Відео

Firstly, that sounds like a really cool fanfic. And secondly, it does sound like you have subverted and avoided all the tropes perfectly. You can 100% have a non-binary character who is an adolescent, slightly arrogant activist (thats just personality) but the fact you aren't linking that to their identity, nor making them different or an outcast, is a brilliant portrayal that enbies are just like any other person (or dragon). If you do feel like watching some more, I mention in Chapter 3 how having non-binary characters whose identity is not a key character trait is good when the story does not require it. And from the sounds of it, your story has inclusive representation without needing to over-do it. Anyway, it sounds amazing and you are a thoughtful writer for not being stereotypical and instead really interesting and subversive in your characterisation :)

@@satinsquares Another thing I want to mention about this character: Their species (called Aer) already has a bit of a wonky relationship with gender, which makes it easier to portray this character's identity as something completely mundane (actually I haven't even directly said in the text that they're enby yet; they're just referred to as they/them). Adult Aer usually have a similar idea of gender to humans. However all Aer are born neuter, and develop into (usually) male or female during puberty. Because of this, they aren't given assigned genders at birth, but rather pick them during their teenage years. This character, Specter, if they were to choose a label, would probably describe themself as agender. Physically they're intersex, but they don't have the language to describe themself as such. They just didn't feel much of a connection to either gender, and since they couldn't tell from their anatomy which label they were "supposed" to use, they just decided to stay gender-neutral into adulthood. And Aer are already so androgynous that most other species can't clock their genders anyway (there's actually a short story by the author of the original novel, about a dragon of a different species who goes on a date with an Aer and doesn't realize until way later that he was dating a dude (which leads him to realize by the end of the short that he's actually bi)), so nobody really cares or event tends to notice that Specter is enby. Actually, in the fic there are two other characters currently living with Specter, and it's ambiguous at this point whether they even know if Specter is enby, or if they call Specter they/them because they haven't bothered to ask their gender. Also, I'd actually say that Specter *is* a bit of an outcast, but again not for gender-related reasons. They deliberately isolated themself to prevent their old boss (the leader of a massive organized crime group) from finding out that they were plotting to assassinate her. And they only worked for her in the first place to try to rescue someone who had saved their life in the past. The fic is on AO3 and is called *Ghostly Iron* (this is a play on the main characters' names, Specter and Ferric), and the novel it's based on is *Silver, Sand, and Silken Wings*, by Angaram. I highly recommend it, it's got lots of queer rep. Also there's a second book coming in probably the next year or so. As a final side note, the reason why Specter is intersex (from a writing perspective) is because I realized that a gender-apathetic Aer who ends up being intersex wouldn't have any societal pressure to stick with whatever gender they were assigned, given that they wouldn't have been assigned one to begin with. So I thought that would be an interesting character concept to work with-a character who neither knows nor cares what their gender is "supposed" to be. And I do plan to finish watching this video soon! It was around 2:00 AM when I posted my previous comment, but I plan to watch more tonight!

Actually, there's another story of mine that includes an actual nonbinary alien coming to earth. That story is a work of xenofiction (the alien in question is the main PoV character), and the only relevance of the fact that he's enby (he goes by he/him for personal reasons, despite not actually identifying as male) is that he finds it baffling that so many humans still have a problem just accepting enby people, when his world figured it out centuries ago. Especially since on his world they have multiple sapient species with differing physical capabilities, and as a result there's more fuel for essentialist rhetoric (which was a widespread problem earlier on during this character's abnormally long lifetime).

I've never heard the concept of Consensual Necromancy, it's such an interesting topic imo. It also sounds like a cool band name

@@Kazelita Specter's magic allows them to communicate with the souls of the dead under certain circumstances, and to move souls around more broadly. They want to be able to use this power legally, so they can give some people who died fairly young a second chance at life.

Ayyy, thank you :)

Do you know what gender means? Of course you don't.

@@MouldMadeMind gender is what you mentally think is your sex

@@elobservadorobservante1605 wrong, it contradicts you anyways.

@@MouldMadeMind or maybe the idea of gender itself is contradictory and we should stick to biology

The Torah has your Bible beat, recognizing up to six genders. Fool.

Exactly! We are not reductionist stereotypes or hidden easter eggs!

Yeah, it definitely is a lower number than in actuality. This is not only because many people probably haven't heard of enby, less so in early 2021, and also because, as it was a census, it was sent to the main address owner to fill out (my Dad did do mine until he got to the gender and sexuality section, and even though I hadn't come out still decided to then let me fill that out. Not everyone has that support though). Other surveys suggest at least 1%, but then I'd get called out for bullshitting for not using the main UK census and using smaller, more LGBTQ focused, surveys. I'm sure by the 2031 UK census that will be way higher.

