Who put the RF in TERF?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 16 лип 2024
- Hi. I thought I'd discuss the finer workings of TERF ideology and how they arguably earn the RF part of the name, as well as some consistent themes in their rhetoric that have existed since the late 70s.
Be forewarned this video is a bit heavy.
My links:
/ rosencreutz
/ krosencreutz
_____________________________________
Videos:
@nerdcity
• UA-cam's Biggest Lie
@caelanconrad
• Gender Critical : Recr...
@MiaMulder
• The History Of Transph...
@Shaun_vids
• Response to BBC transp...
For additional context:
@Ember_Green
• "Gender Critical" is N...
The artist of the image used in the thumbnail has a whole video on the creation of said image:
@CatherineGraffam
• I Painted JK Rowling (...
(By the way, let me know if you want me to change this thumbnail, if you happen to see this)
__________________________________________________
Digital Sources:
Dworkin and MacKinnon against Transphobia:
Dworkin
bostonreview.net/articles/joh...
MacKinnon
radfem.transadvocate.com/sex-g...
Janice Raymond’s site:
janiceraymond.com/fictions-an...
Bindel on Jeffreys:
www.theguardian.com/world/200...
________________________________________
Intro: 00:00
Monique Wittig: 04:21
Critiquing Wittig: 13:00
Raymond: 17:26
Critiquing Raymond: 24:57
Sheila Jeffreys and Unpacking Queer Politics 32:39
Power: 35:28
Transgression 39:29
Today and the Past: 50:51
Conclusion: 1:00:21
Outro: 1:03:45
Having finally regained full monetary control of my channel and whatever, I'm torn on turning off ads for this one in that most people I've talked to have said they're not really a barrier. But then there's the question of like... profiting off of labor vs profiting off of a social issue and idk. It gets messy fast and as transparent as I try to be with money things, I do feel a bit weird about it all.
Full disclosure, I got back ad control a few days ago, but these numbers come in at a delay and so I didn't know what I was making, nor if I'd actually get it because there were some contradictory statements going on in adsense after some ID issues. The point being that I wanted to let things run for a little while to see what kind of numbers we're even talking about. Of course, the way the site works, we're talking like 7 dollars in ten days of monetization, so uhh not much in the grand scheme.
I dunno. Let me know what you think below. I'll probably also post this on twitter for reasons.
The short version is I'm not sure if an average of like a dollar a day is worth the nagging sensation of a moral quandary, but at the same time it feels like money left on the table and that nobody cares about the inevitability of pre-roll ads (and I have the worst ones turned off.)
When the labour you’re doing is fighting for social justice you can’t really separate the two. If it really bugs you then you can always donate to an appropriate charity. But I see nothing wrong with leaving ads on and treating yourself to coffee twice a week 💙
Leave the ads up get that bread king
Vid being monetised promotes the video in the yt algorithm so you might wanna consider it.
Ads are consent based now, ad blockers and such. I think you should allow ads, if you feel like you aren't going to make these for profiting of off it.
@@gwendlevs.everything9178 True. But for me, adds ARE a significant barrier. UA-cam starts small but then escalated to abusive amounts of add time, making it simply not worth it to keep watching and endure somebody saying "are you still using that same soap that you used when you were mommies little man" over an over again.
Coming back to this video every time and being reminded: "Oh yeah, some people adopted the term lesbian to express how much they hate men, and they pretend to speak for actual wlw people."
Yeah its kinda wild that the people complaining about people inserting themselves in wlw spaces on false pretenses insert themselves in wlw spaces on false pretenses.
@@Owesomasaurusevery conservative accusation is a confession
As somebody who floats around a whole plethora of online queer spaces, I've found that the main difference between the normal, chill lesbians and the weird, TERF-y ones is that the former focus on their love of women, while the latter focus on their lack of love towards men.
@@rainbowsorceress2082exactly
@@rainbowsorceress2082ahem, famed transphobe, posie parker- same woman who accuses transwomen of stealing identities pretended to be a lesbian to be transphobic 😬
I love the "trans men are confused lesbians" argument bc I'm apparently so confused a lesbian that I'm a gay dude.
Because it’s true.
@@SuccubusTouchedMyDoodle thanks for vouching my gayness I guess?
