]

cringe wall of text lol

[@IRDeady]

You'll never guess what ad played before this.

[@keyboarddancers7751]

The two scenes in the doc which made my face crawl were: 1. The trans identified man who described hairs growing on the inside of his urethra - his peen was created from a skin graft on his forearm. 2. The professor of women, gender and sexuality studies who, despite his obvious extremely well credentialed expertise, was completly lost for words when asked to define a woman without using the word 'woman' in the answer. I think Walsh should have included an interview on this issue with a Muslim contributor instead of only limiting his diversity content to an African tribe. It's not just conservatives who are speaking up about this issue; many on the left are very concerned about it too but they're unwilling to risk putting their head above the parapet.

[@PungiFungi]

I see no snarky response to you from the commenters here, most of whom obviously did not saw this documentary.

[@FriarJoe66]

So the primary issue is we need to put more effort into developing vaginoplasty techniques that don’t risk internal hair? Is that your issue here?

[@stephenhood3690]

Crazy how the comment that actually contextually relates to the documentary has absolutely nobody throwing multi-syllable personal attacks at the person who posted it.

[@keyboarddancers7751]

@@FriarJoe66 I think it's phalloplasty techniques which need improving but don't you see the absurdity that either technique is actually a reality?

[@FriarJoe66]

@@keyboarddancers7751 why is that absurd? Surgery has been advancing since it was developed.

[@uncle_joona6049]

a botanist could categorize tomato, cucumber, and egg plants as fruit, but I don't see anyone adding those into fruit salads.

[@lonelytexasheeler]

You don't add cucumber to a fruit salad?

[@uncle_joona6049]

@@lonelytexasheeler nah. it would ruin the taste of ketchup.

[@MrAdamo]

Fruit salad yummy yummy

[@emylily8266]

cherry tomatoes can go great on fruit salads as well.

[@skiskicmb]

Would be nice if you'd watch the movie before arguing it's entire premise. Most of your arguments fall apart after realizing the actual point of the film. It's not about denying trans people right to exist. It's about the industry that was created to fill that demand and how it disregards actual well being of young people. The movie acknowledged gender dysphoria as a real issue. 50% of people intervied are so called liberal experts in their fields. Liberal pediatricians, psychologists, gender studies professors etc. Just watch the damn movie Vaush and make an honest attempt to dispute it! I'm very curious what you would have to say about it.

[@atexxxxx]

I agree.. Watch it and then make your video..

[@SuperFloxes]

Normally I'd agree, but the guy who made it is MATT WALSH. Unless there's a moment when he's like 'oh, I guess I might be wrong', it's going to be shit.

[@theLanceInPants]

The problem is you believe Matt Walsh would ever ask questions in good faith and not just doing the usual, psychotic, reactionary shtick over culture war noise.

[@tommartinez1532]

@@theLanceInPants no the problem isn’t a matter of belief I have watched the movie and he’s correct. We don’t have to believe anything. We know what’s in the movie and you apparently have not seen it. So, you and Mr. rambling on and on about a movie you both haven’t watched are operating under a “belief”.

[@nowwhat1434]

@@SuperFloxes this is the issue though …focusing on how you “feel” about someone vs whether it’s factual or not

[@Anton-wk8lv]

Just your daily reminder that Matt Walsh is only 5 years older than ShoeOnHead.

[@pi172]

And in direct comparison ShoeOnHead is massively intelligent.

[@neoqwerty]

It's honestly embarrassing, imagine LARPing as a boomer.

[@edenmarsh4127]

Really? Wow, I thought he was my age! 😦

[@margotpreston]

Hate really does age a motherfucker.

[@supermutantsam1160]

He’s like the physical embodiment of the idea that misery ages you, holy shit

[@jambott5520]

First we had fat ian, then we got skinny ian, now we have the new cia replacement. As we all know from our collective best friend Tim Pool, there is only one reason why someone would wear a beanie. The cia replaced skinny ian with bald ian and there is nothing we can do but weep for our loss.

[@mizzou1016]

What are you talking about? He’s still fat. He’s just not as fat as he once was

[@nmh11]

Doofinsmirtz would totally invent a transition machine

[@altdelctrl4489]

THE TRANSITION-ATOR

[@TheMaan2008]

@@altdelctrl4489 😂😂

[@controversialopinion5722]

Actually, the entire point is that you don't know what a woman is. A conservative can give a clear concise definition of the word woman that doesn't contradict their world view, you can't.

[@ightimmaheadout290]

Im liberal and many of us agree. But too bad everyone gets painted as one sided politically and political commentators like vaush can't disagree with his side because he's a coward and scared of losing fans and money

[@CaptainTitforce]

@Sky Gardener I don't really get why you would think that there couldn't be just 2 genders, just because there is a "manliness spectrum". We can obviously say that there are smart and dumb people, based on IQ tests, EQ tests and even just by hanging around people and seeing how they act and if those actions constitute as smart or dumb. The points will vary across a spectrum but at some point "dumb" goes to the side of "average intellect" and then "smart". These are still very specific terms and describe a type of person. There's no reason to make up a thousand different terms for a person that's a bit smart, a bit smarter, a bit smarter than that, etc.

[@Ozgipsy]

@Sky Gardener then they’re wrong and totally disconnected from reality 🤷‍♂️

[@rithvikmuthyalapati9754]

@Sky Gardener You must have failed school

[@Digitaldude23]

Pretty simple actually. You can be a “woman” or “female” (or whatever other word you’d like to use) in terms of either biological sex or gender identity (usually both) the later of which being due to gender as a socially constructed means of self-expression. The left has been saying this for literal years and you guys continue to pretend like we don’t understand our own arguments.

[@aechmaydostuff]

An ad for "what is a woman?" played before this video for me

[@yacobo4397]

"mom can we stop for tim pool?" "we have tim pool at home" tim pool at home:

[@swordhunter12]

You've got a good mom

[@dannydelacruz7303]

@@swordhunter12 do u not get the meme?

[@HotBaraDad666]

A woman is a gender.

[@brianhayes7108]

Can tell you’re not a biologist when you completely described what chromosomes do incorrectly. We don’t define things based on fringe abnormalities/mutations.

[@Di66en6ion]

Yeah, we don't. We describe the mutations and discuss the medical repercussions on a case-by-case basis, that's it. The dead end of this conversation goes back to Vaush's point about conservative's moral revulsion of trans people. It's just free reign to pass judgement on who does and doesnt pass arbitrary (and often false) ideas of what is ideally female or male. Baseless fear, every time.

[@trishash79]

@@Di66en6ion From your distorted worldview maybe, but not from others. until one can step back & look @ the betterment of society, not just their own betterment, there will never be a productive conversation had.