@@satinsquares oh!

That is understandable why you do not agree with it, and sorry if it felt like I was not being appreciative and respectful of the whole non-binary history, identities, and experiences. I mention at the start of Chapter 1 that I am regarding it in a "negotiated reading" of how stereotypes are most harmful when cisgenderist/transphobic people purposefully choose to misread a text. Furthermore, as I clarify at the start of Chapter 3, all of this is a result of cisnormitivity creating this assimilation with traditional culture, and not providing the words (or caring to take the time) to explain non-binary identities. You are absolutely right my position sounded very pessimistic and focused on cishet culture and readings, but that was by design as the main part of the discussion. Do some non-binary people have shaved eyebrows, flamboyant clothing, particular make-up? Absolutely as you say yourself. Do some non-binary people want to tear down the system? Not just some, I would argue all enbies do, and identifying as non-binary is a stand that gender is not real, but if you force us into categories how about we make our own. But there is also the more personal aspects such as dysphoria and social exclusion. Not all non-binary people are going to parade around in Sam Smith's wardrobe declaring the end of the system, some just want to still be seen as people first. If cisgender people only see the activist ideas on media, they will feel like its a politicised attack. Will screaming at people that "Ugh, its N.B. Like Non-Binary person" make cisgender people understand or feel like it is an attack on them? My personal view is we need the calmer and simpler representation first, and if that means being a bit cisnormative in mainstream series, well, begrudgingly do it because it would at least show something. But with more Enby actors expressing themselves, and more people becoming aware and accepting of it, then these assimilationist mainstream examples will pave the slow way to proper examples where we can be as activist as we like. In other words, children respond better to being slowly introduced a topic, rather than being screamed about what they should have done, even if they had not heard anout it before. I think we can both agree that transphobes are children, and we can't risk fuelling their belief, especially when not every Enby has the life where they can be comfortable to speak out and feel safe about it. Also, finally, can I just say it is really interesting to talk to you and get your views. I hope my replies don't sound dismissive or like I am making excuses because I do agree with your points. Its really nice to get actual constructive criticism (every other time its just transphobes saying "ITS NOT REAL" and then crying when I give them any scientific study to google). So thank you so much for having something very interesting to say :)

Yeah, I completely agree that I made a few mistakes there. Unfortunately, I was limited by a word count as this was written for my BA(Hons) Dissertation, and so cut out a lot of my discussion into the positive aspects to keep it focused on pointing out the more academically discussed negative aspects. The demon labelling was my stupidity to not fact check, which I apologise about. It used to be part of a longer section that also mentioned Good Omens, and it was one of the last bits I cut out on my final edit and I guess I never thought "Joe, you are meant to be an academic, at least watch the last half of The Sandman to know the inclusion is correct" but I did think "I have been writting this for 8 months and I just want to watch a series that I am not making Enby notes on" 😂 And yes, I would have included more positivity if I didn't remove all of it from the final draft, as a 9000 word limit is surprisingly low for such a fascinating subject. The main reason I mentioned The Sandman (and by proxy Gaiman's other work of Good Omens) is only because it's a very common trope to have non-human characters as non-binary. As brilliant as it is to say canonically all angels and demons in Good Omens are genderqueer (and more specifically genderless), there is a seperation that the human characters are not. On the one hand, it could be said it implies non-binary people are holy entities and therefore extremely cool and powerful (the common joke that if god doesn't have a gender, I guess all enbies are gods too). Although on the other, its seen as inhuman, which is obviously the side I discussed. But absolutely, similar to Asia Kate Dillon (especially in the example of John Wick) having Enby actors play Enby roles regardless of whether it is mentioned or not is brilliant, and same goes for Mason Alexander Park. Unfortunately, mentioning Hedwig and the theatrical runs does mean I should discuss Neil Patrick Harris also portraying Hedwig on Broadway, a mainstream gay actor on the most famous mainstream theatre place. Alas, brilliant actors good for the role get overshadowed by an erasure of those themes that audiences may misinterpret about being about homosexuality (like my discussion on Joy Ride). Anyway, overall (to stop sounding like I am a miserable person who hates everything): I love Good Omens and think the genderless writting and portrayals are brilliant, and Mason Alexander Park should get more credit than just a short mislabeled clip. I am planning another video where I do use more positivity.

Ayyy, amazing! Thank you so much, glad you enjoyed it :)

Ooooh, that sounds very interesting. Might have to watch that one next off my list because that does seem really cool. Thanks for the recommendation!

