Agreed! One of the few sane people speaking out publicly, and standing up for those among the most vulnerable casualties of this massive scam and hijacking of everyone's rights, especially those of women prisoners, kids, parents, lesbians in particular, and women in general.
@@GayDetransitioner Where did I say I get triggered? I'm against gender ideology, whereas "trans" has no fixed meaning. It mostly means "transvestite" and I have no problem with transvestites as long as they stay out of women's spaces and stop trying to influence education policy.
Vestite is Latin/italian for dressed which is a more accurate name for trans people because they are dressed as the opposite sex, they have not changed sex.
"-that same person". Then in the next sentence you are referring to them. Them what. Them clothing for that same person? Safegaurding does include the right to wear snow pants too with a jacket in the winter outside without that offending someone based on the person whom they believe they should be instead. Safegaurding does include the right to wear a kilt too during a ceremony where they will be recieving recognition too without that offending someone based on the person whom they believe they should be instead. When only stereotypes that have only very limited value during communication become more important to some people than people in general whlle at the same time the majority of people have the attitude that when they believe that they could win a fight with something to win at the end of that fight then they would well then from there a whole lot of chaos is bound to start while getting worse as time goes on.
There's a woman in prison in CALIFORNIA right now. After asking the transwoman inmate politely to stop watching her in the bathroom twice, she filed a complaint. She has been DENIED Parole because of it! It's a massive human rights violation against WOMEN. THIS MUST END.
@historicalperspectiveLesbians are still women, dude. Men staring at other men is still happening in a single sex facility. Men don’t belong in women’s prison, nor women in men’s.
By her logic, it must also be okay to call someone with Down Syndrome a retard or 'intellectually inferior'. Nobody actually thinks it's okay to say literally anything just because it's true, because you could justify plenty of insulting and anti social behaviour by doing that.
Who ever thought that allowing people to change their birth certificates was a good idea? It boggles the mind that this was ever proposed, let alone taken seriously enough to proceed.
Yes, agreed. They have had a long wish list, an entire agenda they've been working on for several decades. First they introduce an item, it's denounced as absurd and crazy, but they keep pushing until everyone has been bullied, guilt-tripped, manipulated, silenced, and cowed into going along with it, and afraid to speak out to find like-minded allies, so they have been able to get one thing they want after another. They have been quietly doing back-room deals to change laws throughout government, for decades, but especially in the last two. Fortunately, more people are finding the courage to speak up, such as Dr. Kate Coleman.
@@plant495 the thing about these "back-room deals" that should be investigated is what the quid pro quo was? furthermore, the politicians and civil servants who have allowed this to happen in several countries were incredibly irresponsible, did they not think for a second that this would have an impact of medical, social and criminal data-keeping?
@@robws007 Clearly, the deals have been to do favors for TQIA+s in exchange for their financial and political campaign support: donations, volunteering on campaigns.
"It undermines safeguarding." It's supposed to. The point of it is to let men into women's private spaces and ascribe sexuality to kids. The principle authors of Queer Theory believed in doing away with the Age Of Consent law.
Except you cannot ascribe any biological function to anybody. This would be the same as the claims made by the "trans activist" that sex is assigned at birth. Both would be incorrect. As animals, all humans are born with sexuality. The difference in society is the safeguarding. We say that children are not emotionally mature to manage their sexuality which is why we have age of consent laws. Yet on the other hand we say they are emotionally mature to be held criminally responsible. The Queer Theorist disagrees with the emotionally mature argument. Perhaps out of personal fetish, perhaps out of ideological/philosophical differences. Human societies make very strange laws based on very strange bases, even at the best of times.
People seem to be choosing to be naiive as if it's morally superior. The GLF wanted to prevent women being able to define what a woman is. If you make boundaries porous, violators will persist in pushing them.
@@inthegutterstaringathestars The argument isn't that children "aren't emotionally mature enough to manage their sexuality." In all my decades of feminism, I have never heard such a phrase. The feminist, child-safeguarding argument is, in essence, that children do not have enough power, autonomy, and years of wisdom and experience to know when they are being sexually manipulated and exploited, and don't have the equal power to prevent that exploitation.
@@inthegutterstaringathestars "Perhaps out of personal fetish, perhaps out of ideological/philosophical differences." If you don't now which one it is, you need to read more about Derrida, Foucalt, Lyotard et al.
The issue is not what people wear, the issue is redefining what women are and co-opting or using gender dysphoria to get access to women's spaces, rights and opportunities. It's defining us as cis, as if the true referent is trans, then using cis as a slur. It's pulling apart a man's view of womanhood, and removing our common experiences from our definition (and the language that goes with them, like breast-feeding and periods) and having men then tell us not only what being a woman is, but parodying us and saying they are better women than us.
@@MarthaAnthony… Women decided to get rid of “men’s spaces”, then thought it would be fun to play word games about all sorts of things. When it comes back around, they blame men. As usual. .
@@jgcelliott1this is definitely a thing that men are doing. It's embarrassing for men not to take responsibility for what their fellows are doing. As men let's reflect on our responsibilities here.
The irony is how many people who support the trans cult also believe gender (sex!) is a spectrum and fluid. The trans concept only works if sex is binary, so how can it be a spectrum? Watch their eyes glaze over before they get angry...
So why do people like you get triggered by being referred to as anti trans, when you're openly against the whole concept of it? Also, I thought most 'gender critical' people acknowledged that gender dysphoria is real?
I'm glad you used the word "sex". People used the word "gender" when the word "sex" is appropriate. They even call that mutilation they undergo "gender affirmation surgery". The penis or the vagina are sex organs, not "gender organs". Estrogen and testosterone are sex hormones, not "gender hormones". We are being tyrannized by words, like in a Marxist Leninist or Nazi state. Forced to publicly regurgitate lies.
Describing someone as a 'trans woman' should just be like calling them a goth or a punk or a gamer or a football fan. It's part of their personality or their lifestyle, not an 'identity' and it should have no kind of validation, recognition or protection in law. And it should never be used to replace the word man in any legal context. Fetish, delusion and non-conforming gender expression are matters for individuals, not the state.
True but it is still an "identity". "Identity" is just a form of self-definition. A football fan is an "identity" A goth is an "identity" It tells others. I define myself according to this group at exclusion to these other groups. The problems, as I see it, is not that identity or validation or recognition are bad things. It is that the activist class have deified the concept as something more significant that everybody else in society should worship rather than just. "Ok that is how you see yourself" and moving on with life.
@@inthegutterstaringathestars Yes, an identity, but not one in the sense of one on a par with being a woman or black or gay - the kind of identity that warrants legal recognition. Your last sentence sums it up nicely.
Transwoman is an honorary term that was originally given out of sympathy or pity to men who had done the undignified thing of attempting to emulate women because of a strange compulsion and deep-rooted unhappiness with their male bodies. It was left-wing lunatics with tiny brains who started to believe, in their typically misguided way, that the term was a description of reality, that it meant that its subjects were actually women. It's now patently clear that far too many people are too stupid and ingorant to not be hoodwinked by linguistic manipulation, and so the term should be scrapped. They're men, plain and simple.
@@regpither3392 Why does the law have to recognize woman, black or gay? I can imagine limited specific cases where the law could differentiate between men and women, but even that isn't 100% clear to me. The whole point if egalitarianism is equality in the eyes of the law, i.e. the law makes no differences based on any of those traits. In other words no legal recognition of any of those things. Identity is complex. It's partly traits that are genetic, partly a concept that arises within your own mind and ,the part that many people don't like to accept but true none the less, it also partly how the people around you perceive you. You can identify as a kind and giving person all day long. But if everybody around you thinks you're an insufferable ass, then your personal sense of your identity is delusional and not nearly as descriptive of who you are as it should be.
there is a word for "transwoman" it is "crossdresser". Andrew when you say "that guy's a furry" you are still acknowledging that he is a guy..... what wrong with saying "that man's a crossdresser"?