[@Di66en6ion]

@@trishash79 Again, all you can do is come up with a hypothetical harm to society and then react to your very own strawman you fabricated. Your belief that this issue is harming society is false. You are harming society.

[@pengmaeda9908]

"I hate trucks. Who invented Trucks?" - Another Brilliant Vaush Media Take in this Video

[@MaliciousMoxy]

Trains are just superior to trucks.

[@zyerkos]

@@MaliciousMoxy trains are just several trucks connected to each other

[@MaliciousMoxy]

@@zyerkos No trucks are a smol and much less efficient train with wheels.

[@zyerkos]

@@MaliciousMoxy trucks are unrestricted small trains yes i agree

[@MaliciousMoxy]

@@zyerkos they are restricted to the road which is harder to build and maintain then a railroad truck. And a train can carry up to 20 if not more truck worths of goods. I am sorry trains are superior in every way. Train supremacy is the way to a better world.

[@JoeySkate24]

This is for the uploader. Some people are born blind, deaf, with 1 hand or with 10 less fingers, yet in biology classes and books when human physiology is taught they show a human with all limbs and no diseases etc. We make sense of life with rules and not with rare exceptions. Similarly to the what is a woman question, its an adult human female and with the term female we mean the person that has the capacity to give birth while taling in acknowledgment that she is absent from disease that cancels that from her. Likewise the same principle applies when it comes to chromosomes and other physical traits. So the arguement that "some people are born intersex or cant give birth therefore we dont know what a woman is" doesnt apply at all. We know if whats born is a human even if he/she is missing all its limbs and we know if a female is born by the chromosomes-genitals etc.

[@JoeySkate24]

@Zero z i dont

[@JoeySkate24]

@Zero z are you talking about me or matt walsh? Or the uploader? I got confused.

[@JoeySkate24]

@Zero z oh ok yes. Yes absolutely. Hes not capable of logic whatsoever. These people have the same brain capacity as flat earthers.

[@Stealthfang270]

NEVER SEEN PHINEAS AND FERB? Vaush, drop everything you're doing right this instant and binge the show

[@TheUnknownsShow]

16:36 "My definition of gender, which is just a woman is someone who identifies as one." It's hilarious that if Vaush were interviewed for the film, he'd be just another one of the people in the reels giving this same exact non-answer to the question. If a woman is merely anyone who identifies as one, then why can people way more often than not recognize a woman as one without knowing how others identify? It's obvious to me that Vaush claiming that conservatives don't know what a woman is is merely a cover for his own inability to define the word. "Well who cares if I can't give a definition that isn't self-referential and meaningless? I talk to conservatives, and they don't know, either! How do I know they don't know? Because I disagree with them. Duh."

[@FishfaceTheDestroyer]

I mean, Vaush has gone on record saying that he'd prefer gender be abolished as a concept, so he may well agree with you that it's incoherent. That is ultimately the problem, isn't it? Though the whole "how come we can figure it out by looking" isn't exactly a gotcha. For example, if you're in a part of the world where wearing a dress is something only women do, then it's safe to assume that anyone wearing a dress is a woman, on the basis that they deliberately put it on that morning. "If names are something that people can call themselves rather than existing in some material form, how come I know that guy's name just by looking at his name tag?"

[@TheUnknownsShow]

@@FishfaceTheDestroyer I would agree with abolishing the concept of gender in the way that people use it to mean a social role separate from sex. You're correct that, ultimately, the problem with the sex/gender dichotomy is that it's incoherent, inconsistent, and irrelevant to daily life. It may benefit those in certain fields, such as sociology, to make this distinction, but it really doesn't help the average Joe to think and live in these terms. Your name and nametag analogy is humorous. Thank you for reading and for responding, by the way. I get what you're saying, though obviously a name is not a material part of an individual as noted and there's a lot more that goes into telling apart men and women from observation than just reading a label. My statement about the ability of people to distinguish men from women based on observation was not meant to directly refute the notion of gender identity existing. I was simply pointing out that Vaush's defintion, apart from its failure on an academic level due to a reliance on self-reference, also fails on a practical level by ignoring how people actually tell apart men and women in daily life. It's impossible to observe gender identity, so all anyone can do is ask for that information. Sex is observable in nearly every case, and in cases where it's not immediately obvious, it's at least verifiable. Gender identity is neither observable nor verifiable. The crux of the issue is whether "woman" should refer to sex or to gender, assuming we find it reasonable for the concept of gender to exist separately from sex. This even has bearing on your nametag analogy. If "woman" refers to immutable characteristics rooted in biology, then it is not actually analogous to a nametag. A nametag can be replaced with one of a different name, but sex chromosomes cannot. Most people mean female sex when they say woman, as they have throughout history. There are practical reasons for doing so, after all. Those who argue that "woman" should refer to gender identity instead of sex seem to agree that language should reflect reality, at least in some sense, which is why they argue that trans women really are women and trans men really are men. However, as previously noted, this "reality" is neither directly observable nor is it verifibale, so it seems silly to me that this reality asserted by trans advocates trump biological reality, which can almost always be directly observed in daily life without necessary intrusion. There's obviously other negative consequences of being unable to distinguish men from women that could be used to support the argument that these definitions ought to be grounded in biology, but I'd rather develop understanding of the rationale of the case for accepting gender identity above biology by talking about its underlying axioms and highlighting its vulnerabilities therein. I know I rambled on a bit, but I hope I've organized this so that the flow between ideas isn't too choppy.

[@rsmlinar1720]

@@FishfaceTheDestroyer Also making distinction between "gender" and "sex" is kind of English-centric. Many languages, (possibly most, i dont know,) including mine only has one word for that concept.

[@FishfaceTheDestroyer]

@@rsmlinar1720 Okay. Making a distinction between green and blue is also not universal. My point is that we *should* have the words to distinguish, and that trying to discard the words is a bad idea.

[@victorracioppi9821]

Did you watch it? You should. You will learn something.

[@michaelhomes8049]

Like what? Just curious

[@katiemyers1192]

It is clear that no one here has actually seen the documentary

[@jestademon3524]

oh absolutely

[@rodiculous9464]

" " " " " " documentary " " " " " "

[@vaguelyviscous4384]

@@rodiculous9464 it's pretty good. :)

[@DeadHandtheSurvivor]

Good

[@markbaco9843]

Unironically the funniest position

[@man4437]

Vaush's degree of condescension when he is refusing to answer a simple question is utterly befuddling

[@JMBen]

These people know they fucked up they just won’t say it. It was part of the Trump Derangement syndrome in 2016-7. They defended them because it was in their “team” and now they can’t go back on it

[@hanzohasashi4534]

He answered the "simple" question almost immediately... a woman is a mode of identity pertaining to an array of social roles and expectations typically associated with the feminine archetypes. You should have watched the video before making claims about it.