@@satinsquares If you do that, I'd suggest skipping the show's first two seasons (Adira and Gray aren't introduced until season 3). I think the show gets much better as it goes on. My thoughts on Discovery as a TV show honestly warrant their own long video essay but I would be delighted to see more people watch the show and talk about the franchise's queer characters

Oooh okay, thanks for the tip. And if you do make a video essay about it I would be excited to watch :)

Skill issue

They/them being used as pronouns has been a thing for hundreds of years. Also language changes and evolves over time. That's literally how it works

"Change the basic structure of language by using they/them pronouns." Nevermind that those pronouns have been used for at least 648 years (source: published work William and the Werewolf and it's use of singular they/them) and that language is ever changing along with humans. Your inability to adapt and have empathy for others shows. You end up despising your fellow queer people in the same way as the people who shunned gay people in the not so distant past.

Did you even watch the whole video? If you didn't, then its ridiculous you are starting an argument about something I was never actually really claiming. If you did watch the whole thing, then firstly, congratulations on being the only person in history to see a thimbial of an hour long video of something you know you will hate and think "That seems like a good use of my meaningless existence" and secondly, did you not realise the key messages: Chapter 1 - non-binary people aren't activists and media fakes that identity, Chapter 2 - non-binary links to LGBTQ+ are not perfect, but from similarities in how they are viewed as trans and gay people by a stereotypical society Chapter 3-Stereotypical society masks all of that as not being important thus nobody outside hears about it, and conclusion- its all a negotiated reading where all of the representation is exaggerated bs but only hateful idiots will believe its a forced agenda that isn't real. Watch the video and see how the baseline of your point is just an extreme and hateful version of my point that positive rep is difficult and its purely because of ignorant people like yourself.

terf brainrot

Thank you so much :) I don't focus on Enby video essays a lot (this took 8 months to write 😂) but I can assure you I aim to do more in the future, just not yet as I have other more comedic projects planned first while I write my next essay

@@satinsquares It took 8 months to write because it included a lot of information! Your video is great!

Ayyy thanks, no promises it will be an era though. My video schedule is like putting all of Taylor Swift on shuffle, sometimes you get a beautifully crafted relatable allegory of the singers deepest insecurities in a melancholy tone that makes you cry, then you get Shake It Off 😂😂 But I can assure you more video essays are planned, just not too soon

I'm sure it will. It will just unfortunately take a while, like it did with homophobia in the 80s (which is still present 40 years later, but considerably less now gay culture has become more mainstream and people realise there is scientific proof around it). And also thank you so much 😊 You should see me without all the make-up and film lighting though 😂😂

You know you are doing something right when someone comments about how trans people aren't real, I answer calmly with scientific facts, and they cry about it and delete their comment 😂😂

Ahaha love the pun 😂 And that is actually an amazing idea. One of my aims for this channel is to do whatever I want, even though I know that talking about non-binary is the easiest way to get views. If I have a good idea for an Enby sketch, I do it. But I like the idea of pushing myself into other areas, so I may do that as a one-off special if I have a good idea for it (with credit to you of course). And also thank you so much for your enjoyment. It really means a lot. Its good to know people see this channel for being about my persona and humour, not just because I am a bit queer 😂

The resistance is not just verbal. Transgender and non-binary people are the most likely to be hate crimed, attacked, and murdered in the USA currently (more than racial attacks). But let's say it is just verbal. I am in a children's park with my wife, discussing how we concieved our child. Other parents may get offended that we are talking about sex in front of children. But is having sex with your wife and making a child wrong? Obviously I do not have a wife or children. That is an analogy. But going back to the fact it is both verbal and physical. If someone protests the government, and is attacked by the police, does that mean the government is perfect because the haters are being dealt with? If people protest against society mistreating them, and a far right group attacks them, should everyone agree with the attackers? That example is actual about non-binary. I can't speak for your culture, but in the UK where I live, we have this kind of hate and violence from our government and far right groups. Fortunately, it is less than other places, but it is still apparent. But this does not mean that we are wrong. Just like how those speaking for rights for women, or people of colour, or gay people, were not wrong.

Unlike yourself, I am not a perverted, incestual, creep who wants to look at my parents naked.

