This Debate Went WILD - Debating “Superstraights” vs TJump

[@testoftempest]

Someone in the chat said TJump was sitting on a croissant. Give that person a medal. 🏅 0:00 Opening Statements 7:52 T Jump’s Rebuttal 8:48 Attack Helicopter? 10:42 Giga Straight? 12:24 Are Trans Women… Women? 14:10 Black People, Humans, and Aliens 17:30 What’s a Chair? 19:48 “The Problem With Your Statement” 23:46 This Cup is a Woman 26:03 Subjective Definitions Become Racist? 29:34 Women’s Restrooms, More Definitions of Women, & Unicorns 37:43 Prioritizing Feelings & Knit Picking 40:50 “Why Should I Support The Super Straight Movement?” 44:00 Does the Left Accept Neo Nazis? 47:36 Super Straight Label is a Critique of the Woke 52:00 Are Identities a Real Thing? 55:27 “It’s Not Transphobic” 57:20 Vaush’s Final Thoughts 59:17 TJump’s Final Thoughts 1:01:20 Q&A Start 1:09:29 Meme 1:15:27 Vaush Puts His Hair Down 1:18:02 Meme 1:19:32 Meme 1:21:29 Sargon

[@reneebear3641]

Glorious I love you

[@reneebear3641]

@@TurtleChad1 You got a discord server again?

[@reneebear3641]

@@TurtleChad1 Damn. You mean your account overall or just the server?

[@reneebear3641]

@@TurtleChad1 Also I remember the first time it got deleted I was one of your old admins lol

[@honest_126]

This is gonna be an interesting debate huh?

[@Restles5Time]

“Is a chair a woman?” Yet another unrealistic body standard 😔

[@katyungodly]

@@Pllayer064 to be fair, many women would enjoy having our legs folded 😏

[@aneeya9387]

@@katyungodly 😳 now I can't wait to see my partner again tomorrow

[@whatisthis1958]

@@Pllayer064 I'm sure some chick out there is into that

[@brandons9027]

Damn. Too good

[@andrewwestfall65]

Some of y'all are too innocent to remember Tokyo Gore Police, and it shows. There's a sex club where all the girls have had extreme body mods done, including a woman that is a chair

[@daxter956]

"Saying black people aren't human isn't necessarily racist" is the hardest bullet I've ever seen someone bite

[@cheems408]

He was NOT gonna let up.

[@callsignapollo_]

This man's teeth could cut diamonds after seeing him obliterate the bait on that one

[@beancheesedip8337]

He bit it *fast,* too. Vaush barely finished the sentence before he said yes. I can only assume he committed to saying yes to anything that came outta Vaush's mouth the second he heard "black people." Also, I do love that after he bit the bullet, he realized he let his mask slip a little too much, so he had to quickly come up with that weird "hypothetically, if you found that black people have alien DNA or something" argument just to cover his tracks.

[@ikumo5470]

I mean its logically consistent, right? Its just reprehensible. There is the hypothetical situation where we find some alien dna or genetic difference that make the statement "Black people arent human" technically correct (Within some arbitrary construct). But the motive of using this hypothetical information would be evil, and the utility of this information would be destructive and cause suffering. The solution in that most extreme hypothetical would be to adjust the construct of human to include whatever genetic divergence we found... Or the choice to not broaden the definition of human to include this divergence would be indicative of bigotry.

[@billieeisenhower406]

@Yeetus debeetus what now

[@luismurillo5855]

Vaush: "Biologists don't use the term biological woman" Tjump: "I don't care" Well that pretty much sums up his thought process

[@sergiarts]

tbf, one could say that Vaush is appealing to authority there and wouldn't be a good argument edit: okay people i get it lol i wasn't trying to be mean or anything

[@blackmage1276]

@@sergiarts which authorities what? Biologists?

[@luismurillo5855]

@@sergiarts I dunno if that's an "appeal to authority" perse, that's more like an appeal to consensus (what do the majority of experts say). Appeal to authority is actually more like what the anti-trans crowd likes to do when they cherry pick a few hacks (Jordan Peterson, Deborah Suh) that fit they're preconceived narrative rather than what the majority of experts have to say. I guess you could argue "appeal to consensus" is still technically a fallacy, but you would have to come up with a really good reason of why you some how know more than majority of academic experts.

[@finitely-infinite2987]

@@sergiarts TJump was basing his argument "on science" and arguing that Vaush's argument was based on feelings. I thought that was a reasonable way to refute that point. It also highlighted that TJump's argument was based on his own ontology, rather than science.

[@Kevo6492]

@@sergiarts Appeals to authority aren’t always wrong. Context matters. If it’s agreed upon by a majority of biologists that they don’t use that term than it’s reasonable to state that. This would be like calling out someone for using an argument from popularity when the discussion is around something like how much money a film made.

[@thereaIitsybitsyspider]

This man literally gave Vaush the win in his opening statement and then spent the rest of the debate trying to unsay what he said. 😂

[@Mars-fu8wb]

Lmaooo

[@goldencalf13]

Not the first time Tjump has done that

[@justinwimer707]

Only to people that are delusional enough to think dudes that think they’re women are women. T Jump is on the scientific and logical side of this, in my opinion

[@cf3714]

"Is considering a Trans-woman not a woman transphobic?" "Not necessarily." "If you defined Human as not black people, would that be racist?" "Not necessarily." This man took Vaush's hyperbolic strawmen and went double or nothing.

[@waterwarrior1382]

Honestly I'm surprised that Vaush responded to anything he said seriously after that, that argument with the follow-up that "what is a human" is empirical not socially constructed made it glaringly obvious TJump's position doesn't exist, he's just disagreeing to disagree

[@tomaszgruszka3845]

He assumed that racist/transphobic actions require racist/transphobic intent. The threshold for that dude to consider something to be bigoted is so impossibly high that barely anything can be considered transphobic/racist. But it doesn't matter because biology and sCiEnCe I guess

[@driveasandwich6734]

@@17jahbh There is no legitimate reason for saying somethung like that.

[@JohnCena-ew1mf]

@@17jahbh Prove that people who believe in redefining words are insane.

[@driveasandwich6734]

@@17jahbh 1. I was actually referring to the second claim in the comment you were originally Talking about. 2. Wanna make an argument by actually trying to back your claim or are you just being dismissive of academic consensus for fun?

[@jonsnow5513]

TJump is a what happens when an Anti-SJW Reddit server becomes sentient.

[@johnrzepka2008]

The ai of Reddit bots is wild

[@Alex-cw3rz]

😂😂 trueee

[@jakespacepiratee3740]

@@johnrzepka2008 I find it odd that the "lol reddit" joke is maintained in this community. I could be wrong but I thought that joke just started because 4chan hated Reddit for being left-wing, so they told the rest of the internet to behave that way and they obeyed. Thats what happened, right?

[@OhWellWhatTheHell1]

r/intellectualdarkweb type beat

[@yougonedunit4115]

No you're making a hasty generalization fallacy

[@RawMaterialENT]

"you claim to be tolerant, yet you do not tolerate the intolerant? curious. I am very smart"

[@lorenabuck2423]

It's always the "self defense" that you from right, such ignorant idiots

[@NIN0ID]

@@lorenabuck2423 I had a stroke reading this

[@lorenabuck2423]

@@NIN0ID sorry my English isn't that good

[@lorenabuck2423]

I mean the right wing is always on the defense when it's comes to real life problems and experiences

[@vanmello1680]

@@lorenabuck2423 Oh okay you pass the vibe check

[@Vincepenalty]

Damn half way through and TJ's only argument is: "I'm too smart to understand your point" followed by grunts and wincing noises.

[@john-paulhunt442]

name that jrpg enemy in the beastary.

[@Eb0nut]

for real! he was whining and grumbling the whole time lol. how do you expect to be perceived as smart if you start crying the second someone interrupts your 10 minute speech?

[@shhs1227]

@@Eb0nut interrupts his 10 minute speech after he himself interrupts vaush at least 15 times before that

[@T-I-M-E.42]

This guy literally knows nothing. He could argue with himself, and both versions of him would lose.

[@gishgish5195]

That’s a hasty generalization. Saying ALL Tjumps would lose

[@johnnyguillotine1673]

@@gishgish5195 you're right... The earth loses as well as every person breathing air that TJump is wasting with his stupidity.

[@EclipseOfTsuki93]

That's a genetic fallacy lol

[@pooshoveler]

Lol

[@pooshoveler]

@@rigroll1612 lol. Based like a huge pile of shit.

[@sanitorz232]

“I trust science” also: “I don’t care what biologists say”

[@Juan-rz1lt]

Not everything that biologists says is science.

[@ashwilliams1725]

@@Juan-rz1lt That's besides the point. Every scientific thing you can say about biology came from a biologist somewhere along the line.