[@JMBen]

@@hanzohasashi4534 so what are these social norms and expectations? If I don’t follow them, and still claim to be a woman, am I a woman or am I lying/mistaken.

[@AJ-lm5dl]

@@hanzohasashi4534 Which expectations and roles make a woman at this moment? And if someone calls themselves a woman and doesn't fulfill those roles, are they still a woman? Why or why not?

[@JMBen]

@@AJ-lm5dl hey you stole my rebuttal 🤣🤣🤣

[@123100ozzy]

Why your best argument against biology is pointing defects and mutations? This does not help your case.

[@zavior1284]

Vaush with a beanie is something I endorse.

[@beanieguitarguy4070]

I mean, there’s really no better hat out there.

[@roosterboots4684]

He's finally Destiny's idea of "Vaush gendered"

[@christal4117]

Maybe you should watch a movie before reviewing it and making assumptions about it? Your whole video is about making assumptions what the movie will be like (without even watching it) and making assumptions on how hypothetical conversations would go just so you could get your narrative through. Try to be more open minded. If by any chance you are interested in a movie you mentioned, it is mostly composed of interviews with experts within gender reassignment process (so liberals mostly) - doctors, professors, therapists, trans people, actually asking them questions and letting them speak (not trolling, actual questions) so their answers speak for themselves. No one says you should agree with Matt Walsh on his opinion, but at least know what you are talking about before making a 25min video about how you imagine conversation could go.

[@iamorbiting]

I love that Vaush is using the beanie to fight Tim Pool

[@yungthunder2681]

So... You didn't even watch the film, you're just debating the title??? Weird video concept

[@phil8378]

Doofenshmirtz says “trans rights”

[@campbell682]

damn he's even donned the beanie now, his transformation into Tim Pool is truly complete

[@goose5761]

just waiting for the fake genocide narrat---- ohhh wait

[@jameskirkpatrick5569]

@@goose5761 when has Vaush ever denied a genocide?

[@goose5761]

@@jameskirkpatrick5569 I am waiting for Vaush to start talking about a fake genocide narrative like Tim Pool’s fake white genocide narrative. Oh wait, here he is peddling a fake lgbt genocide that also isn’t happening.

[@kennylee6499]

Vaush, I’m disappointed in your response in this video to be honest. Frankly, you gloss over the details and mischaracterize the conservative argument here. It’s sloppy. You seem like a relatively cordial and decently throughly-out guy, excluding the conservative jabs. I know you can be better. Your argument seems to be that: 1) Gender and Sex are distinct and conservatives flip-flop between the two, and 2) the existence of intersex people justify transitioning. The issue is that for 1) that is simply not the case. Neither Matt Walsh, Ben Shapiro, nor Jordan Peterson have claimed the two are the same. Clearly, there is a difference between societal and cultural standards and biology. But they aren’t 100% distinct. There is a crossover and many characteristics associated with “femaleness” and “maleness” do have some biological basis. The three mentioned have maintained that point, even though the words used to define it are different. JP typically uses “femininity” and “masculinity,” for ex, but the point is the same. For example, males are biologically more muscular than females. So traditionally, toughness and physicality are associated with masculinity. That wouldn’t justify defining maleness AS toughness and masculinity though, which is what many people are unfortunately confused about. And as a note, this is kind of irrelevant for your next claim… if gender and sex are wholly distinct as you say, then whatever way someone presents themselves through societal roles and standards should have no bearing on their actual sex (male or female), as transitioning would do. And to that point, 2) this simply does not logically follow, and you are really crippling yourself here. Your point on binary and bimodal understandings of sex doesn’t hold up when the bimodality is based on genetic abnormalities. Sex IS binary. And the existence of intersex doesn’t contradict that. Intersex people are exceptions precisely because they are irregularities from the norm. Yet trans people, in the vast vast majority of cases, are *not* in that situation. No, you can’t classify trans people as “intersex” because the issue is not in their classification. The issue is in the validity of their claim that they are the opposite *sex.* And this is where there is a breakdown in logic. See, you are trying to define man and woman based on the societal norms, and finding a way to make the biological sex fit into that definition. Conservatives don’t have this issue. If you are a female who loves boxing, monster trucks, and arm wrestling, that doesn’t make you any less of a woman. In fact, that makes you more unique for who you are. For men and women, there is a whole spectrum of personality, and conservatives have no issue with that. But flipping the order and defining the category from those broad personalities breaks down under scrutiny. I apologize for the long comment, but the nuance is necessary. Thanks for reading.

[@PremiumGerman]

Thank you the abnormal part and that sex is binary was what I wanted to write aswell but you made it sound smarter.

[@Di66en6ion]

You realize this is precisely why there is a "trans" qualifier right? I'd also disagree that sex is not completely bimodal. One might be able to classify every single set of genetic mutations that result in some form of intermixing of secondary sex characteristics but those interactions with the entire sum of other phenotype expressions within a human smudge that out significantly. The claim that sex isn't bimodal also fails when you consider the number of women who can still reproduce with significant genetic mutations, and that not all mutations that typically result in loss of fertility always do so. Then we get right back into the weeds with definitions of what a woman is: 1) Someone that can reproduce? Lots of exceptions there within the XX chromosome restriction. 2) Someone with an XX chromosomes. Lots of exceptions there with those whom have androgen sensitivities, visible intersex ambiguities, physical mutations, or various other mutations. It literally does not matter what definition you apply, you will alienate someone who's not specifically trans. It comes down to respect for other humans and the ones denying this are far and above conservatives. They DRASTICALLY overstate harm and then attempt to enact policies to react to that fabricated hypothetical harm.

[@kennylee6499]

@@Di66en6ion I’m not sure what your point is. I don’t necessarily disagree with anything you laid out. Of course considering the entirety of phenotypic expression, secondary sex expression is a sliver of the whole. But that’s irrelevant because we are specifically talking about sex expression. And of course women can reproduce with significant genetic mutations. I never denied that. My point was that bringing up examples of mutations or defects in sex expression doesn’t contradict the idea that sex is binary… because they are genetic mutations. They are abnormalities. We can recognize that someone with an XXY chromosome, for example, has a chromosomal deficiency. NOT that they are a brand new biological sex. Now, I think there is some confusion with “binary” and “bimodal.” When I say sex is binary, I am saying that there are 2 distinct sexes: male and female. Categorically, they are binary. Otherwise, I can grant a softer stance that sex is essentially binary. The *expression of sex traits* may be bimodal… but that bimodal distribution still has two, widely separated peaks. And the difference is almost negligible. Of course, not every single human will fit neatly into “male” and “female” but the exceptions are like… 1-2%. And that’s GENEROUS. It’s **rare** for there to be ambiguity about someone’s sex. Now if someone is indeed intersex, with a highly ambiguous mixture of male and female characteristics, gene expression, and some funky mixing of chromosomes too, I have no qualms with them picking or choosing a sex to present as. The point is not against intersex… it’s against trans people, who by and large, are *not* intersex with genetic mutations. And using intersex people as an excuse to transition from one clearly defined sex to the other, and then claim that that is defined not by biology, but by social standards is not right.