Then see under your pants lol

Hold on... one second... yep, I have a penis. Sorry what is this trying to prove except my ability to look down? Oh wait, you think that sex and gender are the same thing. No, sex is the physical, biological characteristics, and gender is a social construct relating to archaic gender roles, and is thus purely psychological. Although sex does have some links to gender, for example male people are more likely to have angry personalities or work in jobs with manual labour as increased testorone is more likeky to lead to those traits, the actual binary boundaries between the stereotypical man and stereotypical woman (what you incorrectly think both sex and gender is) is blurred. In a study from over a decade ago, around 2/3 people in the UK did not identify with the stereotypical man or woman. This was before "non-binary" was even a mainstream idea. Technically speaking, this means that 66% of people are non-binary. But really what this means is that gender is not a set thing, and is not realted to one's genitals. Basically, if you think there are only two genders, you also think that all women should be stay at home mums. Because the two gender system is a set of rules used in a pre-21st century society. So, to simplify at the end: yes, I have a penis. That is sex. But I also do not identify with the traditional image of a man. Some peopld may do, thats fine. Some may not but don't feel like they are in-between and so are still forced to use "man" (like the 66% of people in that study). Thats fine. But others who do feel in-between, and have done research into sex and gender, may favour the term non-binary. And that is also fine and does not affect your own ability to have genitals.

Wow a lot of yap you can't change who you are just be a man. You are to be man not yapper

Wow a lot of yap just be a man and stop talking shit. You are born as a man only Man.

Aw, thanks, glad you enjoyed it :)

Yes indeed, time to answer all the comments that UA-cam flagged for inappropriate language

Awww, thank you so much, I will try my best 😂

@@satinsquares same I like you :3

Thank you :)

Ay thank you, all I had to do was scream in a field to do it 😂

I'm sorry to hear about your current predicament

Thank you, my personality is a carefully acted persona designed to seem stupid for comedic effect

Unfortunately, I am not good at voice acting. Do you really think, if I could change the tone of my voice, I would speak in that awful British accent? 😂

He's saying that the voices are correct (which you are trying to make them sound stupid) and I agree with what he's saying

Wow, no shit, its almost as if I have a persona online where I purposefully act a bit naive and stupid for comedic effect. Anyway, I am sorry to offend you. If you personally think you are a helicopter, and you think that is not stupid, you do you. If you think identifing as a vehicle is the same as genderqueer, then please do any research before trying to annoy me again 😂

Hi

Yeah, because if a person stabs you multiple times purely because they don't like you for being different, its your fault for not wearing a full suit of armour. And if I now tell you that I would want to do that to you, because of your views and because you spoke up about them, then you are in the wrong for drawing attention to what you see as an issue. Why did you feel the need to say that quote to a stranger? Because my views upset you to an extent where you felt obligated to raise your voice. There is only one helmet here, and it's the person who doesn't realise that the message of the video is that using short sentences to ignore a complex issue is ridiculous and a sign of ignorant stupidity. "The only person being represented by you is you"

@@satinsquares "if a person stabs you multiple times purely because they don't like you for being different,..." People don't have to be confused about their gender to get stabbed. You are exaggerating, which is common for people without real scientific arguments. "Why did you feel the need to say that quote to a stranger?" Trans activists do it all the time and I'm sure you think they are fighting for their rights. I'm fighting for the right of not being imposed by the religion of gender. People are free to believe all the nonsense they want but they are not free to impose that nonsense on others by insulting them with terms like "cis", "bigot" and "transpohobe". You believe that people who are confused about their gender makes them the gender of their choice. I, and a HUGE number of people in the world, believe there are two biological sexes and two genders that represent their biological sex. Men have a penis that gets hard and can orgasm in ways that women have no clue. No woman can claim to be a man just because they "feel" it. The same goes for men confused about their gender. They can pretend to be women but they will never be women. Being a woman is living in a woman's body, dealing with menstruation, and the possibility of pregnancy with sex. No man can claim to be a woman. This gender thing is the the modern-day version of The Emperor's New Clothes.

