How Schools Are Being 'Queered' - Dr. James Lindsay

[@shokuchideirdrecarrigan7402]

Yes- parents- don’t let the government raise your children!

[@nancybaumgartner6774]

Or any other self- anointed “expert”.

[@paulmead5832]

4:50 John Money: born in my country, New Zealand. Started his life as a surgeon. Sad, awful, evil.

[@viejolincanada]

I corresponded twice with Dr. Money. I liked his book "Gay, Straight, and in-Between". Both his letters were very strange.

[@vicklen51]

Nice to see James Lindsey here

[@vivienneb6199]

No, it is appalling

[@dakota-sessions]

Gender exists to the extent that any identity exists. i.e., it's just a belief... that's it.

[@vivienneb6199]

Not really, it is the set of social expectations with respect to behavior and roles etc. Sex is the material reality. Being female is a Necessary AND sufficient condition of being a woman.

[@AndyJarman]

​@@vivienneb6199 so why didn't it exist as an idea before 1950? Surely Simone De Beauvoir used the grammatical convention 'gender' to infer that it was possible to eschew womanhood, that being a woman was a societal imposition (the Second Sex 1949)? The idea that a noun doesn't have to be 'gendered' in order to exist being the origin of this subversion? My understanding is that before the essentialist idea of "gender" was invented (by a radical socialist) there were people who were atypical and less desirable as mates because of their nature. Women typically find men more useful (attractive), and men find women more useful (attractive) as prospective partners in life, because they complement each other in the game of survival. I think a lot of contemporary feminists like Mary Harrington are beginning to realise that this "gender" business has swindled them.

[@mr.mithmoth]

It's not an identity or a belief. Gender is not a thing on its own. The word "gender" means a "kind" of thing. For humans, gender refers to sex, as a polite euphemism. There are two sexes: male and female. But there aren't two genders. There is only "gender" as categorical differentiation, not a category itself, not a property. We don't have a gender. We have a sex. And the word has been synonymous with sex since roughly the middle ages.

[@michelledavis2604]

You're hilarious and ignorant in equal measure.

[@michelledavis2604]

​@vivienneb6199 not really. Social pressures and influences are the consequence of grnder identity, which is hard wired.

[@adrianryan5654]

100% agree re parents inoculating their children against the indoctrination. My 7 year old has been trained to check everything and to especially check back with me and to tell me everything that is going on at school. I have also advance taught him about gender, virology, climate alarmism, racism, bullying and taught him to stand up for himself. It isn’t that hard, you just have to take an interest in their life and well-being… We talk about stuff everyday on the drive to and from school, at meal times, while out walking etc. No opportunity wasted.

[@markrussell3428]

@@adrianryan5654 all excellent points. 👌

[@cestmoi4532]

Important.

[@dakota-sessions]

What everyone gets wrong about John Money is that his beliefs that gender was learned happened to be common among doctors at that time. He wasn't some lone weirdo, it was common-think of the day.

[@codyrockall6978]

James Lindsey is amazing! I’m so glad he’s spoke at Genspect, I wish I could be there!!

[@vivienneb6199]

You are really into self-flagellation, aren't you/

[@5-Volt]

Eh, it's more like gender _identity_ doesn't exist. It's just a metaphorical descriptor of how we internally feel about our sex.

[@BevWood-e8g]

When you talk about how you feel internally you are talking about what identifies with you -ie, your identity.

[@5-Volt]

@@BevWood-e8g Right but some people talk about it like it's a tangible, observable thing, that is innate & unchanging. When it's simply a self interpretation of thoughts & feelings. If we start basing things on self-identification, which some countries/US states have, that has easily abusable implications.