@UC1naSD3NCrbCiGjwCXdS5qgConsidering that
A) There’s more discrimination against Trans people than Gay people
B) Plenty of Trans Men are either Bisexual or in relationships with Men
That makes no sense
@@Lilyanna298
Addendum: the fact that bisexual people having relationships with the opposite gender is still seen as "wait, i thought you were gay" is just as cringe. It is not a puzzle.
REAL. it assumes every trans man is straight like ??
People who are confused/outraged at a paradox youtuber making a video about queer issues CLEARLY haven’t spent enough time in the paradox community
Lol honestly, that's what gave me hope this wasn't "too far a pivot" (even though I'm sure not all my audience is directly interested.)
1. Paradox youtuber?
2. What's that?
3. What's the paradox community?
4. What does it have to do with the topic of this video?
5. We're talking about the TERFs when we say "People who are confused/outraged" I'm guessing...?
6. I know what a paradox is(well, maybe I only know about the time travel related grandfather paradox), I'm just stating it in a weird way because apparently it's the name of a community, therefore, the meaning in the context of a community with that name is lost on me... perhaps the community is considered a paradox in of itself in a society that is owned by people trying to make it impossible to be societally acceptable...
@@land3021 idk if your comment is supposed to be ironic or not but (in this context) "paradox" is just the name of a video game company focusing on the "grand strategy" genre. The "paradox community" is the community that emerged around these games, while this video isn't connected to them, a lot of the previous ones were.
@@land3021Have you not looked at the list of videos? They're mostly about strategy games, although most of them are left-wing takes on them. I think the outrage would be because strategy games attract an unfortunate number of fascists.
@@TheRenegade... and those fascists have a hard time understanding how few of them there are in comparison to the rest of the community, mostly because to be a fascist often means having an inability to realize that people don't engage with them because they can't stand them.
Me an hour ago: "Ooo a video about Paradox map games, nice"
Me now: "I'm not to keen on this Raymond lady"
oh no.. i just followed your footsteps
@@Nebulaofthenorth lol
That’s how they get ya! Hbomberguy has videos on New Vegas and Transformers too! It’s the “media criticism -> critical theory” pipeline lol
@@andyghkfilm2287maybe it's the fact that a lot of critical thinking is done by the people who make these videos. Just a thought, albeit a bit of a reductive one
@@FeeshUnofficial Steve Shives has Star Trek and Superman stuff ...
The point about "gender confirming = upholding oppressive gender norms" by Raymond always annoyed me because it's not gender itself that's the problem it's how it's used by the state.
I always figured if anyone can be feminine, if anyone can be masculine and if anyone can be both then it stands to reason that the state would have a *harder* time using it as a tool of oppression not an easier one.
Right?
YES! Its so dismissive and it dismisses how deep patriarchy's effects are and the history of it. Gender confirming/conforming isnt inherently bad, its neutral. The issue is how gender roles and how our systems utilise that using history and now. For eg a woman who like girly things isn inherently pro patriarchy, she only becomes that when she claims that its one's natural path and start using other gender roles that are connected to it like submission etc actual harmful roles and conflate them w biology, the christian trad version of GC and terf bio essentialism thats when it gets harmful and shady.
@@espeon871Why is it okay for people to be what they want to be sometimes, but as soon as they become Christian and traditional it’s ‘harmful’ and ‘shady’. Double standards I say
I've tried to explain this to them. I spent several days constructing a well formed argument as a pinned tweet, and still I got only "trans is patriarchy" and "gender stereotypes" with no meat. One woman was arguing (I'm using that word charitably) for a week, and since she'd gone on some tear about stereotypes to start, I ended every response with, "What stereotypes?" To which she never supplied an answer.
@@tempejkl
Some people don't believe a nonbinary gender exists.
There's a lot of overlap between the nonbinary- denyers and those who believe in a God who made us, but then couldn't stand most of us, so He had to unalive His kid.
Then He could put up with us, if we believe in His kid and get saved.
I can't fully, scientifically, substantiate nonbinary gender, but I know I am a nonbinary.
They can't prove Jesus is real, but they know it...
I think this is pretty funny.
France's "Wokisme" mentioned
I am in pain.