Okay, fair enough, you got me. I do apologise for mocking you. I was exaggerating as I believe that the majority of people who don't support trans people just want an excuse to hate people, and exaggeration is the only way I can get on their level of ridiculousness. People rarely read or listen to the longer discussions I say. Now I can see that the real culprit is that you believe it is "nonsense" with no scientific evidence. That is such a bold and fundamentally wrong claim that I can see why you are confused. This is not your fault, you are clearly an intelligent person, however I am guessing you are yet to hear the other side of the argument, so here is that longer discussion. Psychologists and sociologists have studied this and it is widely agreed that sex and gender and two different things. Sex refers to what a person biologically has (a penis or a vagina). Gender is not really that easy to define, as it is a social construct. I am guessing (from my general analytics and the ideas you pose) that you live in a Western Culture (most likely the USA or UK). This culture is based on (let's face it) sexist ideologies where the man works, and the woman do housework and raise the family. Even though that has changed, our perception of each sex still relates to these archaic roles. If you think of a man and a woman right now, your first thoughts are likely derived from these ideals, as that has been passed down through generations of how each sex should act, and these ideals are installed through birth by what toys we are given depending on our genitalia (Seavey (1975) put adults in a room with babies of different sexes, and it was the adults who chose to use dolls for girls, trucks for boys, even though the babies were interested in both). This is called Social Learning Theory, such as a study by Bandura and Bussey (1999) that looked at how children were influenced by adverts (its always women doing house work and men owning sports cars in those). In other cultures, these roles don't exist, and some other cultures, such as Hawaiian, some Native American tribes and some Polynesian tribes to name a few, recognise a third gender (which we would call non-binary in our culture, another type of trans individual that is not recognised in most States or in the UK, but that psychologists can show exists). Regardless of that, your view of what makes a man a man, and a woman a woman, is based on biological processes such as pregnancy, orgasms, and menstruations. There are atypical sex chromosome patterns where, for example, 1 in 5000 females are born with Turner's syndrome, where the second X chromosome is absent or partial. This results in them not having a menstrual cycle, and thus not being able to get pregnant. By your logic, as this person can not experience what a woman is "meant to", they are not a woman. Does that therefore make them a man? Of course not. Does that therefore make them trans? Also no. Going back to Social Learning Theory, your view on sex and gender is defined on the idea that a woman's life purpose is to give birth and raise a child. However, and I hope you agree, woman in the modern era should not have to have that pressure on them, and don't need to get married and have kids, if they don't want to. Its not like our population is struggling, is it? So, as discussed, gender, and views on how sex should relate to that, are fundamentally flawed. Sex is only a physical attribute, and gender should not be labelled based on genitalia and the normal function of that genitalia in reproduction, it is instead a complicated process we do not fully understand. In fact, other theories will challenge the ones I have said, but the majority agree that it is in part due to hormones and sex, but also in part due to culture. Regardless of this, nobody knows for certain. Psychology is a study of something we can't really ever see, but it is evident it exists. Regardless of how it is formed though, gender does not always align with sex. This is called gender dysphoria and psychologists do not say that it is "just made up". We don't fully know why, it may be due to hormones (Siegmann et Al., 2020), genetics (Bentz et Al., 2008), brain structure (Zhou et Al., 1995), culturally learnings or something else, or (most likely) a combination. However, psychology recognises it as real in the DSM-5, the main text used for all psychological processes. Search up the studies in your own time as I can't explore everything about sex and gender in a UA-cam comment, but to answer you, there is scientific arguments (although it is a one-sided argument in favour of trans people). The reason I chose not to mention all these facts in my UA-cam video, is because that was not the point of the video. The point was to show that Rishi Sunak's simple phrases could be dismissed by other simple phrases, or a reverse of his points on to himself, to show that it is fundamentally ridiculous. If I had made a video saying all of this, you would be unlikely to be advertised it or watched it, but by making a comedy video I can be shown to a broader spectrum of people and make more people question themselves. You are clearly an intelligent person with beliefs, and there is nothing wrong with that, however, just like how you can't claim how having the other sexes' genitals feels, you also can't claim how it feels to be trans, or more specifically, dismiss it as nonsense because you yourself have not experienced it. Transgender isn't a whole conspiracy where people lie about their feelings just to annoy others with the words "cis" and "actually my pronouns are...". Unfortunately, I understand that the loudest voices in the trans community are also extremists who will say that (and actually a different comment shows some people think I was too extreme towards supporting Tories, so I myself am not such a person and made sure to have a varied subtext throughout). Anyway, I could obviously go on, but I hope that helps as a different, more intellectual, discussion into this.