The change of name is all about pushing medically money making solutions. Changing language is about controlling and changing laws under the disguise of kindness.
Plus, how often is it necessary to identify people by their social peculiarities? Should we have a special name for people who like to eat mushrooms? In normal life, why do we even need to refer to someone's sexual habits at all?
The problem isn’t that some people undergo major cosmetic surgery, including castration. It’s that we are being forced to collude in their self delusion, to pretend that they have changed sex. We don’t have to pretend that a same sex couple are man and wife do we?
Yeah it is odd. In Asian countries they call them lady boys and it’s understood that they are NOT female. The narrative in western countries identifying trans people as the sex and gender of the opposite sex they were born, just muddies the water in an already confusing situation and doesn’t accomplish their goal of inclusivity but pushes out others specifically women
except that cosmetic surgery is still cosplay. Even getting surgery does not make you the opposite gender. If you think of Hans Moravec's thought experiment, where we replace, bit by bit, every part of your body from carbon to silicon based structures. Will you still be you? Does physical body modification change who you are or your gender?
I disagree. I think the people who are mentally unwell enough that they can be easily convinced to undergo dangerous mutilations should be offered psychological and psychiatric help, not have their delusions enabled by ruthless Frankensteins and Mengeles who have forgotten their hippocratic oath. We don't enable the delusions of anorexics or schizophrenics. Why are we enabling those of this category of delusionals?
these language games are deliberate. Transactivism didn't stop at using 'transwoman' for transidentified males, and asking for nondiscrimination, which would be fine. They moved on to trans woman (just a kind of woman like any other) and now claim that "woman" must include males, and even calls TIMs "female" (an absurd denial of biological reality!). This is a purposeful obfuscation of any difference between TIMs and women - in order to roll back women's rights and make it impossible for anyone to say so. And that's why going along with trans-language-games is just not a good idea.
Oh so they want to be considered a type of women now by putting a descriptive word in front of women? Okay. They get to be false women. And they can have a space or no space between.
The people suffering from gender dysphoria and are not part of the incels and perves that like to invade women's spaces and make women uncomfortable, need some consideration, they have a medical condition and they don't assign their gender themselves it's a medical diagnosis.
This woman is so direct and brilliant. Do we need a word to describe men who like flowers? For men who pluck their eyebrows? For women who don't shave their legs? Any identity that can be changed on a whim is useless, we may as well identify people by what they ate for breakfast.
And everybody knows that the feelings of biological females, formerly also known by the word woman, don't count. Move over the 1950s, have we got a competition for erasing women for you.
She speaks the truth about using the words trans women I am happy to say men dressed as women . Why do we have to shorten the language. We don't talk enough as it is
This is the crazy thing - why brave when a decade or two ago this would be normal thinking. But I get you, the intolerant 'identity' mob would attempt to silence her and her thinking. Two fingers to them!
It is deeply disheartening that contemporary society has become ensnared by this particular ideology, and individuals who dare to voice objective truths should be commended for their bravery.
I recommend everyone read George Orwell’s essay, “ Politics and the English Language.” Although it was written in 1940, it addresses the verbal gymnastics and tortured linguistics so much like what we see today. It showed a lot of the underpinnings of Newspeak, in 1984.
In the old days people like Danny la Rue were known as Female impersonators,there were also transvestites who enjoyed wearing other gender clothing..So why cant we revert to this manner of refering to this type of person,rather than pretending sex change is a reality.
Call them whatever you desire. One does not get their own pronouns, and just because they want you to do something imposes no obligation whatsoever that you comply. Never surrender the language.
Yes. "Men", "trans-IDing males/TIMs", or "men who ID as transwomen" are as far as I'll go. And ONLY correct, sex-based pronouns, 100% of the time, zero exceptions. But I won't get bullied into PRETENDING to share the evidence-free beliefs of any OTHER ideology, religion, political group, race, nationality, subculture, sexuality, etc... I'm sure as hell not making some special exception, to prioritize THEIR beliefs above my own (a demand I'd NEVER make) for THIS ideology, no matter how super-duper special and important they believe they are.
I tell people, "For clarity, I refer to people by their biology." Then I either say "men," "women," or "men who say they're women," or "women who say they're men." I also refer to them as bio-phobes. Bio-phobia - an irrational fear of nature, including of one's own biological sex. (Also, bo-phobe, bio-phobia.)
But isn't men even easier. And more accurate. They're not fake men or fake women. They're dressed up as men or women. That's not even being fake. If for Halloween I go as Michael Myers that doesn't make me a serial killer or even a fake serial killer. It just makes me dressed up as Michael Myers.
For the sake of brevity can't we just call them what they are? If I dress up as Michael Myers for Halloween does that make me a fake serial killer? Or does that make me dressed up as one?
We can call them what we want, it's our personal opinion. If the law wants to force people to cow tow to a group of individuals who have proclivities that are over sexualised and offensive to 99.9% of the human population then those law makers show no respect to the 99.9% of those who are offended by attitudes and actions which are harmful to children and others. I will never call a born male anything but a born male, I will not acknowledge your sexual proclivities as they are offensive to me. If someone is offended by my opinion, close your eyes and ears. If you don't like the way you are, get help but stop trying to push your problems onto the 99% we don't want to included.
Do you feel the same way about medically diagnosed gender dysphorics who just want to live without the pain of their condition. I quite agree when you're talking about the overly vocal group, with hair never seen in nature, nose rings, chest hair, beards, and a dozen buttons with their pronouns du jour. The latter are being given too much attention and verification by those who disregard biology, because verifiable science neither fits their agenda.
@@sangfroid4376I can't speak for the OP, but I have two transsexual friends, and they're completely different from the "transgender activists". They've both had gender dysphoria all their lives, and they transitioned medically as adults, and I consider them women because that's who they really are at heart. I welcome them in female spaces. But the "trans rights activists" are making things bad for transsexual women as well as for cis women like me. No REAL trans woman would ever want to walk around a Korean spa with a penis hanging out; nor wear a beard and demand to be called "ma'am". And especially, no real trans woman would tell survivors of r*pe that we should "unlearn our bigotry against penises" the way Mridul Wadhwa -- who has a penis -- did at the Edinburgh R*pe Crisis Center. It's always the aggressive, arrogant, MASCULINE behavior of so-called transgender "women" who wreck things for everyone else. The real trans women and trans men are just trying to live their lives, just like cis women and cis men. ❤
@@sangfroid4376 I don't think a diagnosis should be necessary to acknowledge the ones that respect boundaries and biological reality while living as the opposite sex. In fact, I think trans has been disastrously and inappropriately medicalized in nonsensical ways which prevent appropriate treatment for anyone who may get caught up under the label while doing a lot of damage. That damage impacts people living happily and respectfully as the opposite sex.
This woman is excellent, no such tink as trans ,let them live b their lives &keep out out of womens spaces,There are 2 sexes ,male &female, v simple, not complicated, you cannot change sex ,
The meaning of the word trans is a prefix meaning "across", "beyond", or "on the other side of". It linguistically doesn't make sense to call trans men/woman with the terms as they are used now. Trans man would mean "on the other side of man", which logically means "woman" and vice versa for trans women. If they wanted the word to mean the intent in what they propose a trans man would be a man who identifies as a woman. Then they would be "on the other side of man". The current terminology is backwards in its definitions.
That's the way a lot of people understand it. I had to look it up to learn what each title meant to use it. I gave them my time and effort. Not anymore!
That's because they are trying to make words mean nothing. It's hard to express or communicate anything if the language has been corrupted and destroyed through wide spread misuse. It's also designed to make everyone feel crazy.