[@kennylee6499]

And to the question of “what is a woman?” I would agree with Matt Walsh when he says “a woman is a human geared towards gestation.” Or perhaps more scientifically, a female is “a person of the sex that can bear offspring; a woman or a girl.” (Woman and female are synonymous here) or, A woman (or female) is “of the reproductive organs of an animal or plant: characteristic of the females of a species; producing gametes (ova) that can develop into a new individual, usually (but not always) after fertilization by a male gamete (as a spermatozoon). Also: designating such gametes, which are usually larger and less motile than the corresponding male gametes.” I’m sure there’s an example of a human that does not fit that bill, but that’s not an example of where the biological category fails, it’s a very clear example of when genetics fails. Edit: added woman/female synonym

[@Di66en6ion]

@@kennylee6499 1) And no trans activist/researcher is denying there are fundamental differences between AFAB and trans individuals. My point was that significant diversity among both sex and gender should lend more charity to those whom do not fit societal expectations on the sex "binary" or gender spectrum. 2) You're definition of sex is still limiting because your version is inherently only considering females whom can reproduce as real women. This comes back to the charity aspect and how it directly reflects society's view of not only trans women but AFAB women too. To place inherent value on only those whom can reproduce for a qualifier as "woman" is not good and if you can't see why that might be I can lay that out... You don't seem to understand how literal of a slippery slope your argument is in a social context. Intersex people matter, non-reproductive people matter, non-gender conforming people matter, and trans people matter. When you give permission to prejudice and prosecute one sliver of that pie you WILL give permission to enact bigotry against anyone else who presents similarly in the eyes of anyone looking for someone to punch down on. This is because any law enacted to classify and seperate humans on this level is utterly impractical on any level. Gonna do genetic tests before giving access to bathrooms? Beyond that, why? No research points to this ever being a problem to begin with. Sports is an entire other can of worms that's still not fair to AFAB athletes precisely because of the massive range of secondary sex expression and genetics within the AFAB population. Hormones are OVERWHELMINGLY responsible for almost everything you see from the outside of another human being. The only real and practical answer to this problem the right as fabricated is charity and respect

[@kelvinlion8839]

I keep seeing ads for What is a Woman no matter how many times I block them.

[@billbarr3960]

he still can not answer what a woman is.

[@KneeVan_]

He literally read the Webster definition. "A person who identifies with the gender typically associated with the female sex"

[@AD-bb9np]

@@KneeVan_, your definition is an incomplete statement. What does the person identify?

[@KneeVan_]

@@AD-bb9np it's actually not incomplete, but I assume you are asking me to define what "the gender typically associated with the female sex" is. Gender is a collection of social expectations, roles, and presentations, so if you think about what aspects of those things are typically associated with the female sex, a woman would be someone who looks at those things and thinks it would be the best way in which to describe and present themselves to the world. It could be anything from typical feminine attire, to how women are treated in every day conversation in comparison to men.

[@AD-bb9np]

@@KneeVan_, I thought you were saying a woman is a person who can identify certain things. I'm more confused with your explanation. How can a gender be defined by clothing? It seems sexist or homophobic to say that anyone who looks feminine is a woman.

[@KneeVan_]

@@AD-bb9np clothing is one aspect of gender expression, it's not end all be all, some may still be a man but choose to wear feminine clothing. But when enough of your gender preferences align with one side, more often than not people tend to then see merit in identifying as that gender

[@wilfredtwitchthrust7688]

Conservatives think in terms of absolutes, which is why nuance drives them so crazy. They'd rather believe they understand something than to actually understand something. That's why you'll hear this a lot, "It's common sense!"

[@sophiet1576]

Thinking is hard.

[@eduardobranco8349]

Like common sense gun reform? I think that phrase is more used by liberals than conservatives

[@AJ-lm5dl]

2+2 is not nuanced. Being able to differentiate a dog and a cat is not nuanced. And being able to differentiate between a man and a woman is not nuanced. They're objective things based on reality. You are simply confused and want the rest of the world to be as confused as you are. You simply try to hide it with the word "nuanced".

[@MrCalebHoward]

Please, all mighty internet intellectual, define a woman please...

[@skillsergeant4885]

What is a woman?

[@SA-mo3hq]

Everyone is so busy asking what is a women, but nobody is asking why is a woman

[@joshuavarughese6701]

or how is a woman

[@Pretermit_Sound]

@@joshuavarughese6701that’s kind been my concern lately. The how…?

[@Name..........]

​@joshuavarughese6701 really though how is she? Did you ask that woman

[@PungiFungi]

If you watched the movie, then how come so many non conservatives cannot answer that question?

[@PungiFungi]

@@lordlubu3029 I understand perfectly. Science is irrefutable, sociology is debatable. And if you have actually watched the documentary, which I think you have not because nobody in the pro-tran camp gave a response. So how can someone register a non response?

[@MrCalebHoward]

@@lordlubu3029 ....So what's the answer?

[@MrCalebHoward]

@@lordlubu3029 Unfortunately...

[@sophiepooks2174]

@@MrCalebHoward 3 words is only one answer, in reality things are much more nuanced, as the science of biology is far from simple. But most conservatives being baby brained as Vaush states need everything, even the most complicated subjects expected to be broken down into one sentence answers with pictures, otherwise TLDR.

[@bubblewrapvillain]

Alright Vaush, define what a woman is? Conservatives easily can do it. But you would be walking on rainbow-colored eggshells 😁

[@TexasThunder]

He won’t touch that!

[@houston1342]

All we want is simple answers. Not mucho texto answers.

[@bubblewrapvillain]

@@houston1342 no wishy-washy. Clear and concise.

[@deussivenatura5805]

An adult female

[@UlexiteTVStoneLexite]

@@deussivenatura5805 what is an adult that went through female puberty, develop breasts and hips, sounds female, looks female including external anatomy but it's actually XY and has androgen insensitivity syndrome?