🍞🥐🥯🥖
@@suzanneclark7706 that’s pan lol
@@andyghkfilm2287 oh must be a pronounciation thing
Le brainrot Americain
“Assigned bottom at birth” 😂
For real though, it is bizarre that that’s essentially how she’s framing women.
maybe i was assigned bottom at birth...
So if you have a breech birth (ie, you are born feet first), is that how you get assigned top at birth?
@@paulgibbon5991all humans are technically assigned bottom before birth since human bodies form ass first in utero.
@seekingabsolution1907 and coincidentally sex-determination in mammals is female default, but we probably shouldn't tell the radicals that
On a side note, IMO, we in the West do society backwards: the lineage - and family histories - should be matriarchal and it’s absolutely the men that make the choice. As with most of the rest of the animal kingdom, it should be primarily men that enhance themselves as much as possible including the use of beauty products in effort to attract objects of affection.
I think something interesting to me is the notion of trans women being stereotypically feminine. I’m a very feminine trans woman myself, but I do not do it “for men” or for anyone else but myself. I have every option to not do so, but it is something I have the choice of doing. For me, the idea of abolishing “gender” in the sense of what you have to be decent mean not being feminine or masculine, but having the option to be one, the other, both, neither, or something even beyond that. Femininity and masculinity aren’t inherently bad things, but anything can be used to harm others. I am a feminine trans woman, and one of my friends is a feminine trans man. He doesn’t reject the notion of femininity, but he rejects the notion of femininity from the lens of being a woman, and accepts the notion of femininity from the lens of being a man.
I have a lot of thoughts but I’m not always the best on conveying them, so what do you think?
Femininity was a concept created to justify the oppression of females through the creation of womanhood as a social role. So yes the concept of femininity and masculinity are inherently bad, but that doesn’t mean adopting femininity etc is immoral, it’s just important to recognize that the concept of gender necessitates patriarchal oppression.
I am feminine for two reasons: One, because I like being feminine. Two, because being feminine communicates my gender and helps prevent me from being misgendered. (Learned my lesson when I went to get blood drawn wearing shorts and a T-shirt and no makeup, and everyone called me "Sir" and "" even though my correct name and gender are in my file. So next time I need to get blood drawn, it's makeup and a pink frilly dress.)
Its so annoying too, like im someone who reads gender theory and is an intersectional feminist, often times trans women are forced to feel like theyre not women by terfs so even if theyre not naturally femme for themselves they have to be super fitting to even scoot by as a woman in a misogynistic and transphobic world. Ultimately, trans women like cis women, and people, have different personalities because theyre people. Its irritating to hear terfs act like all trans women are the same, and as if trans women arent people. Esp when they bring up hyper feminine trans women for eg dylan mulvaney, theyre also the same people to claim to be able to "tell" and will misgender and harass random cis and trans women if theyre masc.
@@temple69 i think its more nuanced, things that consists as traditionally feminine can be used as a tool of subjegation but usually if its like being "feminine" like soft etc naturally or liking "girly" interests its organic and not harmful for the fact that its not contributing to oppression. The oppressive structure comes in when people use gender roles as biology and try to be bio essentialist and say for eg women shld be submissive. Thats subjegation which is oppression via roles in society masquerading as biology to excuse oppression.
@@temple69 labels or concepts in themselves are not bad, for example i could label myself as a "gamer" because i want to find others who have the same ideas as me about games, could be sports or gender or anything, the problem is when we project bad things on these labels that are not true and we force people to go by them and act in a certain way.
34:45 "Philosophy covers all of our lives but we don't go around evaluating interactions using Kantian ethics" you're right - I don't, but only because I had to study the fool for 3 years lol
I love how each time I hear about Kant I can tell who I'm looking at based on how much they dunk on him bwahahahahaha
52:38 - So the funny thing is that the term “gender ideology” originates with the Christian Right, not any strain of feminism, if I remember correctly. I grew up in a rather conservative LCMS church, and the first time I remember hearing the term was from Christian public figures.
Bollocks
@@_Sakidora_ It's a literal fact. The propaganda term in question was invented by a Catholic think tank in Poland in response to the Cairo Conference and was historically applied as part of anti-LGBT, anti-abortion, and anti-feminist movments across Central and Eastern Europe before making the jump over to the UK. You can tell it does not originate in English due to its lack of an article. If it had come from English naturally, it would be "THE gender ideology", much as in the 2000s we had "THE gay agenda", a term with identical usage by the same bigoted personalities as the former.