[@BevWood-e8g]

@@5-Volt Ok first: sex is innate. It is determined by gametes (eggs or sperm). It’s not on a spectrum, there is no “spermegg” (even people who are intersex are either male or female). Sex is such an innate part of our world that even insects and plants have different sexes. You cannot destroy these categories or the need to differentiate between male and female because the survival and reproduction of our species depends on it. Gender is a made up term, crafted by ideologues, that conflates four categories: temperament, sexual orientation, interests and self expression. Each human being varies in these categories, but on average, there are distinct differences between the groups. These traits are inheritable as humans are not born blank slates. Women are higher in agreeableness and neuroticism (on the big 5 personality score) than men; being attracted to men is a feminine trait and being attracted to women is a masculine trait; women are more interested in people and men are more interested in things (hence women choose people oriented professions and humanities degrees while men dominate STEM); women and men have different ways of dressing that are culturally informed and display distinct differences in speech patterns and body language. There are masculine women and feminine men (who are typically gay), but that doesn’t negate one’s biological sex. To say otherwise is to say something quite homophobic and sexiest, because it is to say that if a man/ woman doesn’t fit sex stereotypes then that means that aren’t really a man or a woman. It’s hilarious how the progressives reinforce 1950s sex stereotypes, but it’s because they don’t realize they are possessed by a silly ideology that doesn’t make sense and is not based in reality. The world is already waking up to the madness of the gender ideology.

[@shokuchideirdrecarrigan7402]

American Zen Buddhism has become a “left leaning church” including the pride flags and DEI.

[@elizabethmiller1804]

I need to correct the video description: Gender ideology and queer theory have NOTHING to do with radical feminism! Those first two harmful ideologies are in direct opposition to radical feminism. Radical feminism is grounded in the recognition that patriarchy oppresses women on the basis of our sexed bodies. Radical feminist do not believe in the gender religion or queer theory in any way. We do not believe in “gender” at all, except as harmful sexist stereotypes. Please get your facts straight.

[@4651adri]

Thanks for saying this. At least he should get his facts straight.

[@pelqel9893]

I think he explained that, in the 70s, there arose a "split" within the ranks of radical feminists, one of which laid the groundwork for gender ideology/queer theory; the other camp continued onward rooted in biological/sex essentialism and is indeed at odds with contemporary trans-activists.

[@theunknownatheist3815]

Patriarchy. 🙄 Get over it already

[@siobhannoble8545]

​@@theunknownatheist3815 We will when men stop making laws that prevent us from having choices in regards to our own bodies. Legally forcing women to go through with pregnancies, even if they're harmful to the women's health; putting a tax on period products; allowing men to complete in physical sports against women etc. None of this hurts men. So, yes, there is a patriarchy in place. 🖕

[@AnActualSkeptic]

It's the 3rd wave feminism that's cool with having men in women's spaces. Radical feminists and terfs are my favorite people.

[@dwightdonnelly8662]

Thank you James for doing the heavy lifting! Marxism is from the depths of hell! I pray you turn to Christ .

[@lovelover4408]

That anti “radical feminist” rant where he claims some radical feminists were sex positive (that’s liberal feminists) was tough to get past, especially him laughing about triggering feminists by calling them “hags.” Like… wow. Really hoping we get to actual factual content at some point but I’m approaching halfway and I’m not sure when we’re getting to ROGD… which is theoretically the point of this lecture…

[@lovelover4408]

At the last five or so minutes the finally gets to his point. I don’t know enough about Marxism to really confirm or contest what he was saying, but I do find it hard to believe that Lenin and Mao were all about including sexual minorities and women… and after the initial rant where he talked about radical feminism and contradicted what I’ve read about it and the repeated “hags mad” thing which was just… so lame… it was extremely hard to get there

[@biblicalworldview1]

​@@lovelover4408The economic Communists were not interested in including racial and sexual minorities. That came later through the Frankfurt School, which were Marxist who are still revolutionary but realized the middle class took away the revolutionary zeal and needed to be replaced through cultural Marxism.

[@theunknownatheist3815]

@@biblicalworldview1enough with the fucking Frankfurt school. 🙄 What we’re dealing with goes way beyond them. When you harp on “Frankfurt school”, it sounds like a dog whistle for Jews. Knock it off and learn something.