[@Englishalc]

As a first time pregnant woman who just recently started lactating, I 1000% agree with your take on it 😅

[@Nazinsky]

I wish you the best ❤️

[@danielemazzali9810]

In Italy we have dialetti, old regional languages people used before ww2. Now basically nobody uses them. There used to be like 15 different names for "mud", because most people were farmers at the time (we weren't so industrialized yet). Now i know only 3 italian words for mud. Conditions change, therefore language change. We don't need 15 words to distinguish types of muds anymore.

[@squreshi10]

@Alias Fakename so do the English: snow, slush, sleet, hail, freezing rain, etc

[@technom4tter]

FANGO, MELMA, SDRUGA, SBRUMMA, SBUNRA, PANTANO, BRUMOTTI

[@danielemazzali9810]

@@technom4tter Melma non l'ho mai usata per il fango, Pensavo a fango, fanghiglia e pantano. Gli altri termini non gli ho mai sentiti 😅

[@Daybreak194]

Yes, definitions can change. ONLY when the majority of the population agrees with the change. And that takes decades.

[@CC-re9df]

@@Daybreak194 I think the debate about the whole topic will make people more stubborn in their definitions. They won't consider trans- woman woman just cause this message gets stuffed down their throats so hard and often. Sometimes logic and facts can't win, they may don't care about feelings, but feelings also do not have to care about the facts.

[@shadrackman1234]

Why have words? Humans should stop talking because the definitions of words are meaningless.

[@lauroneto3360]

Conservatives: An adult female human. Liberal dude: 25 minutes of gibberish. "Conservatives can't give an answer to that " You're funny man.

[@gabrielbrew4530]

This video uses quite accessible language, if you don’t get what he’s saying then I’m worried for you. But I don’t believe you can’t understand it, you just don’t want to expand your worldview to accommodate the social reality of gender.

[@Rustcat666]

@Eyeney your cringe. There's a truth. It's not a social construct. You are who you are. You can't claim that and say that your a different gender than your biological sex. You guys can't change biology, so it will never be truth the gibberish you say

[@Seethi_C]

@@gabrielbrew4530 you can make a really big word salad while using common language. That doesn’t make it any more meaningful

[@lauroneto3360]

@Eyeney basically everything can be described in a short sentence. A dictionary proves me right.

[@emiliosalazar9962]

@Eyeney Tell me how many cultures in recorded history have had an extrictly non-binary concept of gender exactly like that posed by modern gender studies academic, and then, tell me how many cultures in recorded human history have had an extrictly binary concept of gender.

[@WapitalismandWreedom]

I'm consistently amazed by Vaushs ability to use a gargantuan amount of words to say absolutely nothing.

[@hanzohasashi4534]

This video was perfectly coherent and well articulated from start to finish. Care to provide any examples?

[@WapitalismandWreedom]

@@hanzohasashi4534 when trying to answer what is a woman, he goes on a 10 minute diatribe about how words don't mean anything, they are only useful as descriptors, we can change the meaning of words however we want, nothing means anything and a bunch of other deconstructivist nonsense. It's a total avoidance of answering the question. You could use this strategy for literally any argument if you deconstruct deep enough so the whole argument is useless in practical application. So yeah, he spent over half the video saying "words can mean whatever we want" like that's some kind of finisher of an argument.

[@adrianl7147]

@@hanzohasashi4534 I'm with Michal on this one. There's another hilarious video where Vaush tries to argue with a Philosophy Phd. and claims that "water" isn't really water when you cross the border into Mexico. It's "aqua". Truly wonderful stuff. It's like Vaush's intellect is taking revenge on him.

[@hanzohasashi4534]

@@WapitalismandWreedom No... he said that reading normative dictionary definitions of words does not constitute an understanding of the concepts the word is attached to. If somebody asks "what is gravity", and I just read the dictionary definition, I've displayed 0 understanding of the concept.

[@hanzohasashi4534]

​@@adrianl7147 No he didn't say that water isn't water, he said that the category of "water" is broad and includes 100s of compositions; such as salt water, heavy water, hard water and so on. His argument is that since the word "water" can include 100 variations, there's no reason why the word "woman" must only include 1 variation.

[@Brenediction]

Vaush doing his best Tim Pool impression.

[@thedeathseas]

Tim Pool is on the left he's just not woke

[@scottvelez3154]

@@thedeathseas buddy woke at this point just means you don't shout the n word with the "er" ending at black people in public, it means nothing

[@Junebug89]

@@thedeathseas Feel free to try and define what "being on the left" means.

[@derekmckinnon6881]

Outside of lacking all morals and ethics.

[@emiliosalazar9962]

@@scottvelez3154 You are confusing not being woke with being *ABSOLUTELY BASED*

[@osamabinliftin8632]

Missing from the video: a solid, non-circular definition of what a woman is. Smooth brain ideas can’t even pass the most basic of scrutiny.

[@FriarJoe66]

Missing from your comment: a reason why such a definition is necessary in this video

[@lasthope3237]

@@FriarJoe66 because that's literally what the documentary he's reacting to is about 🤦🏻‍♂

[@rexfarell]

@@FriarJoe66 🤣🤣🤣

[@lasemillanadamas7179]

@@FriarJoe66 the legal definition (or lack thereof) of the terms "woman" and "man" has very profound political implications for all of us.

[@sethcaro]

@@FriarJoe66 good Lord. Seems like what is actually missing is your ability to think critically.

[@Cory_Springer]

While XX and XY make up the majority, the odds of having something other than XX/XY is roughly the same as the odds of having red hair.

[@danielcrafter9349]

Good comparison! :D

[@BrandonAB]

Conservative here, in what situation does a human have a characteristic that is neither male nor female? Like, do they get an extra part? Please, go easy on me. I’m retarded.

[@DrummerGhisi]

@@BrandonAB they can, in fact, have no primary sexual characteristics, have both extremes of primary sexual characteristics, have any one of them but have other primary characteristics not associated with those, like XY chromossomes still resulting in a person with a womb, and have them be alined, a cis man, with a penis and XY chromossomes, those are all possible

[@gamerinatrance3618]

@@BrandonAB There are in extremely rare cases people who are born with both a vagina and penis, two penises, or two vaginas. These used to be referred to as hermaphrodites, but they're now mostly referred to as intersex people. I believe chromosomes might be the result of that, but I'm not sure tbh.

[@Butmunch666]

Are you honestly taking the entire population of the earth into account when you are doing this? Because that is a recessive gene and can only be expressed in communities with that gene. That is you know biology...an actual hard science. So is that what you are doing?