[@CharlieApples]

@@Juan-rz1lt Not everything that Christians say is Christlike.

[@HeroOfTheDay16]

He's probably anti-vax and/or a covid denier too i doubt this is as far as his ignorance goes

[@Plushiecandie]

literally every transphobe

[@lokalcrow1470]

Someone in chat said "this is literally the Patrick meme" (the "is this your wallet?") and I'm writing this to thank that person because I've been crying my eyes out since.

[@lokalcrow1470]

Best part is that it happened when they were at the: - How do definitions happen? - We make them up. - Which means they are...? - Subjective. - So the definition of woman would be subjective, correct? - No, it's objective when based on biology and history.

[@rainbowlemniscate2761]

literally all conservative talking points require this level of cognitive dissonance from the facts they accept to the conclusions they make

[@KARKAT420]

@@lokalcrow1470 “It’s not my wallet.”

[@silverstein8308]

@@lokalcrow1470 wouldn't everything be subjective then? Like for example what counts as a dog would be subjective as well then by that logic right? ( I'm not trying to be a smart ass I'm just curious)

[@chichogp]

@@silverstein8308 Yes, that's why it's important to understand social constructs in terms of definitions.

[@junfaa]

He said that the super straight thing was never meant to be a serious identity and then wonders why people don't accept it.

[@KayLee-lw5iv]

"Biologists don't-" "I don't care... The scientific definition" I have nothing more to gain from this...

[@chilldragon4752]

That pretty much sums up this debate. I did enjoy laughing at his positions though

[@brianbridges8124]

biologists do differentiate between women who biologically born with female genitals and women who transitioned from being a man. Vaush is just delusional about this....... i mean slow it down and really think about it........ people who study the anatomical differences between sexes have no word or criteria to distinguish between biological and tans women...... thats insane haha, vaush is waaaaay off here.

[@4pple.p13]

Vaush: *says literally anything* Tjump: 😠😯🤨😬no😟😩🥴🤔no😬😮🤔no🤨🤓 fallacy🤓

[@blue5had0w]

Yo his face was looking all kinds of crazy 🤣

[@winston3737]

Science!

[@ThompYT]

"wait wait wait wait wait wait wati wait wait"

[@DIRTYD33DSDON3DIRTCHEAP]

That’s the hasty generalization fallacy 🤦‍♂️

[@AmaraTheBarbarian]

I mean the argument that there aren't even any logical fallacies in vaush's argument is pretty sound. For a genetic fallacy to be valid the current usage of super straight would have to differ from its original use to invalidate trans people, and since the common usage of the term hasn't changed that fallacy is invalid, coincidentally he also bases his accusation of the hasty generalization on his previous assertion of a genetic fallacy, we have sufficient data to conclude super straights are transphobic by vaush's definition because being transphobic is a part of the "identity" which means we don't really have to poll a large number of super straights to find out if they actually think trans people are valid in their chosen identity, the trait we're looking for is inherent in the sample. TJump however, and I love this, commits a fallacy fallacy in assuming that an argument that contains a logical fallacy automatically invalidates the conclusion

[@rikachiu]

Biologists disagree with you. "I don't care" Then claims that ALL scientists and philosophers agree with him

[@5driedgrams]

The guy is full dishonest.

[@Skibbityboo0580]

@@5driedgrams It takes a lot of work to debate liars like this, and I applaud people that have the patients to do it.

[@showtheshow3397]

Honestly? Powermove, but that dude's STILL a dumbfuck. It's like if somebody accused you of a crime you committed and you just went "I did not commit that crime" while walking off.

[@SamGlaze]

@@showtheshow3397 Yeah, in a way you have to admire it. "I believe in objective categories like biology" "Biologists would disagree with you" "I don't care"

[@ellieosteen]

That’s what kept getting on my nerves about this moron. He kept claiming that science was his reason for being transphobic BUT SCIENCE DISAGREES WITH HIM

[@cowsmoogo]

Vaush: "how do we determine speciation?" TJump: "We make out best guess through induction." Vaush: "YEAH, WE MADE IT THE FUCK UP!"

[@psychopompous489]

They guy who came up with speciation: "MY SOURCE IS I MADE IT THE FUCK UP"

[@nobleradical2158]

@@psychopompous489-Charles Darwin, 1853

[@ThatisnotHair]

Yeah therefore concept is not grounded in reality at all

[@Tastyduckling5]

@@ThatisnotHairis this ironic or do you actually believe something so stupid

[@brandons9027]

​@@ThatisnotHairIt's grounded in reality.It's just not describing reality. It's a frame that we use for explanatory power in regards to how life develops. Like in fact, you could say that gravity doesn't actually exist.It's a theory that we use to explain phenomenon we see in nature.

[@ScreachHiensburg]

Vaush: "Science and scientists say-" TJump: "I don't care." And...he thinks he's the one with fact?

[@bvishal2kn]

TJump had several easy questions he could have asked like: Do you think "Demi-sexual" is valid? because if it is he could have made a case for super straight. instead, he kept going back to this "Biology" thing.

[@AT-AT26]

@BattleMage wait how? Isn’t Demi-sexual just when you only feel attraction after an emotional bond with someone? How can that be used to defend super straights?

[@bvishal2kn]

@@AT-AT26 I see some people on the left who seem to be describing "Types" into their own "sexuality". If you can make the case that only attracted to autistic people is a sexuality or "Emotional Bond" is a sexuality. I guess you can say only attracted to Cis people is a sexuality as well. Important to know this is a small minority.

[@SA-mo3hq]

For these brainlets, facts = my feels

[@aufhebenx3662]

@@AT-AT26 it can't be. Demi-sexuality is a specific sub-category of the asexual sexuality. Such people such as myself do not feel primary sexual attraction but will have sex with those we have an emotional connection with. There is scientific research on asexuality.

[@Sprite_525]

TJump citing Blair White, Sargon of Akkad AND Black Pigeon Speaks as his inspiration -- says ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW 😆

[@joverlockp]

It made my brain hurt. "2 Nazis agree with me. So I'm right."

[@0wolfmoon]

Remember that time when Raid: Shadow Legends sponsored black pigeon speaks? You know, an actual white nationalist?

[@notimuscrime9477]

@@0wolfmoon Yeah that's about what I expect from Raid: Shadow Legends.

[@worldviewdetective9456]

@@0wolfmoon Raid: Shadow Legends will literally sponsor anyone with enough subs/views.

[@SA-mo3hq]

The Brainstem Trust - no supratentorial activity, guaranteed

[@Alex-cw3rz]

Vaush : hi- Tjump : *scoff*, rolls his head around like he's in the Exorcist

[@TariqNasheed117]

No lie, I wanted to deck him

[@Alex-cw3rz]

@UCCpOWnaMQR1ZpeBZqWFoFSw I stole it from myself

[@zacharypegg7051]

@@TariqNasheed117 I'm glad I'm not the only one. He crossed into "insufferable douchebag" territory with the quickness.

[@njester025]

That’s a greeting fallacy actually

[@Alex-cw3rz]

@@njester025 that's a comment fallacy I think you've just made

[@moonblaze2713]

"By our definition, stating a transwoman is not a woman is transphobic." "Saying that anyone who says a transwoman isn't a woman is transphobic is a hasty generalization phallacy." I can't wrap my head around how he thought this was an appropriate response.

[@bigpooper4156]

Simple: he does not think.

[@GrayYeonWannabe]

phallacy 😂

[@psychopompous489]

Assuming someone saying "I hate trans women" is transphobic is a hasty generalization fallacy because how do you know it's not opposite day?

[@captainphoenix]

We know.

[@beamerkiller11]

TJump: "I don't care that the overwhelming majority of biologists agree with your definition of sex/gender" Also TJump: "I only care about biology!"

[@timinator20o0]

They dont though. lmao

[@beamerkiller11]

@@timinator20o0 don't overthink how wrong you are.

[@Ireallyneedintensivetherapy]

@@timinator20o0 prove it

[@beamerkiller11]

@Vincent H.I don't see the point in making an argument debunking an obviously false and unsubstantiated claim. I'm sorry you're not clever though. 🤷 Try harder, I guess?

[@hannahmander7607]

@@timinator20o0 It's more than just biologists, though. The better part of the whole scientific field that would be applicable to this debate does agree that gender and sex are not entirely binary and have a lot more nuance than seen on first blush. I know this won't sit well with some people, but I fall back on how gender and sex is viewed in the field of psychology. The standard in psychology is that while sex is generally determined by biological signs (ie the presence or lack of certain chromosomes, reproductive organs, hormones, etc), gender is purely a psychosocial construct and does not necessarily reflect the individual's assigned sex. And that's not even mentioning how sex is not completely binary (for example, being intersex), let alone gender identity and gender expression.