[@BevWood-e8g]

Loosening sexual boundaries of the society causes enormous chaos; beyond spreading disease and causing unwanted pregnancies, casual sex ruins relationships and the dating market which makes creating a healthy society near impossible. It’s also very bad on families/ children. Casual sex is as bad for the social capital (which is the level of trust and stability in society) as crime. If you want high levels of physical and mental well being and wealth, you need to constrain the sexual habits of the people, preferably by using social stigma instead of the law. The liberal feminists have seriously destroyed the stability of our society and its well being with their pro-sex revolution. Ironically their interventions have also led to far more exploitation of women (p*rn being the most degrading and obvious). They even encourage young women to see exploiting their own sexuality as a form of “empowerment” despite how destructive it is for women and how obviously misogynistic and hypocritical this is. They then claim to care about issues around the objectification of women and girls. They claim to be concerned about the well being of poor people even though everything they support leads to more human suffering. Then they blame the upper classes or white men for all of the chaos. Do you see why James Lindsay hates them now? They are vial, narcissistic, hypocritical and destructive.

[@brandotheone]

Even though today there are many feminists against gender, let’s not forget that Feminism took us here.

[@hooligan9794]

I can't agree with Lindsay on the "gender doesn't exist" thing. It does exist. Evident with "infinite personalities" comment. We see personality commonalities between the sexes, by which I mean, women have more in common personality-wise with other women and men with other men than between the two groups. Of course, gender, isn't some disembodied soul expressing itself, it is inextricably linked to sex. It is the mental component of sex differences. Yes some people are outlier, but this doesn't even rise to the level of interesting. It is true of essentially every category, trait, etc.

[@TheSwauzz]

It is ultimately a social construct and can definitely be argued that it isn't real.

[@hooligan9794]

@TheSwauzz it's not a social construct. It is a result of development of the brain. There are some socially constructed elements if you take it at its broadest, but things like temperament differences between men and and women are not social constructs.

[@siobhannoble8545]

Yeah. This guy has not done his homework.

[@dwightdonnelly8662]

😂​@@siobhannoble8545

[@DrGreenGiant]

​@@hooligan9794 that's only true if you accept gender is the mental differences between the sexes *and* that they are caused by a physical difference. At the point it's physical the word gender is no longer meaningful; it's a sex based difference, not a gender based one. You could of course act like the other sexes temperament/mental if you know what that appears like, which requires social conditioning. From what I understand that's what gender means, it's an act based upon a social condition. It doesn't help that everyone seems to have their own definition so there's mine too to finally settle the matter (lol)

[@umwha]

James has the seed of greatness - however I think he’s sliding off the mark , he’s sliding into a good and evil narrative and he’s getting sloppier in whom he is assigning to the evil category. I think this is because he seems to have become more Christian over the years

[@K10House]

Yup. I've watched it happen too. This presentation was well beneath the level of discourse I expect from Genspect. I've sent a few good liberals to the Genspect site to do their own research, and I would be embarrassed and apologetic if this was the page they landed on.

[@vivienneb6199]

Genspect is finished if they applaud MEN who insult women.

[@kierasthoughts2480]

You can be all for sexual freedom and expression and still understand that biology is real. Why is he trying to put us into neat little boxes?

[@K10House]

This guy makes some good points, but he's far less than measured. He doesn't even define what he thinks a feminist is before he starts jovially bashing us. I'm of the line of feminism that simply states men and women, in spite of our differences, are equal in importance and meaning. Women's voices and our needs are no less/no more important than men's. Is that something he'd disagree with? I have no idea. This was a glib presentation and poorly constructed. He was kind of all over the place and his points weren't well defined. All in all, it was not up to par with what I've come to expect from Genspect. I think what he was *trying* to say is important, but the way he said it was off putting. I wondered the whole time what he wasn't saying that he would say in less decent circles. I'm far from a pollyanna when it comes to guys taking digs feminists or at social structures, and I can hang with the most foul mouthed comedian, so when I say that this guy might not be a douche, but he does kind of come across as one, I'm not coming from a delicate or 'triggered' place. And anyone who broadly proclaims that we all ought to be home schooling is neither realistic, nor well informed. We need to fix our schools. Homeschooling is just going to create more division and more kids who are online too much. Many of today's working class parents are overwhelmed because our economy is a mess, and he thinks that they can reasonably home school? He clearly doesn't hang out in circles of people who are different from himself socioeconomically or he wouldn't so brashly suggest such a thing. I know he's scared and he's mad, but I don't think he's nearly as logical or as helpful as he wanted to be.