[@alexielknight]

Its funny how I can agree with most things you say except for your conclusion. You say that the definition that conservatives use is not useful but your circular definition is. How does the definition "a woman is someone who identifies as a woman" have any use? It means we cannot assign ANY attributes to men or women so the words are merely labels with no meaning that people assign to themselves. Please explain how that is more useful than the traditional definition. It makes people happy? Thats an illusion which wont last. Why are you happy to be called a woman when the word has no meaning? Your second definition "someone that wants to be adhered to the social roles and expectations that are associated with a woman" is actually a much better one that even I could get behind. In fact i think thats the definition that most transpeople would like to be established. But what are those roles and expectations you are speaking of? Isnt that exactly what many other progressives are fighting against and want to get rid of? I think you are being dishonest when you say that thats the definition of leftists or progressives. I think your own camp is actually divided over this question, but didnt realize it yet.

[@styleformen7535]

Finally someone who is thinking. Couldn't have said it better

[@vipira1001]

That's not a division, that's an issue of intersectionality. The second is objectively better (and is not used because republicans have pea brain and hate when you say more than a few words.) but the first one is a more effective statement. Trans woman (since we're always the one group at faults it seems) don't always have the means or the knowledge or both to adhere to social expectations of womanhood and frankly a lot of the social roles imposed on woman are a pretty bad deal that women as a group are still fighting to dissasociate themselves from. The second definition leaves a blindspot where any person who doesn't want adhere to those gendered role strictly or "pick and choose" is no longer what gender they say they are. For exemple, if you're a women but don't want to be quiet and compliant and instead be a loud and assertive women: by that definition you are no longer a women. Trans women, in the majority, want to be seen as women without having to reinforce sexist stereotypes and gendered expectation for all women. If we use the same defintion for men, any men who doesn't want to fullfill the role of a strong and aggressive breadmaker is not a men anymore. It's entirely dependent on the society you live in and is just not accurate to most people who want to be themselves and that coincides with their gender roles sometimes and sometimes it doesn't.

[@styleformen7535]

@@vipira1001 so your definition of woman is anyone who says the words" I am a woman"?

[@alexielknight]

@@vipira1001 Sorry but I dont understand it. What does it mean for trans women "to be seen as women", if not having other people associate certain stereotypical attributes with them? Is abandoning those stereotypes really in the interest of trans people? And even if we did that, then there is no typical behaviour, look, etc. that we can assign to men or women. We should not assume a biological sex either, so is there even a difference between men and women? Why even distinguish between them? I dont want any trans person to feel "at fault" btw. If there is one thing we can agree on, then its that being trans is not something you should have to feel bad or ashamed about. But I cannot support a proposed (or even enforced) change of language that makes no sense to me.

[@vipira1001]

@@alexielknight That's a false dychotomy and also quite moot. Gendered stereotype will outlast trans people being accepted by society or rejected or when republicans will segregate us even more. Saying that we ought to stop putting such emphasis of gendered behaviour because it's not intrisincly linked is just better for everyone's capacity to express themselves. A gender abolitionist position is well and good but is also not something that could be achieved before climate change as rendered all our disagreement moot by boiling us I also find it kind of hypocritical to want to "placate" trans people by saying they shouldn't be Made to feel bad about it just before saying that any change to vocabulary we support to be less ostracised doesn't make sense as if any other description of women didn't have glaring holes.

[@mouthofpower8492]

26 minutes long and you still haven’t answered: what is a woman?

[@Ggeorgiev89]

I don't think all people will agree on what a woman is. I don't understand why trans rights activists care so much. Trans women are trans women, but trans women are not women..

[@troybenson5767]

The world may never know!

[@dangilbertson592]

Legal or biological definition? Both exist, both apply to cis and trans people.

[@troybenson5767]

@@dangilbertson592 so what is a woman?

[@Bustaperizm]

@@dangilbertson592 It's weird how noone in the documentary could answer it, though. Not even the gender studies professor.

[@JonConroy]

Social roles are broadly the same throughout the world. They stem from biology and are largely disconnected from cultural trends

[@elegantoddity8609]

I mean, that's kinda ignoring the role that colonization played in the whole thing. Unfortunately we can't really go back and hypothetically isolate cultures to see if the same gender roles develop across them. No doubt commonalities, but also drastic differences, and I'm unsure how much of those are related due to contamination.

[@JonConroy]

@@elegantoddity8609 that's my point the communalities stem from biology. The arrogance (not you specifically - the idea that's perpetuating) to assume that cultures only have gender roles because of colonialism is quite amazing. Completely removing a culture and a people's agency is mad to me

[@elegantoddity8609]

@@JonConroy I mean, please see native Americans having to fight tooth and claw for every scrap of their culture as the colonizers lied and cheated and displaced them and literally took their kids to indoctrination centers. Its tragic stuff. And for all the cultures that survived there are an uncountable number that didn't.

[@JonConroy]

@@elegantoddity8609 yeah things on one culture didn't survive the human movement across the planet. What happened to them happened to my people when the Romans invaded - culture is mixed and the ones with power at that moment tend to provide the bulk of what remains. The conquered culture will be a blend if they even survive. That's the way human history goes from the first empires in mesopotamia all the way to the American and Chinese empires right now. However, the things that remain the same are the things in built to our very human condition. Yes there are small variations, but men have always been men and women have always been determined by biology. If there are one or to feminine men in a society that doesn't take away from the base line.

[@SoyBeanQQ]

25 minutes later… I have a question: If the conservative definition of woman is not a female adult human, what is a woman?

[@AD-bb9np]

I'm halfway through the video now wondering if he will ever give a definition at all.

[@Future_Imperfect]

I'm not sure if knows the difference between figuratively and literally. When someone says you aren't a "real man" they mean you are not living up to the character or expectations of a man. Not that you are literally not a man. Does he...does he really not understand that? 🤨

[@AD-bb9np]

@@Future_Imperfect, he does his best to argue liberal positions but I do not think he is dull enough to believe what he is saying.

[@Future_Imperfect]

@@AD-bb9np I think the documentary proved it's purpose quite throughly. If anyone gets uncomfortable trying to explain what they believe they probably either 1 don't know what they believe or 2 they are afraid of you knowing what they believe. Almost without fail, relatively civil conversations/debates fell apart the moment Walsh asked for specifics or brought up discrepancies in their positions.

[@advocatusdiaboli9971]

Afaik, Vaush's definition of woman is "a person that identifies as a woman". I know this sounds circular, but it can make sense when you see "identifies as" as "gives themselves the label". In that case, the definition is clear yet being a woman is quite meaningless.

[@sethcarpenter7120]

“Behold Perry the Platypus!! My Gayinator!!” *pulls velvet curtain to reveal convoluted machine* *validated platypus noises*

[@scylecs]

from what i've seen they especially don't know what a chair is

[@AJ-lm5dl]

A chair is furniture designed to be sat in. Are you really *that* detached from reality?