[@Faith-lx7jn]

When TJump said “All scientists and philosophers agree with me”, I ACTUALLY had to pause the video and take a break, I think it took years off my life

[@TaosoftheVoid]

Theoretically, I could replay that clip enough times that I will just instantly drop dead. It'd be to much torture to listen to it even one more time tho

[@djjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj]

All? That's just a hasty generalization fallacy I think 😡

[@lifeboat6284]

him saying that defining black people as not human is not racist depending on the circumstances, then realising the mask came off and tried to suture that shit back onto his face by talking about alien DNA. that broke me

[@supermutantsam1160]

And you can tell that he literally only believes that out of assumption, he’s never looked into what philosophers or biologists say on this subject in his life

[@brandonburough1215]

This is his go-to statement when he is backed up into a corner. He says it all the time when he has no real rebuttal.

[@LDsprite]

Tjump stubbing his toe: "Oof ouch owie, that's a hasty generalization fallacy ! ! !"

[@flamingogh_]

All people who stub their toes say ouch 🙄

[@Altitudes]

TJump throwing his own excrement across the room: "All the philosophers and experts agree this is how to win an argument"

[@dannysdungareedanceoff8481]

Not all the stubbing are painful

[@mr.negativenancy5751]

@@flamingogh_ Ouch was 1 of 8 words there. Also I just go Ooooooooooo

[@mushroomkaat2667]

When I stub my toe one of two things happens always with out fail 1: *long sigh* fallowed by thoughts of how I should really watch where I'm going 2 : FUCK !!! AAAAAAAGHH GOD FUCKING DAM IT I KEEP DOING IT IN THE SAME PLACE LIKE EVERY TIME UUUUGGH *tries not to cry and walks it off * I'm clumsy is what I'm getting at

[@shortymccutlery8919]

I like how he looks and sounds like he’s in physical pain listening to Vaush explain why he’s wrong, priceless.

[@nate-yl6fx]

My man is in pure agony through out the whole video lmfao

[@captainphoenix]

Yeah Vaush is physically painful to listen to.

[@BlueTyphoon2017]

@@captainphoenix yeah it’s painful when he explains why you’re stupid.

[@littlemoth4956]

@@captainphoenix How so?

[@DumbAsh00]

​@@captainphoenix yeah it can be painful to listen to someone explain why your entire stance is baseless and ignorant

[@qcomix1411]

"woke, SJW, feminist ideology" Ooo boy, this is gonna be a shitshow"

[@Yr_218]

The name TJump is a guarantor for that.

[@SA-mo3hq]

It's a neapolitan ice cream of shitty ideas!

[@NerdyPunk93]

Is he broken? He keeps pulling that Popeye face when his argument is dismantled in front of him.

[@nukiradio]

I think he's used to smudging past real criticism

[@katyungodly]

He thinks cringing makes him correct

[@aby110]

"If I pretend hard enough that my opponent is stupid maybe they'll think I'm winning", copium

[@freedomofmusic2112]

His face contorts so much, it's painful to imitate

[@Yimika777]

LMAOOOO

[@MetalGearRaxis]

This guy's just making the "so much for the tolerant left!" meme as an argument.

[@francesevans5555]

LMAO

[@mirac2958]

omg underrated comment

[@bigpooper4156]

Dude is stuck in 2016

[@ari_metal95]

His whole political world view seems to be based on memes

[@Plushiecandie]

This guy is literally just the aesthetics of intellectualism. Using academic language while not knowing what any of it means lmao

[@gobackpls3029]

The irony of this comment

[@clarkkimber5427]

@@gobackpls3029 that'd be a sick burn if they were 12 years old. And not taking part in important discourse.

[@zacheryeckard3051]

@@gobackpls3029 You think Tjump knows what any of these words mean?

[@gobackpls3029]

@@zacheryeckard3051 considering he’s prob been proficient in philosophy longer than you’ve been alive, then probably not

[@zacheryeckard3051]

@@gobackpls3029 I might actually be older than Tjump. And he's CLEARLY not proficient in philosophy, don't even get started.

[@superlink235]

This guy is arguing "Separate but equal", but as we've seen in history, that's not how things play out, humans will always disenfranchise based on social speration.

[@nuanceblacksywin4868]

Yeah. The point is that trans women want to be seen as women, and not as some intergalactic breed of extra cool aliens. Tjump is so stupid and dishonest that I can barely watch any videos that he's in.

[@superlink235]

@@nuanceblacksywin4868 I question whether he's being dishonest, or if he just legitimately believes in the things he's saying, it's the same libertarian 101 shit, "In a perfect world void of human corruption, bias, and self interest, the builder of a building would do his absolute best to create a quality product that will make people weed out the inferior builders" 😵😵😵

[@stacymlem]

I was thinking this the entire time!

[@nuanceblacksywin4868]

@@benny399 I absolutely don't think that it's possible to change his mind. He doesn't care about facts or science. That's just his facade. As he said, he'd debate anything for money. And that looks to be the case. He doesn't give a shit that he's ignorant as fuck. Did you see his debate with Skylar Fiction on morality? That's a while back now. Tjump as usual, made NO SENSE. I just don't get why people listen to him. I get propel listening to e-girls even when theyre vapid as hell. But Tjump doesn't have looks, he doesn't have charisma, he doesn't have humour, and he doesn't have brains. He's just worthless garbage. So why does he have followers?

[@nuanceblacksywin4868]

@@benny399 I guess. On that note I'd like to see Destiny review this debate.

[@tabbycat2154]

“Science.” “Is it a construct?” “Yes.” “So how did you come to this factual conclusion?” “Science. It’s not subjective.”

[@nukiradio]

Science of the Gaps?

[@MusaMansu]

Science is on Tjumps side.

[@jaidenthekid6051]

@@MusaMansu Not when he invokes it like this.

[@MusaMansu]

@@jaidenthekid6051 I don’t see how. Does biological sex exist? Yes. That’s all he was saying. He said he doesn’t even have. A problem with dating trans people personally. He’s just recognizing that biological sexy is real.

[@MusaMansu]

@@LegendaryHewy They haven’t proven that at all. What is a woman to you?

[@OutdatedBeverage]

Isn’t he doing a “hasty generalisation fallacy” when assuming that all leftists believe every single identity that you can conceive of ever should be recognised as legitimate???

[@peepeeman4740]

By that same vein, how do you decide what is and isnt a valid identity? and is everyone that doesnt agree with this incorporeal filter just written off as a bigot?

[@OutdatedBeverage]

@@peepeeman4740 this is a strange response to what I said. I only inferred that by handpicking some leftists who think that all identities are legitimate regardless of any other applicable context and ignoring the majority of leftists who recognise that some identities are worth recognising and some aren’t he is committing a hasty generalisation fallacy, by definition. He is taking a small sample size and applying it across the board, the majority of leftists do not believe this is true. It’s literally the attack-helicopter meme. Leftists don’t actually believe you can identify as an attack helicopter. In response to what you’ve just said, we already have a process by determining this in society, it’s not just a left leaning thing (which is clearly where he and probably you are aiming this imagined gestured hypocrisy). if there’s any scientific or empirical basis, if there’s any real social utility, these are the things you take into account. This is a weird kind of attempt at gotcha I have to say.

[@snakearekat2634]

Nah that would just be the "generalization fallacy".

[@OutdatedBeverage]

@@snakearekat2634 he made a claim based on a small amount of evidence, the small amount of evidence being the extraordinarily few sincere leftists on this planet that think you can identify as anything that can be conceived of

[@ashrobin55]

@@peepeeman4740 harm, and sincerity. If an identity causes harm, IE things like MAPs, or folks into zoophilia it's not valid. If the person admits its all a troll, then it's also not valid.

[@ember8005]

I love how he keeps making the 'hasty generalisation' fallacy accusation, then tells people to Google it. Then people Google it and a bunch of people tell him he's wrong in the Q&A and he keeps going with it. Incredible, amazing.

[@hayleyxyz]

These people are such cowards Just say you find trans women disgusting. I'd have more respect for that tbh

[@DeathProductions200]

Same

[@Matty002]

respect? for these types of people? never the only good thing about people who dont hide their hate is you save time trying to figure out if someone you just met is worth associating with

[@Drogon7102]

@@Matty002 he didnt say they agree, just that they respect it. Probably because of its honestly and bluntness.

[@jessethomas9676]

You would have more respect if we lied to you? Y’all really do have ass backwards morals

[@Matty002]

@@Drogon7102 OP is saying they would respect a hateful person. history is full of examples of bad hateful people being treated with respect and the outcomes are never good. obligatory hitler reference here. a good society doesnt tolerate hate, much less respect it

[@wesleyskinner9477]

O lord, you “debated” TJump? He doesn’t believe a majority of the positions in these. He just likes to debate because he thinks he’s more intelligent than everyone else. Dude has learned like 1 or 2 things about philosophy and thinks it makes him qualified to boil every debate down to a philosophical argument. He just follows a script that gives him an out for everything. Not an honest interlocutor.