[@vivienneb6199]

If you've see Matt Walsh's new mockumentary, the scene with the race DEI women humiliating "white women" at a dinner party, this is it. He is so gross, and I cannot believe genspect just takes his abuse.

[@arknabul2760]

"Women's voices and our needs are no less/no more important than men's. Is that something he'd disagree with? I have no idea." Because you don´t know what modern feminism is...

[@arknabul2760]

@@vivienneb6199 They humiliating themselves. Matt just exposed but let us make him the "bad" guy.

[@vivienneb6199]

@@arknabul2760 Sure, but you entirely missed the point. They sat there, and took it. The DEI ladies who berated them can be swapped out for Peterson, and those ladies would sit there while he called them names. I'm sure of it. It has NOTHING to do with Walsh.

[@vivienneb6199]

You are a bit dim, so let me try again. My analogy has NOTHING to do with Matt Walsh. If you swap the DEI ladies with Peterson or Lindsay, you would have the same berating of women who just sit there an take it. That is what is happening in this Lindsay talk. He is demeaning them, and they applaud, and vow not to be feminists anymore. lmao

[@cosmickilroy]

OMG bringing up The Matrix is also connected to the fact the creators are both now trans! It IS a religion

[@Spacegirl3200]

Is it me or was this talk hard to follow?? I found Jordan Peterson's talk on the history of radical gender ideology easier to follow....

[@laurenmoreira1047]

Jordan Peterson is a great professor. One always understands what he explains.

[@HedonistPoet]

I know the topic incredibly well, and it isn't just that he argued his own points poorly, it's also that he is ignorant on top of it. It is BETTER that you couldn't follow it because if you had, you might have been misled into his ignorance. You're better off fighting this ideology without James Lindsay's 'knowledge' than with it.

[@K10House]

Commenter coming with knives out 😂

[@arknabul2760]

It is you.

[@beartrapperkc]

Kinda surprised Genspect associates with Lindsay. He's got some pretty radical ideas and was one of the most influential trolls to restart the "groomer" meme that was SO harmful to gay men in the 80's and 90's. The "groomer" term got teachers fired just for being gay, saying they are "grooming" children. That simply isn't true. The modern term he SHOULD apply is "indoctrination", which is a set of ideas, not a nefarious plot to sexualize children. James has gone WAY to the right since he first came on the scene. Doesn't mean he doesn't have some valuable insight, but he's also lacks ALL compassion.

[@arknabul2760]

Don´t be a liar. Go read the academic papers yourself.

[@beartrapperkc]

@@arknabul2760 Liar? About what? I'm admitting there is indoctrination. And if you are REALLY concerned about actual grooming, you might go after the child beauty pageant industry or the Catholic church.

[@arknabul2760]

@@beartrapperkc My real concerns are not defined by you. So, don´t give me your "if...then" BS And, again, you can read their papers.

[@beartrapperkc]

@@arknabul2760 You sound like a very cooperative person. Good luck.

[@arknabul2760]

@@beartrapperkc As cooperative as you deserve my friend.