We already had a word for men who pretend to be women - (I'm not sure whether the algorithm likes it so I'll split it up) tra nsves tite. It's a superior word as it's meaning is perfectly clear and it doesn't carry the implication of some sort of magical transformation.
@@pootispoot The concept of autogynephilia is typically associated with men and is often addressed through therapeutic interventions. However, it is concerning that many affected individuals do not actively seek therapeutic support and may manipulate this concept to their advantage.
Reminds me of the Little Britain skit with the characters who wanted to be referred to as “ladies”. A fellow tells his wife on the phone that “a bloke in a dress just helped me fix my van.” He was having none of it and his van was no less fixed. Ahead of their time!
This push for people to accept this is in large part to keep the massive amounts of money coming in to the people who figured out how to monetize this all. Never leave this part out of the conversation. Why else would therapists be not be allowed to discuss other possibilities? The directive to therapists is to affirm and nothing else. That is vile. Great guest by the way, she’s thought this trans bs through to its many harmful implications.
I disagree that we won’t need a word for it, we do. But I do agree that Trans woman is not it. A “trans woman” implies a category of women when it is not, it is a category of men. I don’t care how people dress or wear their hair or live their lives but none of those things make you a woman.
If a man wants to live his life as a woman pretending to be a woman, let him dress as a woman and live his live as a he chooses. Changing birth certificates and government issued ID does not change reality, my driver's license still says that I weight 175lbs, that does not change the law of gravity.
But what does it mean for a man to "live as a woman"? How does one describe how a woman lives, without using sex-role stereotypes? There are just two things: 1. Biology, which is immutable 2. Sex-role stereotypes, which are used to try to mould people, but still do not accurately fit all women or all men. None of us perfectly fit all the sex stereotypes for our sex, and many of us fit few or none of them. Descriptors also shouldn't be something we try to fit into, but should be chosen to try to best fit us as we actually are.
@@plant495 biology is immutable, sex role stereotypes are the social construct. I have a very good friend who is female and will always be a real woman unlike hyperfeminized trans. a biological male who wants to be a woman is still a man
That was a very interesting discussion of the language of the gender cult. I wouldn't object to 'trans' as an adjective if it was applied appropriately - so a 'trans man' is a MAN who wants to present as female and a 'trans woman' is a WOMAN who want to present as male. I strongly object to the idea that 'trans woman', as the term is currently used, implies that these men are a sub category of women.
No, because cross-dressers aren't laboring under the delusion that they're actually a different sex trapped in the wrong body. Cross-dressers are just ppl who enjoy looking like the opposite sex.
@@JohnSmith-lk8cy you missed the boat on that my friend. We have loads of words to call these people. I can't say them UA-cam will ban my comment for a month 😁
I couldn’t agree more. I don’t play this game. I have people who distance themselves from me as a result and that’s great because now I know who they are..misogynists.
I agree with Dr. Coleman 100% regarding the usage or words. Having trans woman instead of transwoman is a subtle way of saying this is a type of woman. If we just changed the definition to be: trans man = man who wants to be treated as a woman; trans woman = woman who wants to be treated as a man. Then we retain the actual sex of the person in the noun and the adjective makes the correct categorization.
More people need to understand that these people truly believe that if they change the words we say they can change what's real and what we believe to suit them. The whole point of all the language is to force everybody to use it. They are trying to create the world in their image.
I never understood people who conflate being offended with actual harm! Because like, if you get offended, nothing happens! You don't get a disease or a physical injury from being offended 😂 it's not like, once you get offended, your arm falls off! 🤷♂️ most people that have matured, if they get offended by something, they think about it for 2 seconds, forget about it, and move on with more important things that they have going on! And I never understood the whole "trans rights" movement, like what rights do they not have that everyone else has? Seriously, they have the exact same rights as everyone else does!
Man and woman are words that describe categories of biology. Masculinity and femininity are words that describe gender. 'Transwomen' are simply feminine men, and I refuse to call them anything else.
Amen, great interview and some really good points made by Dr Kate. The first that resonated was at 2:20. We need more discussions like this where people get the chance to speak truth and commonsense without fear or threat of being shut down or "cancelled" as happens all too much in our modern activist driven culture. God bless and thank you Heretics.clips and Dr Kate Coleman. Bryan Man of Faith Ministry 🇦🇺🙏🏼
He is confused. Saying a "furry" means "a person who pretends to be an animal." That's literally the most precise description of that person. But saying a "trans man" OBSCURES the literal definition ("woman who pretends to be a man") while demanding acceptance of a FALSE definition ("woman who transformed into a man"). As she says, it has political importance because the purpose is to create a protected identity, protected from any questioning of its factual validity. So, no, the battle must continue against new, misleading terms.
The speaker begins by asserting that the terms "trans woman" and "trans man" are inaccurate and should not be used. They argue that these terms create a concept that is difficult to define and apply consistently. The speaker also expresses concern about the potential negative consequences of using these terms, such as the implications for safeguarding and the rights of others. The speaker then discusses the evolution of the term "trans woman," from a single word to two separate words. They argue that this change is deliberate and designed to normalize the concept of a trans woman as a woman. The speaker also questions the need for a separate term to describe people who identify as trans, suggesting that existing terms like "man" or "woman" would suffice. The speaker raises concerns about the potential consequences of using the term "trans woman," including the implications for safeguarding children and the rights of others. They argue that the focus should be on safeguarding children and protecting their rights, rather than on accommodating the individual preferences of adults. The speaker concludes by emphasizing the importance of clear and consistent language in discussions about gender identity. They argue that using terms like "trans woman" can create confusion and ambiguity, and may have unintended negative consequences.
@@edenbreckhouse Women have said, “ there’s a man in the women’s locker room.” It was the women who were kicked out of the gym. Not the skirt wearing man. Freedom of speech does matter.
I brought up this exact point; the prefix ‘trans’ means opposite from so, trans-woman literally means a person that is opposite from a woman… so a man.
At present i think the caring nurturing nature of our woman folk has encouraged the affirmation for children so as to avoid self harm in the children. Statistics are often used to justify this in a clinical setting. And i think its a mistake. I think its lazy clinical care. I think its harmful. I understand the why but i dont accept the response from the health sector.
When I was a young girl the first time I came across the mental illness called Dysphoria was when this bloke tried to cut his leg off because he hated it in them days it was an offence to try to commit suicide how things have changed because of messing with the DSM book Women & Girls lose their rights why ?
The problem ia it isnt a term to identify a group of people its a movement looking to supplant and undermine womens rights and remove the distinction between separate spaces.
We all need religion. If it’s no longer acceptable to worship the old gods and saints, we just cook up new ones based on other varieties of nonsense and delusion.
Yes, which explains how the Woke cult sprang up and devoured the online Atheism community. Suddenly they became "Atheism Plus", worshipping their new religion of Wokeness, because humans have had some sort of religion even in prehistoric times; and there are only a very few humans (like James Lindsay) who can be atheist without succumbing to some weird new religious ideology in lieu of God.
This lady is 100 &correct ,&expecting little girls ,women &children to go into bathrooms &locker rooms etc is wrong &unsafe ,There is something else weird behind all this ,women above all needs their privacy ,&transwoman (men ) barging is a no no
The prefix "trans-" generally indicates a movement or change across, beyond, or through something. It is derived from the Latin word "trans", meaning "across" or "beyond". Here are some examples of words with the prefix "trans-": Transcontinental: Across a continent. Transatlantic: Across the Atlantic Ocean. Translucent: Allowing light to pass through partially. Translate: To change something from one language to another. Transform: To change into a different form.
For the longest time I thought a trans woman was a woman that lived as a man and a trans man was a man that lived as a woman. It was kjnda shocking to me when I found out that was not how society defined it.