@@CharlotteSWeb-oh7ou Still bollocks. You don't need 'the' in front of an ideology to make it an English phrase. Marxist ideology doesn't need to be 'The Marxist Ideology', neither does Islamic ideology or woke ideology, or fundamentalist Christian ideology. Anyone who has two grains of common sense can recognise gender ideology as an ideology based on the concept of gender, hence 'gender ideology'.
@@CharlotteSWeb-oh7ou Your origin may be correct but the grammatical analysis isn't very good--between 'ADJ. ideology' not usually getting an article unless you're discussing particulars within a larger sphere--'fascist ideology' vs 'the fascist ideology of Franco'. They think of 'gender ideology' as a nebulous thing insofar as they apply any thought to the concept at all.
And we apply articles to borrowings from languages without them all the time, like if I want that steamed bao right there, or a panda, or a piandao or katana or whatever.
Once a word is borrowed it becomes part of the language it was borrowed into, and generally the people of the newer speech community don't care or have to care about the particular grammatical context of the 'original'--cf chai becoming a subset of tea, specifically a spiced tea, and by extension the spices applied.
@@CharlotteSWeb-oh7ou of course its the transphobic losers who wld kiss up to the most misogynistic and oppressive of people if it means they get to be transphobic
53:21 Yes! Quite a lot of intellectuals in Quebec do say that "wokisme/woke" doesn't mean anything (especially in French) - that it is merely a tool to scare the public, a kind of strawman akin to "islamo-gauchisme" (islamo-leftism) or "judéo-bolchevisme" (Jewish bolchevism).
Though on that note, I never saw anyone pronounce "wokisme" as "ouokismé" - it is pronounced "like it would be in English". Maybe they do things differently in Europe, but I doubt it.
Most post modern thinkers rejected the moniker. Doesn't mean we can't identify trends in thought/art. Notice the difference, your examples are specifically targeting ethnic groups. The latter is nazi propoganda. To deny a social trend derived from all the post modern, critical theory, deconstructionist, intersectional theory would be foolish. The people throwing it around as a slur might not know anything about what they're criticisizing, this doesn't deny a trend.
Wait so is the last e silent?
@@gatzimitkyes, if it does not have an accent aigu (e vs é).
IMO ive always felt it that way since people use woke like they use commie during the cold war days, like they'll show the least woke thing and call it woke cuz its bad and have some slightly "progressive" themes in it, and atp they just say anything is woke and progressive as a way to fear monger
@@espeon871
They still use commie...For center-right Democrats.😂
I believe in equality, racial, gender, and economic justice.
...I've been like this since the 90's.
The reactionary right keeps coming up with "slurs" that are actually flattering for me.😁
I know, caring about others who aren't like me, wanting them to be free of avoidable suffering, it's so, so terrible.
23:52 I thought I'd add my view as a trans woman here. My being trans is a feature of my existence, not a political position and not a political act of "iconoclastic rebellion." As GNC women don't owe anyone femininity, I don't owe anyone the abandonment of my femininity. I'm not trans because I'm a "gender outlaw" who aims to "transcend gender roles." I'm trans because I'm a woman who was assigned male at birth.
I agree. People who expect trans people to hold gender abolishonist views are weird, man... the occasional but infuriating "that you are politicized is a good thing for my ends" feels very exploitative.
no one is political for being born, its such a strange and messed up way to put oppressed ppl as responsible for their oppression imo
Trans guy here. I agree that we aren't trans for political reasons. But that aspect of our identity does almost unavoidably become political, either externally or internally.
External is things coming at me. When in the sauna at the rec center someone asks me my thoughts on kitty litter boxes for middle school kids who identify in cats (real life question that happened at least twice), my transness is now political. Regardless of my answer or even refusing to answer, it's a political statement. Against my will, I am now the voice of the "trans ideology" and my response or lack will be judged within that framework, not a judgement of me as an individual with whatever views I may have.