[@Kevo6492]

It’s pretty clear that’s the case considering his contradictions and using subjective/objective when it’s convenient.

[@Alex-cw3rz]

From this discussion that is plainly obvious

[@brownleaf_o1]

He leans from science to not caring about it in 1 second lmao

[@Cory_Springer]

1:41:49 "pay me and I'll debate about anything" - Tjump

[@TWENTYFO5]

The crux of his argument was that it’s not inherently transphobic to identify as ‘super straight’ and he’s right. Don’t know why vaush wouldn’t concede that simple point.

[@kestral63]

"I don't care about scientists. Anyway my argument is science and all scientists agree with me." Tjump twisting his head into a pretezel to match his arguments

[@kaiza6467]

TJump: "You're incoherent, you don't know how reality works, I know more than you do! You not understanding biology isn't my problem!" Also Tjump: "We tell species apart by guessing." Perfect example of the Dunning Kruger effect. 🤣

[@RagingRugbyst]

Like he could have cited P values and diagnostic weights of certain traits, as in, we gather evidence until we can ascertain a set number of traits that reliably enough allow us to tell apart two species. Then though he would have been confronted by the fact that the trans woman category shares a lot of highly diagnostic traits with the category woman. Like... I lift weights for a living and would have sounded less appallingly misguided in my understanding.

[@alessandromorelli5866]

@@RagingRugbyst No but, the thing with social constructs is that, and especially given than in reality most things are part of a spectrum, the way the line that divides those things apart from one another is chosen by us. I really LOVE Phylosophy Tube´s video: "Social Constructs | Philosophy Tube", it´s so ducking good at explaining the concept it singlehandedly made me understand the entire thing and I could never do it enough justice.

[@lazerhosen]

In the first 40 seconds of this video the guy says "ecksetera." When I hear that I immediately lose faith in the person's intelligence.

[@taliaeategg2027]

Science.

[@taliaeategg2027]

@@lazerhosen that's the better way of pronouncing it

[@curtbressler3127]

TJump - "My social construct is more objective than your social construct!" Objectivity - "🤦‍♀️🤦‍♂️"

[@curtbressler3127]

@Michael Hayes Exactly....sorta....not really. Objectivity is not on a scale....subjectivity is. TJump was slinging 'objective' and 'subjective' around as though they're interchangeable...they're not. I agree....everything we utilize to interact with each other has been socially constructed...we made them up, we change them to suit our needs...and they vary depending on the company we currently find ourselves. I don't believe anyone can be 'objective' so, of course, not all socially constructed 'constructs' are equally weighted. But that doesn't make anything or anyone 'objective'; nor does it gives us a glimpse into what IS objective. TJump tried to claim 'objectivity' through 'subjective' arguments as though they were refuting Vaush's 'subjective' arguments....which is why he failed so hard.

[@Andrew4Handel]

Biological sex is a physical reality. That is why 7 billion plus humans exist.

[@alexanderoneill6160]

Tjump believes in objective morality while vaush believes its a social construct its not a fact which view is correct.

[@zacheryeckard3051]

@@alexanderoneill6160 Moralitt has never been demonstrated to exist outside of the human mind. So no, Tjump's appeal to "objective morality" is just ignorant.

[@christianmccauley7340]

@@alexanderoneill6160 objective morality is silly.

[@lonerbox]

1:00:24 - "it's not transphobic because you haven't said they're better or worse" i guess 'separate but equal' wasn't bigoted then i wonder if tjump considers his definition of bigotry to be an objective one

[@bananewane1402]

A chair is only a woman if she’s actually a woman with a human furniture kink

[@gulfgiggleanimations4472]

must have watched beauty and the beast and the brave little toaster a bit too much in her formative years

[@CrumCringle]

All chairs are women

[@bananewane1402]

@@CrumCringle Grammatical gender?

[@liberaldriller9884]

Table legs are more alluring than chair legs

[@mitchellhoward3209]

But what if they show up to pride?

[@TheKid377400]

"How do you know?" "Science" I love it when people who know nothing about science invoke science.

[@Alex-cw3rz]

This guy is trying to meme but is too angry at trans people to make a joke. It's why conservatives are always terrible comedians, they just get angry and forget to tell a joke.

[@AR15ORIGINAL]

tbh I can kinda understand that try making jokes about police brutality or politicians being pieces of shit

[@Alex-cw3rz]

@@AR15ORIGINAL I get what you mean, but I think gallows humour and a mentality of it being the norm that never seems to change, means this type of forget-to-do-the-comedy-bit isn't really present on the left. Dave Chapelle (probably not a leftist, but on the issue of police brutality) is an example of how we joke about it.

[@jakespacepiratee3740]

"Deviant people are bad. Obey state, and if state not like us, undermine state until we control it. Then obey state." -Conservative media in a nutshell

[@mt-zf6xp]

I understand the criticisms of the kid that made up "super-straight", but what if instead of thinking of trans-women as not "real women" like that tool, you're just a man that is turned off by knowing that the woman you're seeing used to have a penis? Is that just a "you're too in your own head, and need to work on that" kind of thing, or is that valid? I'm asking this as a straight dude who probably would date a post-op trans-woman. I'm just interested in the logic of this whole discussion. This might be dumb af lol

[@odb1612]

gustav nobody cares

[@lilacpilot3437]

It's amusing to see TJump falsely label arguments he doesn't like fallacies.

[@jamielee7404]

Well he gave himself away in the first seconds saying that his problem is that people claim something is wrong with his character. And since something IS wrong with his character he's gonna try hard not to listen to arguments

[@burnttoast111]

He's too busy poisoning the well to notice.

[@ncucomics287]

It's funny because if you look up the fallacies he tells you to, he's actually right. Vaush looked pathetic so he projected TJump look like an idiot to cover up the fact he was getting destroyed with valid arguments.

[@burnttoast111]

@@ncucomics287 Give your best example with a timestamp.

[@clockwork_mind]

@@ncucomics287 if you were paying attention to Vaush's argument, and *know what transphobia means,* neither of which TJump did, you would know that Vaush was never making a hasty generalization fallacy between TJump and other transphobes, he was saying that what TJump was saying, even in total isolation of other transphobes, is by definition transphobic. The biggest failure of Vaush in this debate was not pointing out any of the dozen times it came up, and never explained to this doofus what transphobia *actually is.*

[@turbocat8329]

TJump might be willing to date a trans woman, but I really doubt any trans women wanna date him.

[@lurkingposter]

Maybe Blaire White

[@hollya.6727]

@@lurkingposter 🤣🤣🤣🤣 If Blaire ever dumps joey, this man should be hers.

[@Shigawire]

Shush. Don't ruin the hopes of TJump. He might be incel.

[@sphenodon2016]

pretty easy to claim you'd date a person who'd never date you because you don't validate their identity. like, I'd date a nazi! but I think Nazis are disgusting people too pathetic to see anything in themselves that makes them special except race. you'd be hard pressed to find any Nazis lining up for me despite my pale skin and blue eyes

[@firerunner35624]

Historical oppressors bragging about their ideologies is what "super straight" is. They aren't the underdog. They're the system.

[@Alex-cw3rz]

Take a shot everytime he say's "hypocrisy of the woke community"

[@123sarge123]

I can't man, I wont make it ;-;

[@sera9349]

He literally said that while i was reading your comment lmao

[@brickowls7886]

don't do this, you'll be dead halfway through

[@v8ali8]

The real killer is taking a shot every time he says "I don't care"

[@njester025]

That’s actually a hypocrisy fallacy

[@jewberto1220]

I'd argue being attracted to transwomen is being superstraight, as you're attracted to all forms of women

[@Yeonoson]

I believe if you search "SuperStraight - Deirdre thehun", you'll get a stand-up comedy routine based on that concept. Oh, the comedian is Robin Tran and the set is "Does that make me gay?". Accidentally promoted a re-upload.

[@EF-wy3di]

If I recall correctly, the super straight really meant super heterosexual. As in you are only attracted to people of the opposite sex. But I guess super straight rolls off the tongue better because the goal was to meme and not make a serious argument.

[@aneeya9387]

Trueeeee

[@humesspoon3176]

Perhaps I’m misconstruing SS, but I thought it’s only an attraction to ciswomen (whilst being a cis male)? Not women altogether.

[@aneeya9387]

@@humesspoon3176 and how would anyone know if someone is cis or trans unless they tell you?