@@satinsquares That was a long explanation that I will try to respond to. First, yes, I have a tremendous experience in the area of sexuality and I have developed ideas that have I have not yet published. These ideas will probably appear in a UA-cam channel in the near future. My main idea is that Sexual Orientation is a social fabrication that has the purpose of dealing with shame about same-sex intimacy, especially male intimacy. I don't believe that people are really gay or straight or anything else. Most people don't know this but Alfred Kinsey, the guy who came up with the Kinsey Scale in the 1940's, warned against using the words homosexual and heterosexual on people. He claims that the sexual acts can be homosexual or heterosexual, but never the people. The Kinsey Scale is just a measure of the proportion of heterosexual and homosexual acts the person is involved, but not an identity. This idea of "being gay" or "being straight" is wrong. But nowadays people are obsessed with identities and everybody wants one. I can say much more about my ideas on sexual orientation but it's not the topic here. My ideas have been intriguing enough to attract the attention of many important researchers of sex. I corresponded twice with Dr. John Money about my ideas. I was also invited by Dr. Richard Friedman to his apartment in NYC to discuss my ideas. Friedman was one of the psychiatrists involved in the DMS-3 when homosexuality was no longer a mental illness. But my main research interest has been the experience of shame. I was in contact with Dr. Donald Nathanson who spent a lot of time studying shame. His main book is "Shame and Pride", a book that really explains shame in detail, including the physiology of shame. Shame is not what we colloquially know as shame. Shame is very relevant when it comes to the body but there is a reluctance of including shame in the discourse because people are terrified of feeling shame: People are shame-phobic. My view is that some people who experience shame about their genitals believe that by being the other gender the shame will go away. The book "The Sissy Boy Syndrome" by Dr. Richard Greene includes several cases of boy who wanted to be girls but experienced an anxiety over their genitals. My preference would be to instead of pumping drugs and hormones and then surgery, why not deal with the issues of shame of these people. I also recognize sex roles that are passed on from generation to generation. Where we probably disagree is on the root causes of the sex roles. For instance, men are more reserved than women when it comes to physical contact. The conventional thinking is that some evil person one day decided that men had to be brave and vicious, all over the world at the same time. No, men are hesitant to touch because we are afraid of the erection. Women are not, so they can touch and do whatever without anyone knowing what they are feeling. There is a lot to say about this but not now. You provided some references but before I check any references I need to believe that the ideas make any sense. One issue that stops me from accepting Gender Theory is the concept of a body-independent Gender. I can't accept that because it suggests a bodyless existence outside a body, similar to religious concepts of spirit or soul. I would need a clear and unambiguous definition of gender. And I have one. Humans are living knowledge/information systems with cognition. Cognitive structures are used to represent reality, just like in any information system. A payroll record of an employee is not the pay and it's not the employee but it "represents" those things stored in some kind of memory bank. Similarly, a child has a Cognitive Structure that represents a door or a window. Well, Gender is the Cognitive representation of biological sex, and the proof is that in more than 99% of the people, they match. But let me respond to some of your comments. "the majority of people who don't support trans people just want an excuse to hate people" I think this hate is made up. If there is any hate involved is in response to demands from Trans people to go along with something most people don't agree. I see a man in front of me who gets angry because I call him "him", and he perceives that as hate to Trans people. Or parents feel hate when their kids are forced to ideas they don't believe. For most people Gender Theory is akin to a religion and nobody likes to be forced to believe something they think as absurd. I think of the idea of a "loving God" as absurd, but I don't care because nobody forces me to believe it. But I would feel hate if I were forced to believe. There is also tremendous hate from Tran people when they see people who refuse to go along with what for most people is a delusion. I think this hate from Trans people comes from being denied "normalcy". In the last few years Trans people have been jubilant with the idea of finally feeling "normal" but to get that feeling they MUST have the cooperation from the rest of society, who is reluctant. It's unreasonable to expect a wild idea to be accepted without proof. Instead of feeling hate from skeptics, Trans activists have to prove their ideas. If I came up with the idea that gravity does not exist, I better have a good proof and not start insulting people who don't get my new idea. "Psychologists and sociologists have studied this and it is widely agreed that sex and gender and two different things. " Of course they are different but being different doesn't mean unrelated, which is what Gender Theory proposes. "...sexist ideologies where the man works, and the woman do housework and raise the family. " As I mentioned before, sex roles are not arbitrary. But there is something in the biology that contributes to the sex roles. In Israel the men are being called to service and when I see the troops all I see is men. Men are generally stronger and more able to disassociate from feelings. Would a woman decapitate a baby in a crib? Sex roles are based on biology in a very complex way. "By your logic, as this person can not experience what a woman is "meant to", they are not a woman." Womanhood starts early in life for a girl, before they even know if they will be able to bear children or not. By the time they realize they cannot have children, they have lived as women. There is much more to being a woman that to have children. "However, and I hope you agree, woman in the modern era should not have to have that pressure on them, and don't need to get married and have kids, if they don't want to. Its not like our population is struggling, is it?" The "modern era" that you talk about exists only in the West. Places like Afghanistan still exist with strict gender roles. "Regardless of how it is formed though, gender does not always align with sex." I cannot agree with this statement. For two things to "align" you need to independent things, which I don't believe is the case between sex and gender. It's like saying that someone who is tall believes he's short, sop they don't align? If Gender Theory wants to push the independence of gender, they need to first define its origins. So far what I see is a "gendered spirit" looks for a body to become human. If "things" don't match (not sure how) we have a Trans. This is unacceptable if Gender Theory claims to be true. " You are clearly an intelligent person with beliefs, and there is nothing wrong with that," I don't have beliefs because they feel good emotionally. I reject Gender Theory the same way I reject religious ideas. I need to see clear proof, for instance, of what gender is. Do animals have gender? Or do their gender gets "assigned at birth" too? "Transgender isn't a whole conspiracy where people lie about their feelings just to annoy others with the words "cis" and "actually my pronouns are..."." The conspiracy if from Drug companies and clinics who are hoping to get more patients. Living in a country with universal healthcare, I find it outrageous that healthy young people are made life-time users of the healthcare system using resources that are needed for people who are really sick. Gender Ideology is for rich countries who can afford to spend healthcare money. Can you imagine promoting gender transitions in Gaza or in poor countries in Africa. Gender Ideology is unsustainable. In the first half of the 20th Century when the memory of Napoleon was still in people's mind, it was common for men to believe they were Napoleon. They would stand in the Napoleon classic stance pretending to be Napoleon. Using today's ideas of "affirmation" they should have bought these crazy men a Napoleon uniform and take pictures with their covered hand. Isn't this crazy?