[@scylecs]

@@AJ-lm5dl a mat is a chair

[@AJ-lm5dl]

@@scylecs A mat is not furniture designed to be sat in.

[@scylecs]

@@AJ-lm5dl furniture: The movable articles in a room or an establishment that make it fit for living or working. mat fits also bed

[@AJ-lm5dl]

@@scylecs I don't believe that you're this ignorant. But, in case you are, I'll let you in on this little piece of information: Just because you can sit on or in something, that doesn't make it a chair. Chairs are specifically *designed* to be sat in. Being able to sit on a fridge does not make that fridge a chair. Being able to sit on a counter does not make that counter a chair. And being able to sit on a desk does not make that desk a chair. If you go to a furniture store and you go to the section labeled as chairs, are you seriously saying that you expect to see counters, fridges, and desks in that section?

[@crazyberrytastebad]

you lost me. All you say is there are exception to sex. NO duh! Person can born with two heads but it didn't change the fact it isn't the biological norm.

[@TheOldMPClub]

"biological norm" is not important to reality. Nature produces it, it's natural. It is organisms in a society that are prejudice against differences.

[@Moistyr1]

The conservative argument relies on fact, and reality holy shit

[@hanzohasashi4534]

It doesn't... because the conservative argument conflates gender with sex. There's a reason why biologists separated gender from sex in the 1970s, and it's not because biologists don't like facts, it's because separating sociological concepts from biological concepts allows us to more adequately study both concepts.

[@AJ-lm5dl]

@@hanzohasashi4534 Clothing choices and personality does not determine whether someone is a man or woman.

[@hanzohasashi4534]

@@AJ-lm5dl It certainly doesn't; hence why nobody said that. Gender is a mode of identity associated with social roles and expectations associated with what the identifier believes should be perceived as a feminine archetype, and although clothing and personality is often components of that feminine archetype, they are minor components.

[@TheBasedGreeg]

Heh, Vaush was talking about his cotton briefs, then said he was trying to be brief. But didn’t even realize the pun. Hahahahahahahahaha

[@moresnqp]

🐊

[@redfire6277]

Man your such a nerd

[@austinmccomb5511]

I am a conservative and I can say that Vaush did not really touch on any real conservative arguments in this half hour video. He is either ignoring them or doesn’t know them. Women are defined by general sets of biological characteristics. Variation among those characteristics does not make them not a woman. Humans have two legs but that doesn’t mean that if I lose a leg in an accident then I’m not human anymore. These definitions are important because they give people an introductory understanding about a person upon first meeting them and they provide each individual with a solid grounding in their own identity. Gender theory muddies the water for everybody, but most importantly for the individual who believes in it because he ties so much of his identity to his gender which he can apparently change arbitrarily. Living life without having a grounded understanding of who you are is a recipe for depression, anxiety, and a host of other mental issues which are all very prevalent among trans and non binary people. Which leads me to this ugly idea that progressives have that, just because a conservative disagrees with you means that he hates you. The reason conservatives disagree with modern gender ideology and transgenderism is because it makes us horribly sad to see people kill themselves because they were convinced the only way to be happy was to make irreversible changes to their bodies. And yes, these changes are irreversible. The fake breasts that a detransitioning woman has will never be her natural breasts. The manufactured penis that a detransitioning man has put on him will never be the one he was born with. People who make the decision to medically transition do not have the highest suicide rates of any group in recorded history because conservatives are mean to them. They have them because they made the biggest mistake of their lives and they can never take it back. Conservatives want to prevent that and help them learn to love the bodies they were born in. That brings me to my final point. Even though gender roles and norms have changed throughout history and will continue to change forever, why does that justify the irreversible medical procedure. Conservatives are not trying to ban cross dressing, we just think it’s a horrible idea to pay doctors thousands of dollars to chop off healthy body parts. It is not good for the individual who is losing that body part, regardless of what they think in the moment. Believing so would be like believing that it is right and necessary for doctors to encourage a person with body dysmorphia to have arms or legs removed because they believe they will be more comfortable that way. If you’re a man who likes doing traditionally feminine things, that’s fine, and it doesn’t make you any less of a man. Liking feminine things does not mean it is necessary to start cutting off healthy body parts.

[@redgalactic]

Good argument.

[@autr3553]

@@redgalactic great answer but the mindless zombies won’t read it

[@redgalactic]

@@autr3553 lol

[@TheSurrealist.]

Your leg argument is a false equivocation. Also, he didn’t say having variable sex expressions makes someone not a male or female, just that they’re not strictly binary, they’re bimodal. Your understanding of the issue is quite infantile. You’re making reductionist arguments that make being trans out to be just gender confusion when it’s not that even in the slightest. Also, trans people kill themselves because they get treated horribly and are invalidated by the people around them. It’s more than just being told they have to be one way and they aren’t getting that way. It’s that they know their mind and body are experiencing an incongruence and they’re being told they’re mentally ill for that when they’re not. Also, again with the reductive arguments, going on HRT or having surgery is not just some aloof decision that’s made in a whim. You do realize that these people have counselors, and doctors and multidisciplinary medical support teams that make sure they’re making the right decision that works for them? All of your arguments are in ignorance and you reduce the trans experience down to such levels to make it easier to invalidate what they go through as “just a phase” WHEN ALL OF THE MEDICAL INFORMATION WE HAVE SAYS OTHERWISE.

[@redgalactic]

@@TheSurrealist. " Trans people kill themselves because they get treated horribly and are invalidated by the people around them ". I'm not sure that's a true statement and yet trans people get treated fairly in developed countries. Your argument is invalidated.

[@tonigeorg7652]

Woman is an adult female human being. You are welcome

[@IAmNumber4000]

How do you tell biological females apart from passing trans women Toni?

[@sophiepooks2174]

Woman is also an adult non human female in sci-fi. *You're.

[@9tailjeza]

other than the african tribe, matt could’ve easily interviewed anyone in china, the middle east, korea

[@Kiadaw77]

Anywhere outside of US for that matter.

[@allisteria5906]

And they would have had the same response. The lefts mindset of sexuality is found in the US and other various olaces it’s infected. But Korea? China? Literally the rest of the world laughs at the absurdity that is gender ideology. All this degeneracy is leading to the acceptance of pedophelia. It’s time to stop.

[@HH-yq6ch]

@@Kiadaw77 or Canada and certain European countries, shoot maybe most of Europe. Australia too. They’re all sipping the koolaid. Hmm I wonder what the connection is 🤔

[@UnlockingYourEnergy]

Why would he go that far when he could just interview Juan the Landscaper outside his house?