[@UnorthodoxIndividual]

I was in chat for this one, and wow that guy is dense. Citing Sargon and Blaire White as respectable figures with reasonable positions on this issue? Lmao

[@spindabrian69]

Return to monke

[@RavensB3ard]

Yes! TJump did the exact same thing in a previous debate with another, smaller political KZbinr called Jangles the Science Lad. It was on the same topic and on the same Modern Day Debate platform. He cited Sargon, Blair White, and Black Pigeon Speaks as reasonable figureheads on the Super Straight. And Vaush was right. Dude lost all ounce of credibility by citing an ethno-stater, a transphobic sellout, and an uber-racist, respectively. My mouth dropped. I was just sitting there thinking to myself, “Like, dude, seriously? Are you for real or is this a troll?”

[@vanmello1680]

@@RavensB3ard By the way, BPS isn't just racist - just full on JQ neo nazi lol. Just amazing, I know

[@RavensB3ard]

@@vanmello1680 ugh! How could I forget? Yes, you’re right. Truly amazing, indeed. But yeah, there’s a wealth of great response videos and other information out there documenting BPS’s Holocaust denialism, weird JQ pushing, and Nazi ideology. One really can’t miss it unless they’re just willfully ignorant...

[@comyuse9103]

@@TurtleChad1 what? i lost all faith about 10 minutes in, how did you keep up for so long?

[@mrs_trains_6213]

As a trans person, here’s my take. If you have a genitalia preference and because of that you choose not to date a trans person, then that’s fine. If you don’t like said trans person as a person (they may be rude or something) that’s not transphobic. What IS transphobic, is if neither of those two factors apply and just BECAUSE the person is trans and you choose not to date them, that is transphobic

[@mrs_trains_6213]

Also, studies show that people who have met a trans person are 50% less likely to be transphobic

[@ms.aelanwyr.ilaicos]

☝️

[@chrispfeiffer6905]

Literally😭 Its so fucking easy

[@Teratoma..]

I understand your meaning but this is pretty uncharitable in a way. Say I'm a man who wants kids and isnt interested in adopting, am I a transphobe for not wanting to date a trans woman?

[@zoewheelwright2325]

@Teratoma surrogacy is an option and also plenty of cis people are infertile without knowing it anyway. Also not all trans woman/femme people don't have functional reproductive organs. The transphobia is the reasoning being about a generalisation of trans people rather than a specific preference

[@MisterSarcastic]

Vaush: Would defining ‘human’ in such a way that excluded black people make you racist? TJump: It depends Imagine not wanting to concede an argument this hard LMAOOOO

[@crishealingvtuber8626]

It's funny, to be fair I'm just that stubborn lol.

[@diegorincon4673]

It’s like when MTG said that the Hitler statues should’ve stayed up.

[@ethanthefrank2973]

I think the most irritating part of tjumps whole shtick here isn’t that he’s being transphobic and whatnot, it’s the unyielding confident stupidity.

[@eroope5713]

I dOnT cArE...

[@shortymccutlery8919]

confidence and stupidity are insufferable, agreed!

[@Kropothead]

That’s the only really offensive thing about it. He’s always confidently and comprehensively wrong. Fractally wrong. Equally wrong on all observable levels.

[@supermutantsam1160]

For me it was him getting pissy whenever Vaush would start asking clarifying questions, telling Vaush to not interrupt him, but then he would literally interrupt every single sentence out of Vaush’s mouth for the entire debate. He did it constantly

[@MizterMissile]

@@supermutantsam1160 SAME. I kept getting so goddamn frustrated. Plus all his baby-back-bitch sighing when Vaush spoke, and he cut him off constantly when he didn't like what V was saying! He literally said TO VAUSH, "No, I know more than you." "You are so ignorant about this." bro, w h e r e ? ! ! ? ? He was also honestly just lacking basic damn respect and debate etiquette. Sounded like a child huffing and groaning like he's too good for a conversation that he didn't even bother to bring facts to. Oh. My. Gods.

[@danielemazzali9810]

If he is attracted to "biological women" that may include trans men, does he realize that?

[@Kazoo_man64]

How did i never consider this? These “super straights” are actually more gay than regular straights.

[@millartiste]

Ddddamn that's sus dude

[@brandonsolis6911]

Well to be fair he does state multiple times he would date a trans woman

[@pebbles3609]

@@thephoenix756 but, they are, in his eyes, a biological woman 👀

[@AnimeGirlYaoiChan]

@@thephoenix756 But they are- many men fetishize them unfortunately

[@WordsinSpanishSam]

1:23:43 “I’ve been called racist for claiming that black people... aren’t human” - The look on James face Omg I choked

[@caydensmith3291]

Christ. This dude saying "I'm saying their not real women" then just ignoring vaush makes me want to fucking scream

[@sterlingmorse5409]

@Gustav 1 No, they are real women

[@caydensmith3291]

@Gustav 1 please tell me you're fucking joking

[@thephoenix756]

@@caydensmith3291 What makes them women?

[@complimentbotd7232]

That really is what his whole argument depends on and even admitted it was just a copy paste of the 2014 attack helicopter craze despite knowing that craze died down because it was so thoroughly disproven that everyone stopped using it. Everytime Vaush points out something inconsistent or asks Tom to explain the reasoning of something he gets so visibly upset I actually can't stop laughing

[@caydensmith3291]

@@thephoenix756 ok so. Let's start by differentiating between sex and gender. Sex is the biological factors blah blah blah. Gender is the expression of specific traits and identifying with that label. Transwomen identify as women and Express what we consider to be traits of women. Therefore they're women. Does that kind of make sense in a very simplistic way? I obviously didn't go very in depth here but that's the gist

[@Kevo6492]

It’s not a hasty generalization when ‘super straight’ was born out of signaling out trans women. But when my back is up against the wall I suppose it would be wise just to shout out fallacies and see what sticks.

[@neoqwerty]

Honestly just going "You do know that superstraight got made up by 4chan edgelords, right?" alone should make anyone who isn't a 4chan dumbass decide not to use that anymore.

[@mechanomics2649]

lmao the guy just throws it out like Vaush activated his trap card.

[@Arcofanunholyempire]

Yeah he must have been confused what he is saying sounds more like a Association fallacy.

[@mcblu9344]

Vaush…..this was amazing. I found your channel as a capitalist and a conservative. Just listening to you do your thing has shown me that I support racism, and the horrible treatment of the wellbeing of human kind. In my defense, I was being an idiot and didn’t even realize it. Thanks for all you do vaush. My entire philosophy towards life has changed and thanks for that

[@tsharabrown3719]

Welcome to Leftyland. Glad to have you with us.

[@nickelliott5182]

Character development, you love to see it

[@tyrennosaur]

That sounds like it requires a lot of character growth and self reflection. Proud of ya :)

[@ohydekszalej]

Absolute king! Now - please try to move friends with you!

[@monkyfunny2171]

based growing as a person

[@scottdrouin9378]

This debate was such a word salad on Tjump's part that I literally couldn't even follow the counter-arguments Vaush was making, because he had to peel back so many layers of this rotten bullshit banana just to get to the nutty core that I got lost along the path and somehow ended up playing scrabble. I want the brains that melted out of my ears back

[@snaddle6428]

I love how you worded this hahaha

[@AkerfeldtTveitan-yi4xm]

It's just like Vaush said. He's not even wrong. His arguments are too incoherent and inconsistent to even address properly.

[@waldoc2829]

I like when he just cites "Science" with the confidence of somebody who doesn't know what science is.

[@UltaFlame]

Dunning kruger...

[@jontraz5993]

@@UltaFlame science.

[@calebwooten7732]

Yes, of course. To determine what a woman is, we science at it.

[@chiraagshah269]

He uses the same "science" argument in debates with religious people. In those situations he maintains his smugness, despite using it with the same moronic confidence 🙄

[@originalslothking]

@@chiraagshah269 I mean I personally like him in his debates with religious people because he actually can argue his case far better in those circles. Unfortunately he's unable to incorporate sociology and social systems a lot more. He doesn't understand how important the sociological research and peer reviewed papers are. I wish he could come to understand that we are a social species and therefore sociology would still be an important discipline to consider.

[@etherealsky7078]

Can we just add “reductio ad attack helicopterum” to the list of logical fallacies already?

[@etherealsky7078]

I know it’s technically an appeal to ridicule btw...

[@snakearekat2634]

That would be fun lol

[@anikmonette2140]

That comment section is hilarious. Not even joking! 😄

[@erin1569]

@@Juan-rz1lt watch this video

[@seasonalsnap3846]

@@Juan-rz1lt Vaush not only addressed this point in this video, but even time stamped it in the description

[@jalioswilinghart]

TJump: "Sepprate but equal" Vaush: "Enforcing separation is not equal" TJump: "Well its 'mostly equal', so I'm right"

[@nukiradio]

Bill Nye the Confirmation Bias Guy

[@kylehayden3113]

V: The aspect that makes this transphobic is not that it says one is better than the other. It's that it implies trans women are not women. T: But you can draw a distinction without saying one is better than the other!!