I find it fascinating that your first points are in relation to sexuality. To specify, this has no relation to sex (or gender) as you clearly also believe through your discussion of the Kinley Scale. Although you also show that you believe that labels are false, that identity is a spectrum, and that what was once seen as a mental illness is actually not and is a part of the human condition. Sexuality is not an empirical thing to measure, you can’t ascertain that your (as you do claim) “belief” that set sexuality does not exist, as to scientifically prove everyone is on a fluid spectrum is impossible. And yet, from seeing research, you have this belief. On the other hand, when it comes to my points relating to how gender is a spectrum without real labels, you say that there is no belief about it, that this is a mental illness. For someone already so attune with this way of looking at sexuality, it is strange you are yet to correlate the reasons for homosexuality to be classified as a mental illness, and the research it took to show that, although the exact cause is unclear, it is still a natural desire, to the issues facing trans people now. Friedman was seen by a huge number of people as ridiculous for saying homosexuality was not pathological, and yet his research changed the hegemony’s views about it. Of course, unlike in this case, gender dysphoria is not viewed as pathological now by the DSM-5, showing the majority of people agree it is not a delusion that should be cured. How you are yet to realise that in terms of transgender studies you are not like Friedman but in fact the people who fought against him is absurd to me. Understandably, sexuality is your field of expertise, and you may still see no correlation (but that would be due to you being disconnected from LGBTQ+ and being unwilling to change). Furthermore, the influential people you have corresponded with not only show your status, but also your age, seeing that Dr. Money died around the time I was born. Ignoring the fact of why someone as intellectual as yourself has a propriety to debate with a random student (not even of psychology) on a comedy video on UA-cam, or why you joined this debate with a single sentence joke, or how you have errors in your quotes (such as saying DMS-3, firstly a typo and secondly using Arabic numerals despite that only being employed for the DSM-5, with Roman being used prior), I will try and respond to all your points in regards to transgender. Your discussion on shame is very interesting, and something I may research further. It is true that trans people would feel some shame towards genitals. However, by your logic, all people under this “delusion” would want surgery to replace their genitals, then not experience any positive effect as this “delusion” would still exist and be transposed on to their new genitals, and thus they would all regret it. The maximum statistic I could find for trans people who wanted surgery was about 28% for transwomen, and about 54% of transmen (including both top and bottom surgery). In the case of just genitals this is about 13% for both. If someone is delusional by shame, then it is unlikely for them to lie about this in a study designed for trans people, and definitely not to the extent 87% do not experience this. That will be in part due to economic and social reasons (people being harassed for doing it), but that still will not equate to the ideals you pose. Of those that transition, 78% say they are happier, and about 0.3% regret it (some sources round that up to 1%). Do you believe this happiness is also delusion, because by your logic and the studies you have mentioned, the 21.7% of people who do not feel a change should account for the majority. It is still a high percentage, and yes maybe some of that is your shame principle, but to claim that principle is all trans people is not supported. Also, quite funnily, Dr. Richard Greene is actually the director at the New York University School of Medicine and is very supportive of trans people being listened to first, before hormones or surgery is considered. Of course, Dr. Richard Green is the person you are suggesting, and his methods employed were often the cause for the shame, with his patients reporting that he would use derogatory language constantly until his patients succumbed to his pressure or committed suicide. Obviously Green would not have written that in his book, but aside from coining the phrase “gender identity disorder (GID)” his research is widely disregarded by modern professionals. Surprisingly, views have changed since 1987 when he published his book, perhaps more modern research on medicine and psychology would be useful for you before you next claim trepanning is the cure for trans people. As you continue to demonstrate, you lack an understanding in my points, instead suggesting your own definitions that in some cases are the exact same thing I have already discussed. For example, your definition on gender being a “cognitive structure” is the same thing I believe. In case this is unclear, I identify as non-binary (which is basically a rejection of gender). Gender is a social construct in the same way we have an idea what a door or window should look like. Let’s say that every adult right now decided that a mouth should