[@mr.mithmoth]

Lindsay's take on Gnosticism is only the definition given by it's Christian critics. Wish he would stop banging on about that. You might stretch a comparison between some modern woke beliefs and Gnostic metaphysics, but it's a really long stretch, and none of the woke nor their leaders are Gnostics themselves. Someone who was a true Gnostic wouldn't try so hard -- or at all, to reshape his environment and body to conform to his own expectations and inner feelings. He would see the physical world as imperfect, but still very real. And the god who created it, not as evil, only misguided, and not the One True God, which is the source of all reality (think Hindu Brahman). A true Gnostic would focus on spiritual development, striving to attain "gnosis", the Western equivalent of enlightenment, but otherwise live as an ordinary person, in the very same reality as everyone else and not be getting in anyone's face for not following the same path as himself. (unlike other religions) Gnosticism isn't the problem. Wanting tidy little answers for everything and somebody to blame besides ourselves, that's the problem.

[@mr.mithmoth]

And Lindsay's take on Hegel is cringeworthy too. He never seems to mention how Hegel was himself a devout Christian or how Marx stood Hegel's ideas on their head, nor does he ever speak about what the project of the German Idealists actually was: to find a resolution to the problem of Cartesian Dualism and propose a metaphysic where our conscious experience was not cut off from the reality in which we in habited. That is, you don't get to live your own reality, reality isn't in your head, precisely the opposite of the post-modernist position.

[@theunknownatheist3815]

Unfortunately, Lindsay is pandering to Christian’s with this crap. I wish he would stop.

[@_abracadabra]

​@@mr.mithmoth So make a response video to poke the holes you see in his argument. Get in the arena.

[@HedonistPoet]

@@mr.mithmoth He's ignorant about gender identity and its roots, ideologically, as well as feminism and queer theory. Interesting to discover he's a know-nothing on Gnosticism as well.

[@mr.mithmoth]

@@_abracadabra A reasonable suggestion, but I'm just not one of those folks who want to have his mug on public display. Some of us like attention, some of us don't. And mostly, it doesn't make a difference. Few people listen to anything they don't already believe. But writing comments lets me blow off some steam, even though I know it's a waste of time. Better off playing Skyrim.

[@waynemcauliffe-fv5yf]

Mr Smith is played by Aussie Hugo Weaving in the Matrix mate

[@apathyguy8338]

Why must everybody go the low road and use alarmist terminology? The millisecond you used Marxist you insulted my intelligence and pissed me off. Apparently it's more important to sell books to people who won't read them then to people who will.

[@pelqel9893]

Because the structure is Marxist. Instead of focusing on economics, however, the critical social justice branches are focused upon culture.

[@theunknownatheist3815]

What “intelligence?” 😂

[@BevWood-e8g]

I’m sorry but why is the term Marxist so triggering to you? It’s literally a Marxist split between oppressor/ oppressed. If you are a Marxist apologist you aren’t intelligent.

[@TheSwauzz]

Marxism is the main culprit behind these tenuous ideologies about gender. I fail to see how it was alarmist terminology.

[@viejolincanada]

Gender exists, but not as an independent entity. Gender is the cognitive representation of biological sex, which is why the correlation is so strong.

[@umwha]

If it’s merely the representation of biological sex, rather than an aspect of it, does that mean a person can have in their brain a representation of a gender that does not match their real sex?

[@viejolincanada]

@@umwha "a person can have in their brain a representation of a gender that does not match their real sex?" Cognitive Structures are meant to help individuals navigate life by bringing the "world" into our minds. Take concepts like "window" and "door". Early in life children learn to distinguish between a door and a window so when someone asks a child to leave the room the child uses the door and not the window. Back to your question. Sex and gender are more complex than a door and a window because it involves strong emotions. But similarly, children are meant to build the concept of being boy and girl based on their bodies, so if that happens there will be emotional problems. The real question is why do some children reject so strongly the gender associated to their biological sex. I think that a boy feeling that he is a girl is different than a girl being a boy, but both are motivated in part by shame about their bodies. All boys feel ashamed about their erections, but in some cases the shame is pathological, and some boys feel that they are a girl as a way of escaping shame. The real solution is good psychotherapy so that children can accept their bodies, the only one they have and will have. But the problem is that psychotherapy is unable to help these children because therapists tend to evade dealing with shame.