3:40, why is it important to use descriptors as white/black or even people’s nationalities? While I agree with the sentiment behind what she is saying I think that point is stupid, there is not “necessarily” a need for those adjectives but we use them to clarify what we are referring to. 🤦♀️
You’ve expressed an extremely salient point: the word “trans” is properly and adjective/modifier (not a noun). A sleight of hand occurred when ‘trans’ morphed into a noun. A man who identifies as transgender is, correctly speaking, a transgender-man. By warping language in this way, absurdities become slogans: trans-women are women. There has to be a way to honor individual expressions while standing firm on linguistic distinctions. The conflation of sex (a noun) with transgender (an adjective/modifier) has serious repercussions for women and girls. Sex based rights and protections are eroded when personal identifications are permitted to blur the language. The loophole that enabled this sleight of hand was a former terminology where sex and gender were synonyms (nouns). The trans community redefined the word “gender” as an adjective: a personal, subjective identification, and insisted that this redefined word “gender” was still a noun. They’ve capitalized on this linguistic ambiguity and continue to effectively silence dissent or any rational challenge to this new construct.
I chooses to be happy, and not repressed...and recommend it to anyone. I am not bothered by what others do with their lives. No harm, no foul. No harm...to anyone.
My inner dialogue has settled on trans men for men who dress as female and trans women for women who dress as male. There wasn’t a whole lot of deliberation, in fact none at all, it was just what my mind settled on. Probably because it is the most accurate and descriptive. It would wonderful if those terms came to be accepted so that people wouldn’t need to override their natural inclination every time such people were discussed. No chance that could happen though because it would demolish the core belief that men can become women and women can become men. Even though they can’t and we all know that. Anyway, it makes no sense to let your political opponents to take charge of the language. You might as well concede defeat. I hope “trans men” and “trans women” in the sense that I am using it gets picked up.
Can't tell whether Andrew is deliberately misunderstanding what she is saying? There are a number of reasons we use words. This woman is talking about words as political tools and subtly describing the frog in boiling water. Initially, the word was "transwoman" then it became "trans woman" until eventually the plan was to do away with the concept of trans and all those that identified as "women" were women. The destruction of society through language. Whereas Andrew seems to be arguing that words are a mechanism for understanding the world and that words are neutral. Both are right but in this context the use of the "trans" label is more of a political tool rather than a descriptor.
I don't think he's misunderstanding, I think he's simply disagreeing about the fact that we invent words to describe what we see. We have always and will always do this especially on interesting and important issues whereas she seems to think we ought not to
@@hippo319 I agree but there were some of his responses that gave pause for thought. As if to say "Is he playing devil's advocate? Is he deliberately misunderstanding? or is he genuinely just disagreeing?" As always it is very easy to read intentionality into something somebody says when it is not there.
@@hippo319 I don't think Dr Coleman has a problem with inventing words to describe what we see. I believe she's just opposed to appropriating words that already have a meaning and using them for something else, because in this case it has a knock-on effect on the rights women.
@@spector969 Not just rights of women. It has implications for us all. Which is why in 1984, language was a target. Where you control language, you control society and people. You control reality itself.
Yeah. She is laying out what I have been wondering about for years. They argue about not wanting to be labored with the expectations of being either man or women. My question is what seems to be the issue with either? There have always been different kinds of men and women. Granted homosexuality isn't exactly socially acceptable in a vast majority of circles. I personally find this kind of prejudice to be a tiresome waste of time. On the other hand there are some obvious reasons why civilizations discourage it. There is definitely a clash there.
"Why can't we just call them men?" Most appropriate question ever.
Very impressed that Kate stuck to her guns regarding terminology. There is no need to normalize men pretending to be women!
So then why do you have a problem being referred to as anti trans, when you're against the whole concept?
This woman is a heroine. If you want a frame of reference, she's basically saying "2+2 is not 5" and these days that takes genuine bravery.
I am applauding her👏🏼
So why do people like you get triggered by being referred to as anti trans, when you're openly against the whole concept of it?
Agreed! One of the few sane people speaking out publicly, and standing up for those among the most vulnerable casualties of this massive scam and hijacking of everyone's rights, especially those of women prisoners, kids, parents, lesbians in particular, and women in general.
@@GayDetransitioner Where did I say I get triggered? I'm against gender ideology, whereas "trans" has no fixed meaning. It mostly means "transvestite" and I have no problem with transvestites as long as they stay out of women's spaces and stop trying to influence education policy.
She's definitely familiar with heroin
Everyone used the word “transvestite” to describe that same person a few decades ago. We already had a word for them.
Drag artists were also called Female impersonators
Transexual is not a recent word.
It seems they want us to refer to them by a sex they are not. Involve us in their lie.
Vestite is Latin/italian for dressed which is a more accurate name for trans people because they are dressed as the opposite sex, they have not changed sex.
"-that same person". Then in the next sentence you are referring to them. Them what. Them clothing for that same person? Safegaurding does include the right to wear snow pants too with a jacket in the winter outside without that offending someone based on the person whom they believe they should be instead. Safegaurding does include the right to wear a kilt too during a ceremony where they will be recieving recognition too without that offending someone based on the person whom they believe they should be instead. When only stereotypes that have only very limited value during communication become more important to some people than people in general whlle at the same time the majority of people have the attitude that when they believe that they could win a fight with something to win at the end of that fight then they would well then from there a whole lot of chaos is bound to start while getting worse as time goes on.
There's a woman in prison in CALIFORNIA right now. After asking the transwoman inmate politely to stop watching her in the bathroom twice, she filed a complaint. She has been DENIED Parole because of it! It's a massive human rights violation against WOMEN. THIS MUST END.
That woman's name is Cathleen Quinn. She's a prisoner at Central California Women’s Facility (CCWF).
@@wiseonwords Thank You.
Stories like this make me ill. We've put woman's safety and rights behind the feelings cancer of delusional men.
That is outrageous! Who are her attorneys, please? Who can we write to, to support her?
@historicalperspectiveLesbians are still women, dude. Men staring at other men is still happening in a single sex facility. Men don’t belong in women’s prison, nor women in men’s.
Thank goodness for the voices of reason like Dr Coleman still out there!
By her logic, it must also be okay to call someone with Down Syndrome a retard or 'intellectually inferior'. Nobody actually thinks it's okay to say literally anything just because it's true, because you could justify plenty of insulting and anti social behaviour by doing that.
Who ever thought that allowing people to change their birth certificates was a good idea? It boggles the mind that this was ever proposed, let alone taken seriously enough to proceed.
So why do people like you get triggered by being referred to as anti trans, when you're openly against the whole concept of it?
Yes, agreed. They have had a long wish list, an entire agenda they've been working on for several decades.
First they introduce an item, it's denounced as absurd and crazy, but they keep pushing until everyone has been bullied, guilt-tripped, manipulated, silenced, and cowed into going along with it, and afraid to speak out to find like-minded allies, so they have been able to get one thing they want after another. They have been quietly doing back-room deals to change laws throughout government, for decades, but especially in the last two.
Fortunately, more people are finding the courage to speak up, such as Dr. Kate Coleman.
@@plant495 the thing about these "back-room deals" that should be investigated is what the quid pro quo was? furthermore, the politicians and civil servants who have allowed this to happen in several countries were incredibly irresponsible, did they not think for a second that this would have an impact of medical, social and criminal data-keeping?
@@robws007 Very well said. I agree with you. And no, they have not.
@@robws007 Clearly, the deals have been to do favors for TQIA+s in exchange for their financial and political campaign support: donations, volunteering on campaigns.
"It undermines safeguarding." It's supposed to. The point of it is to let men into women's private spaces and ascribe sexuality to kids. The principle authors of Queer Theory believed in doing away with the Age Of Consent law.
Except you cannot ascribe any biological function to anybody. This would be the same as the claims made by the "trans activist" that sex is assigned at birth. Both would be incorrect.