also be classified as a door (as it has a hinge that opens and leads somewhere), and then children were taught that a mouth is a type of door the same to all other doors. Children would believe that and thus teach their children about it, and even f somebody pointed out the obvious differences they would be seen as wrong as society agrees a mouth is a door. In a more complex way, society distils ideas about the genders men and women to children, and in cultures where that is strict (like Afghanistan) it will stay strict, and in cultures like the UK where there is more of a cross over (but it is still fixed) then it will stay like that until it changes slowly through generations or a change in hegemony or leadership. You also claim in 99% of people it matches. That is true (if you then agree gender must be a real social concept for there to even need to be a match between the biological and (as you claim) “spiritual”). However, let me remind you that that means that for 1 in 100 people it does not match. How quickly can you count to 100? If you walk to the shops how many people will you pass? The number 100 is quite low. Also, 1 in 100 people have autism, 1 in 100 people have BPD, 1 in 100 people have OCD. 1 in 100 people have celiac disease but we still have gluten-free options. Unless you think that is radical, I don’t see why this 1% of trans people is such a small number for you. And before you think of it, yes, some say 1% of trans people regret transitioning, but seeing as that is actually 0.3%, and that is only of trans people, that is actually about 1 in 300,000. You also say that trans people are also hateful. A common misconception is that trans people get angry by misgendering immediately. Often if you say the wrong pronouns, someone will correct you and explain it. If you continue to do it, they may still remind you. But if you purposefully use the wrong pronouns then people get annoyed. If I called you “he” or “she” when you are actually the other, you would first correct me. If I did it again you know I am trying to annoy you to prove my own twisted point. Of course, I don’t know your gender, so I am using a neutral second person. Of course trans people want to be seen as normal, but “normal” is a concept controlled by the hegemony, and may I remind you the hegemony in the UK is anti-trans with no real proof (Rishi Sunak). As I have already explained, as you have already explained, sex roles are both through biology and social cognitive structures. Its also ridiculous you try and prove differences through the decapitation of babies. As much as that is related to testosterone and a lack of oxytocin, its also a war crime as last time I checked babies weren’t being drafted, so social factors are just as important as to why these people would do this. Overall, the rest of what you discuss is just showing that you also agree there is a disconnect from gender and sex, and that gender is a spectrum and also not real. So, if something is not real, yet society forces us to choose a box, how can we expect us all to align? If you add the biological effects on that as well, plus some social and psychological factors, you have gender dysphoria or (gender identity disorder as your source Green would define). Of course animals don’t have gender, but the difference is that humans have a superior cognitive ability and thus have made these systems. Biologically, a male animal may behave different to a female animal, but its not the same across all species. Although, we are yet to study every animal in as much detail as humans, so a comparison is going to be a worthless point on your part. We both reject gender theory, we both believe the cause is a mix of biological and social-cognitive, but whereas I am quoting studies supported by modern research which show gender dysphoria exists, you are quoting falsified evidence where the researcher caused the shame, and comparing transgender to a Napolean complex, which is also regarded by modern research to be a myth and a social stereotype rather than a real thing. Of course, we don’t affirm Napolean concepts, in the same way we don’t affirm the earth is flat, there is no proof. There is proof for transgender, regardless of what your disproven sources from 40 years ago claim. Good luck getting your paper published, I hope you actually remember its 2023 before choosing your sources for that.

Definitely agree with you there. I tried to take a less insulting approach as I don't think people will listen to just plain statistics and facts, and so I just thought if I point out what is fundamentally wrong with Sunak's points, it shows a basic idea that the audience can research further so they wish. But I definitely could have done better with more time, and I aim to revisit it later

Unfortunately, that is definitely not the case, Brexit and Covid in the UK prove that over and over again

Country or frozen food shop? 😂

Hahaha, oh dear 😂😂😂

Aha thanks 😂 I may have to change my goals 😂

Good for you

Well, we'll see what I can do, it might be a celebrity rite of passage...

Aww thanks :)

Really? Wow, Amazon really knows what people want 😂

I'm sure you can find the second one online somewhere by someone else 😂

My apologies, maybe next subscriber special I should just do a hunger games 😂