[@davidjeanmichel8358]

lgbt ideology is the real new western colonialism

[@katyungodly]

Hormones drastically change everything about trans womens' bodies. Our skin is thinner, our genitals are smaller, everything is soft and squishy, body hair thins drastically, and much more.

[@sonofgandalf403]

You will never be a woman. I'm so sorry.

[@justin-md4xm]

Estrogen shrinks your dick? That sounds really bad. And no cis man would ever want that lol

[@maryedmonds4350]

@@kp63 Cope and seethe

[@justalostlocal]

@@kp63 cringe.

[@MaliciousMoxy]

Speak for yourself sister. Wile my skin is ultra smooth I am still packing a big iron on my hip.

[@444Nightshade]

beanie vaush beanie vaush

[@LexBrewer]

That's a lot of words to let us know that you have no idea what you're talking about. It's absolutely bonkers to me that somebody believes what you're saying and the way you explain it your expression tells me you actually believe it. So sad

[@knowledgeanddefense1054]

Nice counterargument, too bad you forgot to include it in your comment

[@discordantvole1416]

Conservative anger tends to be directed at perceived caste defiance. It’s all gut reactions, then post hoc justification of those reactions.

[@discordantvole1416]

Also, fuck ‘em? Yeah.

[@HutchHere]

wow! a 30-minute long non-answer!

[@AJ-lm5dl]

Leftists seem to be really skilled at talking for extended periods of time without actually saying anything. It's like an art.

[@Cowplunk]

I think a lot of people struggle with this question because they don't want to say "I don't know" when that is actually not a bad answer. Society's definition is currently in a state of change because our society is starting to realize that being a woman is more defined by gender, which is a complex construct, than by biology exclusively. Some people are very resistant to change, others are not. Some people value very simplistic explanations, others do not. I am not afraid to admit that I personally don't know what a woman is because our understanding of human sexuality is still quite limited but is growing rapidly. As Vaush pointed out, the practical real world questions created by this change aren't usually that hard to figure out.

[@christiancastro5746]

Yeah idk if 2+2 is 4 now or if it’s just a social construct

[@tomasrocha6139]

People are not changing their minds women are adult female humans period.

[@thewhitefalcon8539]

​@@smergflerg64752+2=10 (in base 4 - I'm fine). Conservatives will call number bases a woke ideology or whatever.

[@LiveFromThePorcelainPalace]

If an 18 year old isn't mature enough to own a firearm.. how is a 13 year old mature enough to make a decision that will affect it's entire life?

[@LOSTnerd815]

I want more vids like this. More Vaush speaking directly to the camera.

[@jeycalc6877]

Is that it? There are exceptions? Sure you can find a human with an extra finger, doesn't mean they are not human. You define what something is by what characterizes it, so genes, physical attributes, hormones, ability to give birth, etc. So you could of just ended the video there lol

[@OberonTeam]

I'm sorry, but when im out at rhe bar, the first thing I check is not "can they give birth? What hormones do they have? What are their genes", and typically with characteristics thr problem is "are they flat or a guy? Are they wearing their hair short or are they a guy?" Etc, im sure you've seen the people. So tell me, how do you know for a fact that someone is a woman in day to day life?

[@rolfpierre8400]

This guy spoke for 25 minutes, and didn’t provide a single coherent, non circular definition for what a woman is.

[@IntiFloresH]

Clasic lefttard

[@MrCalebHoward]

What were you expecting?

[@skillsergeant4885]

Exactly what I expected lol

[@SoFarSoGoodSoWhat14]

It's almost like it's kind of impossible to define a woman in that way 🤔

[@MrCalebHoward]

@@SoFarSoGoodSoWhat14 “adult human female”. Not that hard…

[@dannydelacruz7303]

Well he said it. He's not a biologists, so why listen to him if his not an expert

[@trishash79]

One reason I can think of is that this platform allows people to leave behind a record of their ignorance.

[@ZZimaJr]

"Oh you say my definition is circular. Let me give you a circular definition thats is 4 times as long"

[@knowledgeanddefense1054]

Nice strawman

[@ZZimaJr]

@@knowledgeanddefense1054 you should stick to terms you understand

[@knowledgeanddefense1054]

@@ZZimaJr You should take your own advice

[@arizonarangerwithanarizona4025]

It seems like no one in this comment section actually bothered to watch documentary since many of these people are assuming that it's just Matt Walsh telling the audience the definition of a woman. It's quite the opposite really. The documentary is actually very fair since the vast majority of the document is spent allowing liberals to give their two cents on the topic. And there is some very concerning stuff that was said in the documentary.

[@hhasslinger9601]

So true. It really isn't a trolling type of documentary. It shows how much big pharma has infiltrated this issue, and honestly some of the people he interviews are very disturbing.

[@mikechelsa3256]

No one cares. Matt Walsh is a grifter

[@BENKYism]

@@mikechelsa3256 Not sure what you mean by that. People knew what they were paying for when they subscribed to the DW to watch the documentary.

[@PapaSmurf11182nd]

@@mikechelsa3256 I actually disagree - on the Matt Walsh being a grifter part - he’s a true blue believer. And that’s why he’s dangerous to LGBTQ folks

[@hanzohasashi4534]

The goal of the documentary is to bait random people into saying stuff that Matt Walsh's target audience can laugh at. During the first interview of the movie, he asks an academic to define sex and gender, and just as the question is being answered, the editors cut off the answer, then pan to Matt Walsh's face while weird clown music is being played. This documentary is an insult to the journalism, rationality, and the human intellect.

[@blockthewind8544]

I'm genuinely curious as to which conservatives you talked to or debated this subject with? I only ask because I have not heard any conservatives say what you claimed they have said. Im not saying they didn't, I just find it interesting to look at things from both sides of the spectrum.

[@iama187er]

I'll say it.....he didn't....too busy smelling his own farts to actually have a conversation with anyone who isn't nodding, and telling him how brilliant he is

[@eyyauprzlln4808]

My guy literally does nothing else than argue fascists online what are you talking about

[@asmbeats5369]

​@@eyyauprzlln4808 "Arguing fascists" lmao

[@davidjeanmichel8358]

@@eyyauprzlln4808 the definition of "fascists" for vaush is not like for womens, even if you don't identify as fascist he label you as one. funny. i like how the defintion of things can be extended to the point that everyone is a fascist women.

[@hanzohasashi4534]

All of the biggest conservative talking heads... Knowles, Shapiro, Crowder, etc... all define woman as "adult human female", and they also conflate gender with sex. It's not unreasonable to infer that the conservatives Vaush debates also believe this.

[@alondrahart3319]

And yet you still can’t tell us what a woman is…

[@aguyithink4119]

we can.

[@doobieddooo]

@@aguyithink4119 yes, adult human female.