[@umwha]

@@viejolincanada So you are saying no, the brain Status cannot be mismatched with the body status?

[@viejolincanada]

@@umwha "So you are saying no, the brain Status cannot be mismatched with the body status?" I wouldn't say no because it happens that some people believe that they are actually the other gender. But I don't recommend it because cognitive structures are supposed to represent the outside (an inside) world as precise as possible in order to facilitate the journey of life.

[@opqrst7]

⭐

[@janinegriffiths8281]

I am a gender critical feminist and I do find this man somewhat offensive. It is interesting how a single topic will being together, or divide, people with such otherwise disparate positions on almost everything else. I really think Genspect is great overall.

[@lovelover4408]

Like does he not realize radical feminists are some of the people pushing back hardest against this nonsense?

[@mr.mithmoth]

It's your right to be offended. But nobody has to care.

[@lovelover4408]

@@mr.mithmothyou realize feminists are some of the ones pushing back against gender the most right? Specifically radical feminists? You might want to care

[@biblicalworldview1]

I think it would just be helpful to have a sense of humor about him. He has done a lot of work and has a really deep understanding of this stuff.

[@elizabethmiller1804]

Your description makes him sound like a misogynist asshole, which does not make me want to listen to his talk at all. Doesn’t sound like he really knows what he’s talking about, especially with regard to feminism.

[@mirelaalina4050]

Not on the Christian Orthodox Church. I love you all people but when you speak out of no knowledge that’s… when it makes me think all that I have listened to and learned from you was indeed true? Cause when you say Church Anglican and Catholic the Orthodox Church names date denominational as well. As not in communion with the apostolic Church. Man-made Church.

[@Johnconno]

ROGERED AWARENESS DAY?

[@newdiscourses]

:)

[@KramRemin]

WELP, now that we've pinned down the subjectivity of the gender-identity, as described by Stoller & Greenson, we can address the question of how to help effeminate boys to experience a masculine self-image (heroic poetry & role-play) and masculine girls to experience a feminine self-image. (Playing, I would think, with dolls.) Certainly we need to study CYBELE & ATTIS, in order to build a robuster phenomenology of what males with trans-ideation experience, and how they can recover from it; that is, from having their self-concept dominated by "I'm really a girl!" ideation. So much so that they . . . (gulp) . . . want to have the surgery.

[@mr.mithmoth]

Or, maybe we can just stop filling kids heads with all sorts of gender nonsense? Teach them that it isn't a choice to be a boy or girl, that it doesn't matter about any individual temperament, and just let them grow up and have as "normal" a childhood as possible.

[@KramRemin]

@@mr.mithmoth There's different populations. Some boys will take after their fathers straight-away. Some will be momma's boys, and need a lot of help to UNINSTALL the mother-oriented programming, and INSTALL the father-oriented programming. (more skills-base, less emotion and aesthetics.) It'll take more work to help the momma's boys find their masculinity, but it's well worth it.

[@mr.mithmoth]

@@KramRemin Maybe, but how about just take the "mamma's boys" and whoever else as they are, focus on leading by example? No doubt, you and everyone else, myself included, has enough work to do just trying to live as a decent human being. And if you've sorted that out for yourself, try helping just one other person. That ought to keep you busy an entire lifetime, you know?

[@KramRemin]

@@mr.mithmoth My poetic practice includes heroic poetry (Homer, Vergil, Beowulf, Sir Gawain) as well as gender-poetry that marks out an idealized passage from mama's boy (Cybele & Attis) through troubles with male role-models (Pindar Olympian #1, Odyssey Book II) and ending with Daphne & Apollo (Ovid's Metamorphoses) which represents the dawn of heterosexual interests. This program of classical poems is offered as a dialectic response, in the Christian/Classical tradition, to Bible-centered gender-programming. It's not my business to micro-manage other peoples' gender-journeys. My job is to put the poetry out there into the public space, so that it can play its catalytic role in male identity formation. ;)

[@pelqel9893]

​@@KramReminMaybe SOME males (like myself) and SOME females simply are not meant to be stereotypical. We have talents elsewhere. My issue with gender ideology is that it lures kids who are atypical (like I certainly was when young) into this cult.