[@QuartzIsAnOxide]

Fun fact: Even in biology the criteria used to define a species varies a lot depending on the field of study, because it's a social construct and researchers use whichever definition provides _them_ with more utility. Some centre around the ability to reproduce and exclude other species, some centre around phylogeny, some centre around the ecological niche, and some centre around genetic proximity. It pisses me off when transphobes co-opt science to justify their unjustifiable morals.

[@spookyfirkser]

THANK YOU. We were just having this conversation at work! The ability of two animals to have fertile offspring is a very common qualifier for speciae, so would a 300-lb male mastiff and a 3-lb female Chihuahua be the same species? Those two animals are unable to have any offspring at all without killing Mom long before gestation.

[@remix4098]

Even having said that science does not affirm the claims that transgender people are making about themselves. They are not what they claim to be.

[@gandalfthegrey2592]

These morals are justifiable, YOURS AREN'T, they shouldn't even be called morals. And frankly, you'll never see researchers suggesting some humans can't be categorized as humans because "muh we don't really know where to draw the line". If you want human rights, then you better be able to act realistically about categorizations. Categories may be constructed, they're categories, by definition they are. But some, including the sex binary, are extremely well-grounded in reality, much more than most other categories. And not only this, but just because researchers disagree on which models to use to categorize species, they not only want to categorize species, but this level of the debate need not exist for other concepts, like human sex. You're misusing science here.

[@QuartzIsAnOxide]

@@gandalfthegrey2592 Exactly! You'll never see researchers not using a category just because its limits are diffuse. It's _your_ ilk who claims that they must be all-encompassing somehow, and this is simply not scientific. You can't define woman in a way that excludes trans women but includes _all_ cis women. And even if you could, why couldn't trans people be an exception? Take quartz, for example. The way mineral groups are defined, quartz is objectively an oxide, because the negative ion in silicon dioxide is oxygen. However, quartz is treated as a silicate, wherein its entire structure would be an anion. Quartz doesn't fulfill the criteria for being a silicate, and yet, researchers treat it as such, because it's more _useful._ The reality is that science is plagued with these sort of scenarios. While we try to use definitions to describe the material world, they don't come to us through experimentation. Limits _must_ be set arbitrarily at some point, and the criteria used is that of utility. Scientists set limits based on what is most useful, and they have decided, overwhelmingly so, that A) it's more useful to treat gender as a separate category, and B) trans people are valid. This is the nature of the scientific and medical consensus. As for sex, it is definitionally not binary. You will _never_ get exceptions to a binary model. You can try this by yourself. Grab a program of your choosing, set a vector consisting of only 1 and 0, ask the program to return values at random, and see if it produces anything in-between. Sex is _bimodal._ Disruptive selection heavily favours the extremes of a normal distribution, which is why you mainly see 1 of two options, but it was never a binary.

[@AllThatsLeft24]

@@gandalfthegrey2592 I wouldn't accuse anyone of misusing science if I couldn't even tell the difference between sex and gender

[@kennethmcgowan333]

When Tjump is actually just Patrick Star in a skin suit denying his own wallet.

[@stevejones5075]

Lol, perfect description of this conversation. TJump is so far up his own ass I would be shocked if he ever conceded a point in his life.

[@Pragabond]

@@stevejones5075 He probably has really bad days when he's introspective for a change and has to refuse to concede a point to himself thus preventing self-growth and ruining his plans for the day. How is he supposed to enjoy a fine chicken tendies dinner with mother now?

[@luv.my.pencil477]

“thats an accurate description of how the word woman has been used throughout history” ..but...wouldn’t that make it...a social construct? 🤯

[@spad1782]

TJump moved the goalposts to the end of the Earth

[@MusaMansu]

Women existed before they were named.

[@MusaMansu]

@@rumncoke76 It’s not recent. Women are adult, female, humans.

[@MusaMansu]

@@rumncoke76 Yes. If you’re born a woman, you are a woman.

[@canadagoose8543]

Funny thing is... that statement from TJump is a genetic fallacy. TJump tosses fallacies around like buzzwords, when he's the one using them.

[@xerxies8947]

"Chairs aren't literal things that exist" made my fucking night; if I said that out loud I would cut my feed and fake my own death.

[@tsharabrown3719]

Applying some charity, I think he meant that humans made them and they dont exist in nature. It was still hilarious though.

[@roobard2700]

@@tsharabrown3719 Chairity*

[@jontraz5993]

@@roobard2700 i didn't know I needed this dad joke but I'm a better person for it

[@rifter0x0000]

@@tsharabrown3719 Actually, the chair argument is one that makes a lot of sense and I have seen before, including (I think) from Vaush. It would be difficult, if not impossible, to come up with an objective definition of a chair that does not end up including things we do not recognize as chairs. Chairs are social constructs, not just because humans create chairs, but the form chairs take and the definition of what a chair is differs according to culture and subjective ideas which may even be difficult to articulate. The fact something as mundane as a chair is a social construct is part of a larger argument defending the position that gender is a social construct. Even people who will not "accept the ideology" of gender as a social construct as an absolute sense directly acknowledge the fact that gender roles are social constructs when they speak in a different context. What constitutes a male or female role, especially including things like clothes and work as well as actions, has obviously changed through time. The very fact they say someone is not the gender they identify as is accepting a socially constructed definition. And it doesn't start or end with LGBT. Cisgender men and women have historically and even are now referred to as "not real [men/women]" when they do not fit the "proper" gender roles the (usually conservative) person accepts.

[@DucktorHeyDucktor]

This is just the "its not my wallet" meme for literally hours

[@boredofcorn3151]

That's it, that's the best summary!

[@albedougnut]

Feels like shit with all the attacks on trans people lately, so it is really nice to see such a supportive comment section. You guys are the best.

[@billieeisenhower406]

we need to broaden this conversation to other streamers imo

[@acezero5705]

There there, remember, the people being shitty are the types to say with a straight face "it isn't always racist to say black people aren't human"

[@NineToFiveGamerUC0079]

As a Black man, I get it, we are constantly under attack. So I empathize with you. Stay strong

[@pocketzed3481]

Despite the attempts to define us out of existence, trans people are still worth knowing about and understanding. Hope you're doing alright. 💗💙🤍

[@akira1086]

I feel you girl, i just want it to stop, so many attempts to legislate transphobia this year and i just want to live my life and be able to pursue my happiness and have my friends able to as well. I just wanted to be treated like a human being and referred to properly, without getting in a lengthy debate constantly about why this basic form of respect should be afforded to me.

[@eggsbruhnadict4298]

Props to the guy in chat saying “aldens sexuality”

[@hannahsladics3008]

timestamp?

[@EternalDensity]

And I saw Alden's DNA, when the "it's not necessarily racist" nonsense came up again.

[@aidantheroux9728]

“If they prefer the hard sciences over social sciences or biology over psychology” I don’t think he knows what psychology is.

[@HoleintheMeadow]

THANK YOU!

[@crishealingvtuber8626]

as a psych student who used to be a med student, yes. It's extremely frustrating

[@Moncrom]

I think that psychology is not quite a hard science. As long as Jung, Freud and the colleagues of their time are still taught unironically in school it's not yet a true hard science as is medicine, biology or chemistry.

[@ZacharyFinch]

“Ok fine, biologically based categories are subjective. You can define gender however you like…Also, my definition based on those subjective, biologically based categories are more objective than yours. Why? Because tradition.” He’s so stubbornly ignorant of the blatant self-contradiction. Even when he admits that it’s ‘partially’ based on tradition, he somehow tries to cling to his contradictory ‘objective’ argument as if it’s not built on the tradition argument he just admitted to. It’s incredibly frustrating.

[@Fluttersniper]

Watching Vaush type his debate notes like he’s slowly loading a gun is such a mood. Breathe in. Take aim. Fire.

[@diegorincon4673]

He gets a bull’s eye. Right through the Center. The target, however, is so weak, that the bullet goes straight through to another one.

[@thegarth5250]

Sounds like TJump has never heard of the "Alden's Woman" fallacy...

[@bahramshams]

The degree of confidence TJump had whilst he declared his ignorant, non-sensical opinions was infuriating

[@3soteriic]

@Engleburt Humperdink wow it's really great that nobody's doing that here then

[@ms.aelanwyr.ilaicos]

Talking to conservatives in a nutshell.