Internally is more about our own reaction to events happening around us. When an anti-trans protest happens and I have an internal reaction to that info, my transness is being politicised within me. It's no longer an amoral trait like preferring chocolate over vanilla icecream. Knowing that other people are politicizing this specific trait now gives it a political weight to me, even if I don't attend a counter protest or write any letters. Just that knowledge has changed or changed the meaning of my transness for me internally into being a political trait along many other things.
I don't think these are good things to be clear. The fact that due to this one trait I'm forced into a political realm kinda sucks. And isn't something I can turn off.
I've never done any gender studies so I hope this makes sense.
@@CorwinFound i think more what this comment ment is the fact transness has been politicized, or that trans people are expected to be political entities, is unfair, not that it isnt reality. or atleast, thats how i was responding to the comment cuz thats how i interpreted it!
@@clownactivist I wasn't disagreeing with the comment in any way. Only adding that it becomes political against our choice and adding how I believe that happens.
50:02 I didn't expect a serious video about a very personally triggering topic to make me laugh out loud, but goddamn me if I'm not going to put "assigned bottom at birth" in my out of context quote repertoir
I’m mostly here to learn because I don’t know enough about these topics. So I’m eager to be constructively corrected. But that being said, the idea of people who think…that women who are straight should become lesbians to boycott heterosexuality as a strategy to overthrow patriarchy; who think that political lesbianism is the only true form of feminism; who think that the phenomena of trans women merely existing and/or trying to join feminists groups and gay men finding common cause with lesbians is simply men trying to infiltrate or oppress lesbians in an effort to oppress the few women they can’t otherwise oppress with sexual violence or by forcing them into traditional patriarchal gender roles; and who argue that trans people are simply mentally Ill gay men and women who should be denied the right to transition to save political lesbianism….seems very unhinged and paranoid.
That's because it is. I'm not sure how obvious this is to someone who's not the familiar with these topics, but the vast majority of queer people have issues with political lesbianism
You are correct.
@@kjarakravik4837 Yeah, if you don't think women are hot, you're not a lesbian.
@@electronics-girl you can be a lesbian and not finding women hot, that's why aces lesbian exists, not everyone feel sexual attraction.
Just saying it because ppl tend to forget ace ppl exist :))
@@electronics-girl I had a friend who was a top lesbian organizer. She was kicked out of a lesbian organization because she said she won't sleep with anyone with a penis. Defining "woman" is a political act. People do a lot of work assuming we all mean the same thing by "woman" or "lesbian".
damn it's really upsetting hearing my identity being discussed as a laboratory subject, I didn't expect myself to feel this way before the video
Makes me feel shit also:) I just want to live, idk I just want to carry on my life with no controversy
a history nerd, leftist, strategy gamer, ive never seen a youtube channel that is such an arbitrary combination, but quite a welcome one.
same lmao
I just wish there were more history and strategy game youtubers, who weren't utter asswipes.
It's funny to me because the combination feels a lot less arbitrary as someone who also is all three
There's literally DOZENS of us. DOZENS™
@@Astro_Guy_1heard of Fredda?
I like this video a lot and I'm very thankful for it.
However, a piece of criticism: the fact that there's text appearing on the screen, which is different from what you say, while subtitles are also available, is very confusing. I often have to pause to be able to read what you wrote after listening to/reading what you said. Maybe it's just a problem for non-native English speakers?
Yeah, I've been trying to cut back on doing that, or be more selective about when it's important to do so. It seems to present a language hurdle, which is not ideal.
I sometimes just ignore the text, or pause to read it. Just doesn't bother me tbh. But I'd understand if it bothered others.
I'm a native English speaker and I kept stopping and backing up. It's hard to read the text while you're saying something different. Really wish you wouldn't do that. You had many good things to say but you interfere with yourself, making it harder to follow.@@Rosencreutzzz
16:27 I get the larger, more important & serious points here & throughout this excellent essay.
However it doesn't change the fact I just really want a tote bag or hoodie that says:
SCISSORING TO OWN* THE MAN
* or PWN? Whatever spelling makes the most of itself.
28:15 Hang on, there's an audience that wants to hear about PhDs picked up for odd reasons? It's almost seven years since I submitted my doctoral dissertation and this was a labour of love largely undertaken in defence of my identity. Even though I won an award for this work, I was not able to really build much of a career for myself, largely because I could not come to terms with my own queerness on a personal level, even if I could intellectualise some of the issues I thought were pertinent to the broader culture.