As animals, all humans are born with sexuality. The difference in society is the safeguarding. We say that children are not emotionally mature to manage their sexuality which is why we have age of consent laws. Yet on the other hand we say they are emotionally mature to be held criminally responsible.
The Queer Theorist disagrees with the emotionally mature argument. Perhaps out of personal fetish, perhaps out of ideological/philosophical differences.
Human societies make very strange laws based on very strange bases, even at the best of times.
@@inthegutterstaringathestarsquite right he can't. Trans can though, as a special category.
People seem to be choosing to be naiive as if it's morally superior. The GLF wanted to prevent women being able to define what a woman is. If you make boundaries porous, violators will persist in pushing them.
@@inthegutterstaringathestars The argument isn't that children "aren't emotionally mature enough to manage their sexuality." In all my decades of feminism, I have never heard such a phrase. The feminist, child-safeguarding argument is, in essence, that children do not have enough power, autonomy, and years of wisdom and experience to know when they are being sexually manipulated and exploited, and don't have the equal power to prevent that exploitation.
@@inthegutterstaringathestars "Perhaps out of personal fetish, perhaps out of ideological/philosophical differences."
If you don't now which one it is, you need to read more about Derrida, Foucalt, Lyotard et al.
The issue is not what people wear, the issue is redefining what women are and co-opting or using gender dysphoria to get access to women's spaces, rights and opportunities. It's defining us as cis, as if the true referent is trans, then using cis as a slur. It's pulling apart a man's view of womanhood, and removing our common experiences from our definition (and the language that goes with them, like breast-feeding and periods) and having men then tell us not only what being a woman is, but parodying us and saying they are better women than us.
You nailed it
Men aren't the reason this is happening.
..
.
@@jgcelliott1 If is was women trying to come into women's spaces... then there would be no issue.
@@MarthaAnthony… Women decided to get rid of “men’s spaces”, then thought it would be fun to play word games about all sorts of things. When it comes back around, they blame men.
As usual.
.
@@jgcelliott1this is definitely a thing that men are doing. It's embarrassing for men not to take responsibility for what their fellows are doing. As men let's reflect on our responsibilities here.
This woman is completely correct. There is no such thing as "trans". You cannot transition to the other sex.
but its like we are coming to a point where you can't say that
The irony is how many people who support the trans cult also believe gender (sex!) is a spectrum and fluid. The trans concept only works if sex is binary, so how can it be a spectrum? Watch their eyes glaze over before they get angry...
So why do people like you get triggered by being referred to as anti trans, when you're openly against the whole concept of it? Also, I thought most 'gender critical' people acknowledged that gender dysphoria is real?
I'm glad you used the word "sex". People used the word "gender" when the word "sex" is appropriate. They even call that mutilation they undergo "gender affirmation surgery". The penis or the vagina are sex organs, not "gender organs". Estrogen and testosterone are sex hormones, not "gender hormones". We are being tyrannized by words, like in a Marxist Leninist or Nazi state. Forced to publicly regurgitate lies.
Trans and cis are types of isomer, not people.
Describing someone as a 'trans woman' should just be like calling them a goth or a punk or a gamer or a football fan. It's part of their personality or their lifestyle, not an 'identity' and it should have no kind of validation, recognition or protection in law. And it should never be used to replace the word man in any legal context. Fetish, delusion and non-conforming gender expression are matters for individuals, not the state.
💯💯💯
True but it is still an "identity".
"Identity" is just a form of self-definition.
A football fan is an "identity"
A goth is an "identity"
It tells others. I define myself according to this group at exclusion to these other groups.
The problems, as I see it, is not that identity or validation or recognition are bad things. It is that the activist class have deified the concept as something more significant that everybody else in society should worship rather than just. "Ok that is how you see yourself" and moving on with life.
@@inthegutterstaringathestars Yes, an identity, but not one in the sense of one on a par with being a woman or black or gay - the kind of identity that warrants legal recognition. Your last sentence sums it up nicely.
Transwoman is an honorary term that was originally given out of sympathy or pity to men who had done the undignified thing of attempting to emulate women because of a strange compulsion and deep-rooted unhappiness with their male bodies.
It was left-wing lunatics with tiny brains who started to believe, in their typically misguided way, that the term was a description of reality, that it meant that its subjects were actually women.
It's now patently clear that far too many people are too stupid and ingorant to not be hoodwinked by linguistic manipulation, and so the term should be scrapped. They're men, plain and simple.
@@regpither3392 Why does the law have to recognize woman, black or gay? I can imagine limited specific cases where the law could differentiate between men and women, but even that isn't 100% clear to me. The whole point if egalitarianism is equality in the eyes of the law, i.e. the law makes no differences based on any of those traits. In other words no legal recognition of any of those things.
Identity is complex. It's partly traits that are genetic, partly a concept that arises within your own mind and ,the part that many people don't like to accept but true none the less, it also partly how the people around you perceive you. You can identify as a kind and giving person all day long. But if everybody around you thinks you're an insufferable ass, then your personal sense of your identity is delusional and not nearly as descriptive of who you are as it should be.
there is a word for "transwoman" it is "crossdresser". Andrew when you say "that guy's a furry" you are still acknowledging that he is a guy..... what wrong with saying "that man's a crossdresser"?
The change of name is all about pushing medically money making solutions. Changing language is about controlling and changing laws under the disguise of kindness.
Plus, how often is it necessary to identify people by their social peculiarities? Should we have a special name for people who like to eat mushrooms? In normal life, why do we even need to refer to someone's sexual habits at all?
@@ohsweetmystery
Someone's sexual habits ?
@@RandomStuff-i4iyes. Autogynephilia is a thing
@@ohsweetmystery a man who likes to eat mushrooms is still a man just like a crossdresser is still a man
Hell yeah, this woman is the way forward.
So why do people like you get triggered by being referred to as anti trans, when you're openly against the whole concept of it?
The problem isn’t that some people undergo major cosmetic surgery, including castration. It’s that we are being forced to collude in their self delusion, to pretend that they have changed sex. We don’t have to pretend that a same sex couple are man and wife do we?
Yeah it is odd. In Asian countries they call them lady boys and it’s understood that they are NOT female. The narrative in western countries identifying trans people as the sex and gender of the opposite sex they were born, just muddies the water in an already confusing situation and doesn’t accomplish their goal of inclusivity but pushes out others specifically women
except that cosmetic surgery is still cosplay. Even getting surgery does not make you the opposite gender.
If you think of Hans Moravec's thought experiment, where we replace, bit by bit, every part of your body from carbon to silicon based structures. Will you still be you?
Does physical body modification change who you are or your gender?
Collude and collide,- both.
@@markferguson3745Oops, corrected.
I disagree. I think the people who are mentally unwell enough that they can be easily convinced to undergo dangerous mutilations should be offered psychological and psychiatric help, not have their delusions enabled by ruthless Frankensteins and Mengeles who have forgotten their hippocratic oath. We don't enable the delusions of anorexics or schizophrenics. Why are we enabling those of this category of delusionals?
these language games are deliberate. Transactivism didn't stop at using 'transwoman' for transidentified males, and asking for nondiscrimination, which would be fine. They moved on to trans woman (just a kind of woman like any other) and now claim that "woman" must include males, and even calls TIMs "female" (an absurd denial of biological reality!). This is a purposeful obfuscation of any difference between TIMs and women - in order to roll back women's rights and make it impossible for anyone to say so. And that's why going along with trans-language-games is just not a good idea.
Oh so they want to be considered a type of women now by putting a descriptive word in front of women? Okay. They get to be false women. And they can have a space or no space between.
💯
OMG she's good, really good, cutting through all the BS & saying it like it is 👍
The people suffering from gender dysphoria and are not part of the incels and perves that like to invade women's spaces and make women uncomfortable, need some consideration, they have a medical condition and they don't assign their gender themselves it's a medical diagnosis.