[@jeffb-c]

Vaush: pretty good deconstruction of tjumps position with a clever and well thought out rebuttal Tjump: “…no…”

[@lessons_in_tanya]

you can tell this guy has absolutely no incentive to learn anything from anyone because everytime vaush speaks to him he instantly gets annoyed and he uses the sentence "i dont care" excessively

[@yeetyeetyeet8053]

and his huffing and puffing every 2 minutes when vaush talks is so annoying as well

[@matthew6695]

And his stupid facial expressions

[@trex789123]

“Thank you for defending my right to say black people aren’t Human as not being racist ” the commenter said with maximum sarcasm and TJump was still like hey it could maybe not be racist. Unironically

[@ChunkyVoiceOfficial]

"if i make enough confused faces, i'll convince the viewers that these basic and obviously correct statements are stupid. thus making me the victor"

[@Kenghym]

As a Biologist, this was painful to watch. Species are a human made construct to give us the language to discuss different organisms. It's very much a loose definition and changes constantly. We do not have a definition of species that holds up thorough investigation and every serious biologist knows that very well. That's also why taxonomy keeps changing and evolving. Because there is no clear line to define. I'm always impressed by Vaush keeping his cool in those instances.

[@counselorguy5481]

Muh "social construct".

[@Kenghym]

@@counselorguy5481 2016 called. Even they don't want you back so idk... go shit in the woods I guess?

[@counselorguy5481]

@@Kenghym This dude's definition of woman isn't verifiable or falsifiable. It's all self-I.D, meaning that only the persons identifying as such are able to define it. It's all post modernist, social constructionist obfuscation and nonsense. You can support transgender individuals and still acknowledge that "trans man" is just another category of woman and that "trans woman" is just another category of man, due to the fact that a woman can never be a trans woman and that a man can never be a trans man.

[@Kenghym]

@@counselorguy5481 I sum up: you have a problem with the fact that it's purely self-ID but you are fine with people self-IDing as 'different kind of man' instead of 'transwomen'. Isn't that the same thing but you switch out words? I'm also interested what objective line there is to womanhood or manhood in your view. i.e.: when does a toddler become a 'woman'? At birth? At 3? At 10 maybe? Then what is a girl? Why do we consider it inappropriate to marry 10 year old 'women' to 60 year old men? To clarify: my position on this is 'A woman leaves the state of girl when she herself feels like it.' since we know everybody matures at a different rate. But I'll admit that 'being a woman' has been defined by various means. So if not by self ID... how would you define a woman? I'm trying to understand your baseline at this point.

[@counselorguy5481]

@@Kenghym A woman is an adult human who produces ova gamites or has the organs used to produce ova gamites. No one who has ever produced produced ova can be a man, no one who has ever produced sperm can be a woman. Humans do not have the ability to produce both gamites and reproduce asexually. There are so many empirically observable differences between men and women. One difference out of many being; that if you take a rabdo 1000 men and a random 1000 women, you will find that on average, women's center of gravity is lower than men's. Why is this the case? Maybe due to overwhelming differences in the pelvic structure/muscle mass, fat deposits, why is their pelvic structure different than mens, likely for reproductive purposes. Another difference is that women carey an additional layer of fat on their skin, thats why women are more prone to cellulite and typically have softer skin. This pseudo-intellectual obfuscation about how, "well, xyz is a social construct" is immensely unscientific. This will only makes things worse for trans people overtime.

[@calebharris292]

Tjump has massive "I took a 101 so now I can do a doctorate dissertation" energy

[@utschemezmuer]

absolutely, and his groans are "personified" Dunning Krugers

[@Coach_Ren]

What sucks is he's normally pretty solid in religious debates. Not sure what was up with this one. I just don't think TJump thought this through too much

[@drdisillusion8037]

Tjump: it's not bigotry to say trans women aren't woman, it's just refusing to tolerate them calling themselves women.

[@timinator20o0]

Amen

[@DandyCipher]

Dude really goes, "I don't care about Psychology" and "Of course Philosophy is part of Science" I don't even know how one could listen to this and think he has any point

[@MusaMansu]

What does PhD stands for?

[@snakearekat2634]

I'm pretty sure it was the other way around lol, as in "Science is a part of Philosophy", though maybe I misheard

[@Zombiekachu]

"Saying trans women aren't women is transphobic" "LOGICAL PHALLACY!!"

[@finnrob8607]

I lost several brain cells watching TJumps trying to disprove social constructs

[@justsomeguy6336]

Is biology a social construct?

[@FireStorm527]

@@justsomeguy6336 No

[@justsomeguy6336]

@@FireStorm527 Well you’re a lot smarter than Vaush already.

[@FireStorm527]

@@justsomeguy6336 yes?

[@gravelmonarch]

@@justsomeguy6336 Yes

[@arly803]

"we make up words to describe things that exist" We made up the word God. God exists CONFIRMED Checkmate atheists.

[@PanozGTR2]

I think I have actually genuinely heard that argument from a Christian before

[@hieithefox]

so Unicorns both exist and don't at the same time

[@worldviewdetective9456]

@@PanozGTR2 Which Christian? Most Christians would not agree with the preposition "We made up the word God"

[@PanozGTR2]

@@worldviewdetective9456 I'm having a hard time remembering where I heard that one. Somewhere on the internet. But the general gist as I recall was that because we thought to call something God he must therefore exist.

[@globalist1990]

God takes many different definitions throughout every human culture. Men and woman? Not so much, they’re global concepts.

[@toadwarnnewt]

Tjump just said "Blair White" when Vaush said there were no superstraight women... Did he change his mind about trans women being women?

[@DeathProductions200]

Thats my issue with conservative transphobes. They can't be consistent, or they are even more aggressive

[@NEMOsleeps24]

"Oh my God Vaush do I really have to explain philosophy to you? Sometimes it's not racist to be racist **burp**" Wow that must have been his thesis

[@curtbressler3127]

TJump tries so hard to avoid using the term "social construct" by using "we come up with", "we make them up".....and then says, "I don't care about your 'social constructivism"! This is where debate leaves you, people.....in a corner growling at the enemy while you protect your precious position.

[@Putri-iu4bc]

Really just depends on how stupid the debater is tbh.

[@melodyyoung9640]

well said

[@dandaropa]

“Woke people just call everyone they disagree with racist transphobic etc” “Yes you could say black people aren’t human” “I don’t agree that trans women are women” Now here’s a wild thought. Maybe we wouldn’t call you racist and transphobic, if you weren’t actively being racist and transphobic. Pretty high brow concept I know.

[@dandaropa]

@ I do judge people on a case by case basis though. And this guy said racist and transphobic things which leads me to believe he is racist and transphobic. That’s judging case by case. You can’t complain about people calling you bigoted while being you’re actively doing bigoted things. If you’re so afraid of “diluting the meaning” that when someone is being transphobic you don’t call them transphobic, then what’s the point in even having the word in the first place?

[@matthewbaumann630]

@@dandaropa what makes a person transphobic? It seems like the threshold is pretty low. Anyone that disagrees with the smallest of details is transphobic today.

[@dandaropa]

@@matthewbaumann630 If you don’t accept trans people as the gender they say they are, that makes you transphobic. The sentence “I don’t agree that trans women are women” is a pretty clear cut case of transphobia. If someone asks you to use certain pronouns for them and you refuse, that’s transphobia. If you try to make life harder for trans people, that’s transphobia. Just be nice to people and accept them for who they are, it’s not hard and people will like you for it

[@matthewbaumann630]

@@dandaropa There are some many different degrees of that though. You can't just label anyone that questions anything a transphobe. Some people use the person's preferred pronouns but don't actually believe a transwoman is a "real woman" as in they see them as a man living in the style of a woman and call them "she" out of respect. There are people that have no problem with he/she/they pronouns but think making up 5 new genders every week is silly.

[@dandaropa]

@@matthewbaumann630 Did I say questioning something made you transphobic? Nope. I said not accepting trans people or viewing them as something other than their actual gender is transphobic. There’s nothing wrong with questions so long as they are respectful questions. And those people who don’t think trans women are real women are transphobic. And those people who only accept trans people with he/she/they pronouns are also transphobic. Because they don’t actually accept trans people

[@sovandeprins2663]

the fact that he keeps saying ’its not RACIST to categorize women and trans women differently’ rather than transphobic really shows you how little he actually knows of what he is talking about. his mind is ree anti sjw goop

[@megatroid7083]

"How does someone know what species something is?" "Science?" "And how do they do that?" "They make it up." "How do people come up with that stuff?" "Science" "So technically gender is a constru-" "No it's not that is ascientific."

[@mehmemeh5285]

its the patrick meme LMAO

[@HeiressEllie]

Chairs are determined by biology is honestly the most dumbfounding thing I've ever heard

[@bvishal2kn]

TJump had several easy questions he could have asked like: Do you think "Demi-sexual" is valid? because if it is he could have made a case for super straight. instead, he kept going back to this "Biology" thing.