[@vivienneb6199]

Lindsay is so anti-woman, and genspect hosts him like he is their spokesperson.

[@markrussell3428]

@@vivienneb6199 you need to listen more closely, there is a wave of feminists that have been at the forefront of Queer Theory. Start there.

[@theunknownatheist3815]

He’s not “anti women”. Where do you get this? 🙄

[@knoxust8558]

I’m asking in good faith, honestly what did he say that makes you think he is anti-woman, if you could please time stamp it, i genuinely want to understand

[@baconsarny-geddon8298]

Radfems define EVERY man as "Anti-woman". They use it the exact same way as "transphobe" is used- As an unsupported, evidence-free, all-purpose smear, used to silence anyone who submit themselves to your authoritrian ideology. Radfems and trans activists are two peas in a pod; In love with their own, self-imposed "victim" status. Utterly intolerant of anyone with different beliefs to their own. Happy to censor and silence ideological enemies, when they can... but cry "oppression", and suddenly LOVE free speech, when it's them being censored/silenced.

[@vivienneb6199]

@@theunknownatheist3815 He stood there, and laughed in the faces of these women when he started in on feminism. They laughed with him. Seriously? How disrespectful. What a pr*ck. The women sitting there are really st*pid if they can't see it.

[@onepartyroule]

How is "sex identity" better? It makes even LESS sense. At least "gender" is displaced to some degree. A female can at least relate to a masculine behaviour, and vice versa, but she cannot relate to having a male body, and vice versa. If you believe that concepts like "feminine" and "masculine" have utility, why would "gender" not? It's essentially the same concept; that we perceive some behaviours to trend in one sex in comparison to the other. This is what perceptions of masculine and feminine are based on, AND what perceptions of gender (the social experience of being a sex) are based on. Terms like "masculine", "feminine" and "gender" exist to refer to socially contextualised experiences and behaviours, but they derive their meaning from biological sex. Once you uproot them from sex they have no meaning, but as understood in relation to sex they have meaning and utility.

[@baconsarny-geddon8298]

ANY term that refers to sex, is ALWAYS better than one that refers to "gender" (unless describing the ideology of sex-independent "genders", itself), because it makes clear that the thing being discussed is ultimately defined by biological sex. Because the word "gender" is now synonymous with the idea of SEX-INDEPENDENT "genders"- I doesn't matter whether you INTEND it to mean that, or not- Any time you speak as if "gender" is a real thing, you are validating trans ideology, whether you want to, or not. There is a REASON they pushed so hard to normalize that word "gender", starting back in the 90's, when EVERYONE, even the most liberal feminists, tranSEXuals, and radical gay activists, spoke in terms of "SEXism", "SEX-change operations", "same SEX attraction", "SEX-based rights", etc. When they first started the systematic campaign of replacing sex with "gender", in EVERY law, corporate or univsity policy, media mentions, and in popular speech, most of assumed it was no big deal- The two words are basically synonyms, so who cares? ... but if we had been smart enough to REJECT that Trojan Horse of "gender", from ever getting into the city gates in the first place, pseudo-religious claims like "trans women ARE women", which have done incredible harm, and have largely been accepted as "truth", by many, would have been impossible to make- Without belief in sex-independent "just a social construct" of "gender", back when "man" and "woman" were universally understood to be defined by evidence-based sex, the claim that "trans women ARE women' was about as coherent as saying "up IS down" or "black IS white". The ONLY reason anyone needs a concept of "gender", is if they want to DENY evidence-based biological sex... Otherwise, anytime you might use the word "gender", you can say the exact same, just with more accuracy, and less ambiguity, with terms like "sex norms", or "sexual stereotypes" or "traditional expectations of males/females", etc. This ideology's manipulation of language has been one of it's most effective weapons; It often even controls the language of its critics, in a way that makes those critics AFFIRM the fiction of sex-independent "genders", without even realising it. When critics say stuff like "I have the right to mis-gender you!!", or "it's not illegal to not use your correct pronouns", they unthinkingly affirm that wrong-sex pronouns ARE somehow "correct" for some people, or that calling a man in a dress "he" somehow IS "mis-gendering" him. The more we adopt be and normalize the cult's language, with words like "gender", the more Orwellian control we hand over, to allow this cult to influence he we think, without even realising it.