Thumbs up for Kate Coleman👍
Heretics is now my Go To channel. Thanks Andrew & all your guests
It feels logically wrong to use "trans woman" to mean a crossdressing man. Shouldn't it be "trans man", linguistically speaking?
Trans vestite man, yeah!
WE didn't create this concept. THEY did. We didn't create this area of uncertainty. THEY DID.
now be kind and comply
I haven't yet met a kind activist.
@@rachellandry3116 take a look at the Pritzker family of Chicago. Early investors in Gender Affirming Care. Trillion dollar industry created.
Ignore the 50% of the human race you're erasing. Be "kind" to the .03% at the expense of the 50%. So kind.
@@MarthaAnthony I've never met a kind feminist activist either.
@@MarthaAnthony Agreed. And oh boy, do they expect *us* to "be kind"!
This woman is so direct and brilliant. Do we need a word to describe men who like flowers? For men who pluck their eyebrows? For women who don't shave their legs?
Any identity that can be changed on a whim is useless, we may as well identify people by what they ate for breakfast.
never call them a woman . reality matters
I call them "trans". They don't deserve to be called a woman or a man if they are not.
So why do people like you get triggered by being referred to as anti trans, when you're openly against the whole concept of it?
But you will hurt Their FEELINGS Which is a crime now
Everybody knows that words are literal violence. 😂
And everybody knows that the feelings of biological females, formerly also known by the word woman, don't count. Move over the 1950s, have we got a competition for erasing women for you.
She speaks the truth about using the words trans women I am happy to say men dressed as women . Why do we have to shorten the language. We don't talk enough as it is
I'm guessing you think it's okay to refer to mentally disabled people as "People who are mentally inferior" then? Since it's technically a truth
Yes, I say "men who say they're women." Because that's all they are: men making an irrational and sexist claim.
We already had the word : transvestite. That's the world I grew up with in the seventies and eighties.
Shes brave ❤
This is the crazy thing - why brave when a decade or two ago this would be normal thinking.
But I get you, the intolerant 'identity' mob would attempt to silence her and her thinking. Two fingers to them!
It is deeply disheartening that contemporary society has become ensnared by this particular ideology, and individuals who dare to voice objective truths should be commended for their bravery.
I recommend everyone read George Orwell’s essay, “ Politics and the English Language.” Although it was written in 1940, it addresses the verbal gymnastics and tortured linguistics so much like what we see today. It showed a lot of the underpinnings of Newspeak, in 1984.
In the old days people like Danny la Rue were known as Female impersonators,there were also transvestites who enjoyed wearing other gender clothing..So why cant we revert to this manner of refering to this type of person,rather than pretending sex change is a reality.
Most of them don't claim to literally change sex.
We should, and without asking permission. The TRAs didn't need our permission.
Call them whatever you desire. One does not get their own pronouns, and just because they want you to do something imposes no obligation whatsoever that you comply. Never surrender the language.
Always remember that speech belongs to the speaker
Your first sentence and your second sentence contradict each other. If we call them whatever they want then they do in fact get their own pronoun.
So is it okay to call people with Down Syndrome retards just because you could justify it as being true?
@@MamaMOB Great point.
@@LeishaCamden Yes! Thank you. Beautiful description of our First Amendment rights in the U.S.
Yes. "Men", "trans-IDing males/TIMs", or "men who ID as transwomen" are as far as I'll go.
And ONLY correct, sex-based pronouns, 100% of the time, zero exceptions.
But I won't get bullied into PRETENDING to share the evidence-free beliefs of any OTHER ideology, religion, political group, race, nationality, subculture, sexuality, etc... I'm sure as hell not making some special exception, to prioritize THEIR beliefs above my own (a demand I'd NEVER make) for THIS ideology, no matter how super-duper special and important they believe they are.
Brilliant! Tims and Tifs!
@@BarnabyWild13 that's generally what they're called now. We're taking back our language. Men are women are called just that. No more qualifiers.
I tell people, "For clarity, I refer to people by their biology." Then I either say "men," "women," or "men who say they're women," or "women who say they're men."
I also refer to them as bio-phobes.
Bio-phobia - an irrational fear of nature, including of one's own biological sex. (Also, bo-phobe, bio-phobia.)
If you insist, for the sake of brevity you can call them fakemen and fakewomen.
Or that crossdresser
@@PurifyWithLight Yep
But isn't men even easier. And more accurate. They're not fake men or fake women. They're dressed up as men or women. That's not even being fake. If for Halloween I go as Michael Myers that doesn't make me a serial killer or even a fake serial killer. It just makes me dressed up as Michael Myers.
For the sake of brevity can't we just call them what they are? If I dress up as Michael Myers for Halloween does that make me a fake serial killer? Or does that make me dressed up as one?
@@MamaMOB If you're against the whole concept of being a transexual, then why do you get upset when people refer to you as anti trans?
We can call them what we want, it's our personal opinion. If the law wants to force people to cow tow to a group of individuals who have proclivities that are over sexualised and offensive to 99.9% of the human population then those law makers show no respect to the 99.9% of those who are offended by attitudes and actions which are harmful to children and others. I will never call a born male anything but a born male, I will not acknowledge your sexual proclivities as they are offensive to me. If someone is offended by my opinion, close your eyes and ears. If you don't like the way you are, get help but stop trying to push your problems onto the 99% we don't want to included.
Do you feel the same way about medically diagnosed gender dysphorics who just want to live without the pain of their condition. I quite agree when you're talking about the overly vocal group, with hair never seen in nature, nose rings, chest hair, beards, and a dozen buttons with their pronouns du jour. The latter are being given too much attention and verification by those who disregard biology, because verifiable science neither fits their agenda.
@@sangfroid4376I can't speak for the OP, but I have two transsexual friends, and they're completely different from the "transgender activists". They've both had gender dysphoria all their lives, and they transitioned medically as adults, and I consider them women because that's who they really are at heart. I welcome them in female spaces.
But the "trans rights activists" are making things bad for transsexual women as well as for cis women like me. No REAL trans woman would ever want to walk around a Korean spa with a penis hanging out; nor wear a beard and demand to be called "ma'am". And especially, no real trans woman would tell survivors of r*pe that we should "unlearn our bigotry against penises" the way Mridul Wadhwa -- who has a penis -- did at the Edinburgh R*pe Crisis Center.
It's always the aggressive, arrogant, MASCULINE behavior of so-called transgender "women" who wreck things for everyone else. The real trans women and trans men are just trying to live their lives, just like cis women and cis men. ❤
@@sangfroid4376 These people don't care that they're demonizing regular trans people.
@@GayDetransitionerNo such thing, so no need to worry about being demonised.
@@sangfroid4376 I don't think a diagnosis should be necessary to acknowledge the ones that respect boundaries and biological reality while living as the opposite sex. In fact, I think trans has been disastrously and inappropriately medicalized in nonsensical ways which prevent appropriate treatment for anyone who may get caught up under the label while doing a lot of damage. That damage impacts people living happily and respectfully as the opposite sex.
she's speaking facts
This woman is excellent, no such tink as trans ,let them live b their lives &keep out out of womens spaces,There are 2 sexes ,male &female, v simple, not complicated, you cannot change sex ,
So why do people like you get triggered by being referred to as anti trans, when you're openly against the whole concept of it?
WE didn't create this. Our enemies did and our children have fallen for it.
I really do think China and other adversaries are behind this. They are laughing at us.
@@wesleywarsmith1113 I tried to mention Ch!na but my reply to you go de/eted by UA-cam. We have to write in code now
:(
So why do people like you get triggered by being referred to as anti trans, when you're openly against the whole concept of it?
The meaning of the word trans is a prefix meaning "across", "beyond", or "on the other side of".
It linguistically doesn't make sense to call trans men/woman with the terms as they are used now.