[@blargh3428]

Yeah it's not like chairs are made by people not their biology or something

[@blargh3428]

@@bvishal2kn Yes and he knows jack shit about biology

[@BenYork-UBY]

@@bvishal2kn Probably because even then, "demi-sexual" was at least made in good faith to contribute to gender ideology. Super-straight was not, it was made to damage gender ideology. That fact alone makes it impossible to legitimize super-straight by comparing it to demi-sexual, unless TJump wants to make super-straight an honest contribution to the gender spectrum, which would in turn legitimize the use of gender ideology. Since he doesn't want to be caught legitimizing gender ideology, he has to pivot over to biology...which fails... because this is sociology, not biology

[@tragyc7369]

"doesn't single out trans people, it's not transphobic" "meant to show the criticism of trans people's hypocrisy" 🤨

[@SenhorAlien]

It does exclude trans people from it, but I'd argue it's not transphobic, the same way that being gay isn't heterophobic, simply a matter of preference rather than hatred. Edit: let me further refine this, as I just remembered to add something. Superstraight is, as it stands, a preference based on specifying both gender and sex to be the opposites of one's own, rather than only sex. Rather than solely being attracted to your opposite sex, you are also attracted to your opposite gender. An example would be that, a straight female would date males, either men or women, whereas a superstraight female would, as such, only date male men. Edit (2): this is what I think about the whole thing. Whether it really stands to be this or not, I'm not sure. Lots of controversy over this issue. This is what seems the logical reasoning behind it to me.

[@tragyc7369]

@@SenhorAlien Jesus fuck was not ready for that lol There are definitely other reasons for it being transphobic but I honestly just don't feel like listing them here cuz I don't wanna go down that rabbit hole, but you do you Vaush does a pretty solid job at explaining it as well if you watched the video

[@Eshtoc]

@@SenhorAlien It is transphobic, even compared to your example, because it's based exclusively on otherizing trans women and denying their gender identity. In your example, a gay person isn't being "heterophobic" because they're not denying anyone else's identity in expressing their own sexuality. "Superstraights" if we even give them the benefit of the doubt and assume they were being genuine, decided that they couldn't just say "I'm straight but I'm not really into dating trans women" but needed a specific term that made it clear that they don't believe trans women are women at all. Someone being gay isn't denying the existence of any other sexuality or gender identity. And I set it aside for a moment, but it would also be foolish to assume that "superstraights" are approaching this honestly and are simply concerned that their sexuality is being marginalized in some way. I mean for one, it isn't, there is no push for people to be forced to be attracted to trans women. It's a reactionary effort to use "woke" concepts in order to otherize trans people. TJump literally talks about it as being solely a "critique" several times, but he's not the only source that would give the proverbial game away in that regard. There was nothing marginalized about their preference because saying "I'm straight" never meant you were attracted by implication to every woman on planet Earth to begin with. They most likely already did and do have preferences based on all sorts of criteria, but they made a decision that the one that was SO important that it required them to no longer consider themselves "straight" was their belief that trans women are not women to the extent that they need to use that belief to define their own identity. That's why it's inherently and inextricably transphobic. That would be my thought on logically working through it - I'm by no means an expert but perhaps it offers a bit of a different angle.

[@ringer1324]

@@SenhorAlien if you talk to most superstraight people they’d call trans women men. I’ve met some super straight people that literally want to kill all trans women and call them trannies all the time. I’m sorry but I don’t consider that a preference I consider that hate and fuck those people. What if someone is giga straight (as vaush said) and won’t date any woman that isn’t white. Would that be just a preference even if that person is only “giga straight” because they don’t consider black females women. I’m sorry but straight people aren’t oppressed they don’t need their little boy club where they just shit on trans people all the time

[@Reienroute]

It's frustrating how these conversations about trans attraction always revolve around the "what is it to be trans" question rather than the "what is attraction" question. As a trans woman myself, I've been forced to have this conversation with multiple men who've pursued me before I shared my past with them, and the most affective way to cut through their defenses is to reassure them of the validity of an attraction they initially assumed was nonhetero. Ultimately, what these types of guys are trying to do is backpedal on their attraction. If you find a woman attractive and she happens to be trans, then guess what, you're capable of being attracted to trans women. No take-backs Any attempt at denying this is not a statement about your attraction, it's just an attempt at reinstating what you assume that says about you. I've found that the simplest way to illustrate this to someone in that position is to remind them that everything they found attractive about the woman in question was identical to the sorts of attractions they would have had to any other woman. They're literally and definitionally, "straight" attractions. The blatant difference between the statement "I am not attracted to x feature or characteristic", and, "I am not attracted to x in spite of any feature or characteristic", makes the prejudice undeniable. The effort of transphobes is to mask this distinction by altering the definition of attraction along the lines of exogenous immediacy. This is why attraction itself is the correct topic to focus on in these situations, not trans legitimacy. These people don't care about the latter, it's their own sexual identity they're concerned with first and foremost. Whether or not trans women are women in their minds is down stream of that.

[@couchman-sw6jy]

Well put. Before I manifested by bi-ness by hooking up with guys, I’d found a few guys attractive in the past but it conflicted with my view of being “straight”. Now I know I can like both women and men and not have qualms about it. I feel like there’s many more “bi” men (and women) than we think because some people just don’t want to accept they might find a guy (or woman) sexually attractive. Typically it comes down to insecurity, which can be overridden by being validated about one’s attraction. I hope that made sense.

[@analigiabatres9114]

People have different reasons for not wanting to be with trans women. Personally I don't really care but that's what it is.

[@somethingelse4424]

Well put.

[@maddiealexandria5876]

Trans woman here too! (Old account if the name throws you off.) But I've always found it weird when people think trans people expect for people to be attracted to them. Mainly since trans people aren't any different from anyone else in that regard. Regardless of if you're cis or not cis you don't really have a say in whether people are attracted to you or not. I think people who don't interact with many trans people simply forget that at the end of the day, we're normal people too. But that's just kinda my take. Feel free to correct me!

[@somebody553]

Such a great point, this is the first time a KZbin comment actually made me think and understand something better.

[@SamuraIcarus3]

You can tell how serious the Super Straights were now that over a year later not a single person is still identifying as it or talking about it

[@Pitchman14]

I absolutely love how much he falsely claims “hasty generalization fallacy” and then tried to use an example of a pornstar not sleeping with a trans person to prove that people who are not attracted to trans people are discriminated against in general. That is the definition of a hasty generalization fallacy.

[@MistaCatsby]

Sorry Vaush, this dude is so extremely bad faith that I feel he was a waste of time to even talk to.

[@justsomeguy6336]

You’re probably a socialist.

[@bromeothesavage2730]

Loool Vaush got wrecked

[@kanekiken7808]

@@bromeothesavage2730 Can you honestly say he got rekt when TJump can't even make up his mind on whether super straight is a joke or a serious identity?

[@kanekiken7808]

@@justsomeguy6336 You're probably a capitalist.

[@justsomeguy6336]

@@kanekiken7808 I am. I believe in the economic model that doesn’t end in mass starvation and economic collapse.

[@R.444-]

I feel like this guy was *this* close to just saying “well so much for the tolerant left!”

[@verager2493]

The few times I've seen TJump, I've had to ask: why does he not simply take the shit before the debate instead of holding it in for 2 hours?

[@sleepyJaclyn]

Lmao

[@Alex-cw3rz]

after his insistance that Vaush was making hasty generalisation fallacies, Tjump actually is the first and only one to make one. What is it with people who often accuse others of doing something, that they are the ones who do it themselves. Like how he kept interrupting but kept saying Vaush was interrupting.

[@Alex-cw3rz]

Oh the fallacious thing he did, was to say that a handful of people said they had made their own gender, therefore it is the entire "woke" community who does this and is onboard with it. I'm quite proud of Tjump giving such a salient example of a Hasty Generalisation Fallacy.

[@mrmoment6061]

They arent self aware if they were they wouldn't hold such positions. That's what i think atleast.

[@DeadBoneJones]

TJump literally just says long words and mugs for the camera like he's in a Happy Madison movie, he doesn't actually know what it means

[@AR15ORIGINAL]

Wait, which one are you talking about?

[@Alex-cw3rz]

@@AR15ORIGINAL Oh the fallacious one I saw. Was that he said a handful of people said they had made their own gender, therefore it is the entire "woke" community who does this and is onboard with it. I'm quite proud of Tjump giving such a salient example of a Hasty Generalisation Fallacy.

[@Ghost_In_a_Sock]

LETS SAY HYPOTHETICALLY, FOR THE SAKE OF THE ARGUMENT THAT I ACTUALLY HELD THIS POSITION THAT I EXPLICITLY SAID I DIDN'T

[@lawrencewebb4142]

37:36 lol he is literally making an argument that could be used to justify separate but equal laws

[@blakeniblett9498]

I came here to make sure somebody made this point.