[@onepartyroule]

@@baconsarny-geddon8298 There’s no such thing as “sex independent gender” outside of teens on tiktok. They use the word incoherently when referring to abstract and absurd identity signifiers and no one is obliged to take that seriously, and the vast majority of people don’t. The only concept of gender that has caught on is gender as social behaviour of a sex. That’s why people are so confused about “gender identity “; they know that gender is connected to sex so get confused about what is being claimed with a gender identity.It’s simply assumed that transgender people are trying to become the opposite sex through medical interventions. The word “gender” replaced “sex” because sex became the shorthand term for “sexual intercourse”. It was understood as a synonym for sex. The word gender has utility because it points towards an actual phenomena. The term “gender identity “ also points towards a phenomena (people attempting to psychologically and socially disassociate from their sex and associate with the opposite sex, often to the point of pretending to be the opposite sex) the point of contention is whether or not everyone has a gender identity (they don’t) and how we should understand the phenomena of people who claim them.

[@nancycole-auguste6614]

Gender is science and sex for humans is sacred because the raising of children is about the progress of the soul in this world and the next. Life is not about selfish desire.

[@theunknownatheist3815]

English, please. 🙄

[@larschristianalm]

«Gender doesn’t exist” So what is James referring to when he uses that word?

[@newstandardaccount]

I can talk about a tree fairy and tell you it doesn't exist - you know what I mean and I'm pretty sure you agree it doesn't exist. Conceptually you know what it means. I suspect what he means about 'gender' is that explaining transgender behavior by appealing to a 'gender identity' does not make a lot of sense. If you were going to move from California to Texas, I wouldn't describe you as being "misaligned with your state identity". But, I'm speculating somewhat.

[@slacktoryrecords4193]

He’s probably referring to the idea that ‘gender identity’ is not an empirical, observable quality like sex. Gender ideologues want gender identity to usurp sex. It’s ridiculous. But it’s also ridiculous to give a platform to this nutball.

[@oliverhug3]

Queering is just the shortcut for queer theory. If you look into Judith Butler you will notice it’s all about breaking any boundaries.

[@markrussell3428]

@@oliverhug3 If you dig into Butlers work find a good therapist to help you recover. Butler is a pretenda-man - the epitome of performative social construction. Someone so deep into her own confusion she lives it every day. Goes all the back to her pedophile hero Michel Foucault.

[@markrussell3428]

He is referring to an absolute truth.

[@HedonistPoet]

Wow, he is ignorant of his own subject. This is an embarrassment for Genspect, an otherwise good organization. Why do you keep associating with him?

[@markrussell3428]

What did you think of his work on the Hoax Study papers?

[@HedonistPoet]

@@markrussell3428 Quite good. And How to Have Impossible Conversations also good. Very good, in fact.

[@vivienneb6199]

@@markrussell3428 adolescent

[@vivienneb6199]

Yep, Lindsay condemns the entirety of Western philosophy. What is left? lmao

[@markrussell3428]

@@vivienneb6199 What are you framing as Western philosophy? Queer Theory? Post-modernist thinking and the power/oppression narrative?

[@kierasthoughts2480]

You can be all for sexual freedom and expression and still understand that biology is real. Why is he trying to put us into neat little boxes?

[@vivienneb6199]

They are laughing when he calls "feminists" "hags." He is so abusive, and these women just laugh.This is so twisted.