Trans man would mean "on the other side of man", which logically means "woman" and vice versa for trans women.
If they wanted the word to mean the intent in what they propose a trans man would be a man who identifies as a woman. Then they would be "on the other side of man".
The current terminology is backwards in its definitions.
That's the way a lot of people understand it. I had to look it up to learn what each title meant to use it. I gave them my time and effort. Not anymore!
That's because they are trying to make words mean nothing. It's hard to express or communicate anything if the language has been corrupted and destroyed through wide spread misuse. It's also designed to make everyone feel crazy.
We already had a word for men who pretend to be women - (I'm not sure whether the algorithm likes it so I'll split it up) tra nsves tite. It's a superior word as it's meaning is perfectly clear and it doesn't carry the implication of some sort of magical transformation.
Just call them autogynephiles
@@pootispoot The concept of autogynephilia is typically associated with men and is often addressed through therapeutic interventions. However, it is concerning that many affected individuals do not actively seek therapeutic support and may manipulate this concept to their advantage.
@@frankgillespie9391 agreed
I think don’t we should call them that because it’s not acceptable to be that, just call them men like the lady in the video says. They are men.
@@frankgillespie9391 But then you also claim that most trans people are gay and autistic?
Not all old dress-ups have Autogynaphilia though..init
If only the media would listen to her and stop this madness before it REALLY gets out of control.
The media is complicit.
I think we’re already there.
Reminds me of the Little Britain skit with the characters who wanted to be referred to as “ladies”. A fellow tells his wife on the phone that “a bloke in a dress just helped me fix my van.” He was having none of it and his van was no less fixed. Ahead of their time!
I think the tide is turning on this madness, thank God.
What she said doesn't really make sense.
This push for people to accept this is in large part to keep the massive amounts of money coming in to the people who figured out how to monetize this all. Never leave this part out of the conversation. Why else would therapists be not be allowed to discuss other possibilities? The directive to therapists is to affirm and nothing else. That is vile. Great guest by the way, she’s thought this trans bs through to its many harmful implications.
Abortion is also a huge money making industry. I take it you'd like to stop abortion?
I disagree that we won’t need a word for it, we do. But I do agree that Trans woman is not it. A “trans woman” implies a category of women when it is not, it is a category of men. I don’t care how people dress or wear their hair or live their lives but none of those things make you a woman.
How about calling them non-men and non-women? Isn't that what they love to insist? 'I am NOT a man!'
Just "trans" full stop.
Why do we need a word for it?
@@ohsweetmystery So why do people like you get triggered by being referred to as anti trans, when you're openly against the whole concept of it?
@@ohsweetmystery Call them trans identifying males/females
If a man wants to live his life as a woman pretending to be a woman, let him dress as a woman and live his live as a he chooses. Changing birth certificates and government issued ID does not change reality, my driver's license still says that I weight 175lbs, that does not change the law of gravity.
@@MrUnclepauly78 perhaps i should have said masquerade as a woman
But what does it mean for a man to "live as a woman"? How does one describe how a woman lives, without using sex-role stereotypes? There are just two things:
1. Biology, which is immutable
2. Sex-role stereotypes, which are used to try to mould people, but still do not accurately fit all women or all men. None of us perfectly fit all the sex stereotypes for our sex, and many of us fit few or none of them. Descriptors also shouldn't be something we try to fit into, but should be chosen to try to best fit us as we actually are.
@@plant495 biology is immutable, sex role stereotypes are the social construct. I have a very good friend who is female and will always be a real woman unlike hyperfeminized trans. a biological male who wants to be a woman is still a man
I can't wait to see all the comments on this one.
I will certainly be interesting
I like that they're able to discuss, even if they have different opinons. It used to be normal to have these kinds of interactions.
That was a very interesting discussion of the language of the gender cult. I wouldn't object to 'trans' as an adjective if it was applied appropriately - so a 'trans man' is a MAN who wants to present as female and a 'trans woman' is a WOMAN who want to present as male. I strongly object to the idea that 'trans woman', as the term is currently used, implies that these men are a sub category of women.
I so agree with you! That includes science , fact and reality...
We already have the word cross-dresser for these people.
It rubs the lotion on its skin
No, because cross-dressers aren't laboring under the delusion that they're actually a different sex trapped in the wrong body. Cross-dressers are just ppl who enjoy looking like the opposite sex.
@@JohnSmith-lk8cy you missed the boat on that my friend. We have loads of words to call these people. I can't say them UA-cam will ban my comment for a month 😁
@@iand654456 Yep!
I couldn’t agree more. I don’t play this game. I have people who distance themselves from me as a result and that’s great because now I know who they are..misogynists.
I agree with Dr. Coleman 100% regarding the usage or words. Having trans woman instead of transwoman is a subtle way of saying this is a type of woman.
If we just changed the definition to be: trans man = man who wants to be treated as a woman; trans woman = woman who wants to be treated as a man.
Then we retain the actual sex of the person in the noun and the adjective makes the correct categorization.
More people need to understand that these people truly believe that if they change the words we say they can change what's real and what we believe to suit them. The whole point of all the language is to force everybody to use it. They are trying to create the world in their image.
Dr Kate sharing common sense again. So unfashionable but oh so necessary
I agree 100% with you, Dr. Kate. Thank you for your intelligent, scientific, and CORAGEOUS speech.
She's amazing
I never understood people who conflate being offended with actual harm! Because like, if you get offended, nothing happens! You don't get a disease or a physical injury from being offended 😂 it's not like, once you get offended, your arm falls off! 🤷♂️ most people that have matured, if they get offended by something, they think about it for 2 seconds, forget about it, and move on with more important things that they have going on! And I never understood the whole "trans rights" movement, like what rights do they not have that everyone else has? Seriously, they have the exact same rights as everyone else does!
Man and woman are words that describe categories of biology. Masculinity and femininity are words that describe gender. 'Transwomen' are simply feminine men, and I refuse to call them anything else.
Except that sometimes they are not feminine at all ie:the ones who say they are lesbians
Not always feminine, usually not in most cases.
Then you can call them fetishist.
Yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes 🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌
Thank you Dr Kate Coleman...simplicity and common sense 🙏💐
Amen, great interview and some really good points made by Dr Kate. The first that resonated was at 2:20. We need more discussions like this where people get the chance to speak truth and commonsense without fear or threat of being shut down or "cancelled" as happens all too much in our modern activist driven culture. God bless and thank you Heretics.clips and Dr Kate Coleman.
Bryan
Man of Faith Ministry 🇦🇺🙏🏼
He is confused. Saying a "furry" means "a person who pretends to be an animal." That's literally the most precise description of that person. But saying a "trans man" OBSCURES the literal definition ("woman who pretends to be a man") while demanding acceptance of a FALSE definition ("woman who transformed into a man"). As she says, it has political importance because the purpose is to create a protected identity, protected from any questioning of its factual validity. So, no, the battle must continue against new, misleading terms.
He is not bright at all . He hasn’t learned anything in having interviewed people like Helen Joyce .
A major battle will be won by fighting linguistic tricks, linguustic errors, and outright linguistic lies with linguistic accuracy and truth.
So refreshing to have perfectly sane people discussing this dangerous nonsense. Badass guest Andrew, thank you 👏
Why hasn't everyone got the opinion that I and this lady has towards this cult
"ANYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH ME IS IN A CULT!"
Brava!!!! We absolutely don't need it, it hurts US Women and the whole society.
I've even heard people say "woman of trans experience." I'm always convinced that it can't get any more ridiculous, and I'm always wrong.
The speaker begins by asserting that the terms "trans woman" and "trans man" are inaccurate and should not be used. They argue that these terms create a concept that is difficult to define and apply consistently. The speaker also expresses concern about the potential negative consequences of using these terms, such as the implications for safeguarding and the rights of others.
The speaker then discusses the evolution of the term "trans woman," from a single word to two separate words. They argue that this change is deliberate and designed to normalize the concept of a trans woman as a woman. The speaker also questions the need for a separate term to describe people who identify as trans, suggesting that existing terms like "man" or "woman" would suffice.
The speaker raises concerns about the potential consequences of using the term "trans woman," including the implications for safeguarding children and the rights of others. They argue that the focus should be on safeguarding children and protecting their rights, rather than on accommodating the individual preferences of adults.
The speaker concludes by emphasizing the importance of clear and consistent language in discussions about gender identity. They argue that using terms like "trans woman" can create confusion and ambiguity, and may have unintended negative consequences.
Well said Dr Coleman. The word trans has had too much power and is shattering our societal solace.
She's right 🌈
The problem is that in some places stating a factual truth can get you imprisoned.
@@edenbreckhouse Women have said, “ there’s a man in the women’s locker room.” It was the women who were kicked out of the gym. Not the skirt wearing man. Freedom of speech does matter.
I brought up this exact point; the prefix ‘trans’ means opposite from so, trans-woman literally means a person that is opposite from a woman… so a man.
Yes he too scared to call them men &boys ,BUT the lady isn't afraid ,excellent she is
Dr. Kate Coleman is 100% correct, Just Call Them MEN! and return to safeguarding.
Dr.Kate speaks total sense ❤
At present i think the caring nurturing nature of our woman folk has encouraged the affirmation for children so as to avoid self harm in the children. Statistics are often used to justify this in a clinical setting. And i think its a mistake. I think its lazy clinical care. I think its harmful. I understand the why but i dont accept the response from the health sector.
Kate is a brilliant woman.
When I was a young girl the first time I came across the mental illness called Dysphoria was when this bloke tried to cut his leg off because he hated it in them days it was an offence to try to commit suicide how things have changed because of messing with the DSM book Women & Girls lose their rights why ?
I offer that we say TIM for trans identified male (XY), TIF (XX), TIP for person/people. It acknowledges their identity and reality.
The problem ia it isnt a term to identify a group of people its a movement looking to supplant and undermine womens rights and remove the distinction between separate spaces.
Absaluty just call them boys and men ,wat are people giving into this so easily, creasy days we live in
Do you also call people with Down Syndrome retards because it's technically true?
Dr. Coleman is certainly an impressive analyst and brilliant thinker. Or maybe I just agree with everything she says.
You can. I never stopped.
We all need religion. If it’s no longer acceptable to worship the old gods and saints, we just cook up new ones based on other varieties of nonsense and delusion.
Yes, which explains how the Woke cult sprang up and devoured the online Atheism community. Suddenly they became "Atheism Plus", worshipping their new religion of Wokeness, because humans have had some sort of religion even in prehistoric times; and there are only a very few humans (like James Lindsay) who can be atheist without succumbing to some weird new religious ideology in lieu of God.
This lady is 100 &correct ,&expecting little girls ,women &children to go into bathrooms &locker rooms etc is wrong &unsafe ,There is something else weird behind all this ,women above all needs their privacy ,&transwoman (men ) barging is a no no
Thanks for helping to empower people.
The prefix "trans-" generally indicates a movement or change across, beyond, or through something.
It is derived from the Latin word "trans", meaning "across" or "beyond".
Here are some examples of words with the prefix "trans-":
Transcontinental: Across a continent.
Transatlantic: Across the Atlantic Ocean.
Translucent: Allowing light to pass through partially.
Translate: To change something from one language to another.
Transform: To change into a different form.
3:09 He can't call them "men" or "boys" because he is too scared to admit that they are NOT men or boys.
Which is odd, if he has already been "cancelled"?
For the longest time I thought a trans woman was a woman that lived as a man and a trans man was a man that lived as a woman. It was kjnda shocking to me when I found out that was not how society defined it.
Beautiful lady 100% common sense
3:40, why is it important to use descriptors as white/black or even people’s nationalities? While I agree with the sentiment behind what she is saying I think that point is stupid, there is not “necessarily” a need for those adjectives but we use them to clarify what we are referring to. 🤦♀️
She's just another person who wants to isolate the subject of transexuals with no context, because context ruins her whole argument.
You’ve expressed an extremely salient point: the word “trans” is properly and adjective/modifier (not a noun). A sleight of hand occurred when ‘trans’ morphed into a noun. A man who identifies as transgender is, correctly speaking, a transgender-man.
By warping language in this way, absurdities become slogans: trans-women are women.
There has to be a way to honor individual expressions while standing firm on linguistic distinctions. The conflation of sex (a noun) with transgender (an adjective/modifier) has serious repercussions for women and girls. Sex based rights and protections are eroded when personal identifications are permitted to blur the language.
The loophole that enabled this sleight of hand was a former terminology where sex and gender were synonyms (nouns). The trans community redefined the word “gender” as an adjective: a personal, subjective identification, and insisted that this redefined word “gender” was still a noun. They’ve capitalized on this linguistic ambiguity and continue to effectively silence dissent or any rational challenge to this new construct.
I chooses to be happy, and not repressed...and recommend it to anyone. I am not bothered by what others do with their lives. No harm, no foul. No harm...to anyone.
YES WE CAN!
My inner dialogue has settled on trans men for men who dress as female and trans women for women who dress as male. There wasn’t a whole lot of deliberation, in fact none at all, it was just what my mind settled on. Probably because it is the most accurate and descriptive. It would wonderful if those terms came to be accepted so that people wouldn’t need to override their natural inclination every time such people were discussed. No chance that could happen though because it would demolish the core belief that men can become women and women can become men. Even though they can’t and we all know that.
Anyway, it makes no sense to let your political opponents to take charge of the language. You might as well concede defeat. I hope “trans men” and “trans women” in the sense that I am using it gets picked up.
Men don't do this, they are something else entirely.
Because we’ve transformed the culture into one of destructive compassion where any use of the word no is considered discriminatory violence.
She is right.
Can't tell whether Andrew is deliberately misunderstanding what she is saying?
There are a number of reasons we use words. This woman is talking about words as political tools and subtly describing the frog in boiling water.
Initially, the word was "transwoman" then it became "trans woman" until eventually the plan was to do away with the concept of trans and all those that identified as "women" were women. The destruction of society through language.
Whereas Andrew seems to be arguing that words are a mechanism for understanding the world and that words are neutral.
Both are right but in this context the use of the "trans" label is more of a political tool rather than a descriptor.
I don't think he's misunderstanding, I think he's simply disagreeing about the fact that we invent words to describe what we see. We have always and will always do this especially on interesting and important issues whereas she seems to think we ought not to
@@hippo319 I agree but there were some of his responses that gave pause for thought. As if to say "Is he playing devil's advocate? Is he deliberately misunderstanding? or is he genuinely just disagreeing?"
As always it is very easy to read intentionality into something somebody says when it is not there.
@@inthegutterstaringathestars, he was indeed playing devil's advocate.
@@hippo319 I don't think Dr Coleman has a problem with inventing words to describe what we see. I believe she's just opposed to appropriating words that already have a meaning and using them for something else, because in this case it has a knock-on effect on the rights women.
@@spector969 Not just rights of women. It has implications for us all.
Which is why in 1984, language was a target. Where you control language, you control society and people. You control reality itself.
She’s right the i it as a way to control speech
On the shorter things: it's a meme on fb that "world wide web" manages to be shorter to speak than www
Yeah. She is laying out what I have been wondering about for years. They argue about not wanting to be labored with the expectations of being either man or women. My question is what seems to be the issue with either? There have always been different kinds of men and women. Granted homosexuality isn't exactly socially acceptable in a vast majority of circles. I personally find this kind of prejudice to be a tiresome waste of time. On the other hand there are some obvious reasons why civilizations discourage it. There is definitely a clash there.