But y'know, my egg finally cracked and now I'm a proud trans woman.
I think there's an audience that would probably like to hear this story and I'll be happy to tell it once I figure out the best way to do so.
This is my first time on this channel, but this is a clear sub from me. Thanks for your scholarship and interesting arguments - I think it was great that you were able to give so much consideration to the ideas that underpin this aspect of RF and to highlight its relative distance from GCs.
Self-Assigned BAB
22:15 the only places I’ve put down I was specifically a trans man outside of like talking to people about my life is things like the census. It’s important to know that statistically people like me exist. I intentionally waited for the paper to be mailed so I could literally write it in. Literally everywhere else it’s “let’s look at my medical records” or “what do my legal docs say” or it’s irrelevant.
I'm only out online, but I would definitely put down that I'm enby on a census too.
I have firmly maintained that the way early TERF text talk about gender with regards to trans folks points in some level to being on the agender spectrum. In the same way that political lesbianism throws straight women under the bus, the early gender critical text seem to throw feminine (and more notibly binary) women under the bus. I.e. It's easy to say "reject gender" when you yourself do not have a strong internal sense of gender.
it requires a VERY STRONG internal sense of gender that is markedly at odds with the prevailing conventions. noncompliance with social norms always requires deep reserves of motivation, which i feel should be pretty self-evident.
You have unironically zeroed in on my UA-cam topic interests with laser like precision by doing paradox map video essays and broadly leftist, breadtube style content all in one channel. Props and I can't wait to see what you make next.
Great video! Getting a full back tattoo of that Wittig cover soon
Don't forget the black-as-the-void xerox scan misalignment lines around the borders. They really provide framing.
"Damm I liked
Rosencreutz till he got political" /s
I feel there will be more than a few of these without the "/s" coming soon.
Is it really political to be against feminism on a gaming channel?
I know that TERFs represent a comparatively small subset of feminism and that critiquing it is far from what is usually seen as anti-feminist.
Everyone knows politics is when marginalised groups exist /s
@@SpoopySquid Everyone knows politics is fine as long as you agree with mine. Otherwise it's... _political._
@@abstract5249 Everyone knows politicality is fine, as long as you don't force me to question my belief framework. otherwise... it's communism! take our country back!
I came to your channel for a video on FNV and this video caught my eye. I might need to recover from whiplash but I'm here for it.
Wow, you got Mia Mulder to work with you?! You're popping off!
The more I learn about the GC movement the clearer it gets that they inhabit a worldview whose foundational principle is essentialism. That essentialist bedrock is what allows the radical misandrist and the Christian fascist to collaborate. Their movements are quite literally built on common ground.
To me the most incredibile thing is that their whole philosophy revolves around calling men (all men not just trans women) rapists. Like in their view all men are potential rapists because of some essentialist quality that they identify in everyone.. and the paradoxical thing is that it's usually men that are supporting this anti trans law bans that are based around the same premise. It's just bizarre to me that men go to such great lengths to attack trans people (especially trans women) and don't see that they are supporting terfs that consider all men to be inherently violent 😂
BTW I personally hate when TERFs call themselves "gender-critical" because it makes them look like they are the ones who critisize gender. Well, what about all the trans folks who say that they look with doubt at gender roles or even want to abolish them? Is it not a critique of the gender by… definition? What is it then?
So, well, no. They are not gender critical movement. They are just TERFs.
This is also why I am not shocked that the biggest concentration of the movement is in the United Kingdom, a country full of people whose entire legacy is made up of endless class division status symbols and trying to classify the world by colonizing it.
YES!! Its so frustrating too to talk about gender roles and gender socialisation too because of GC bio essentialist terfs who instead of talking about the very real patriarchy they talk abt biology 🥴 for eg horrible men get away with more because of misogyny and mistrust of women because of gender roles and implicit socialisation that men esp in authority, are more trustworthy than women as they might want something in return for eg. Same for women getting away with stuff like SA because patriarchy to excuse female SA is like men are naturally hyper sexual creatures which in turns hurt male SA since people esp more misogynistic parts of the world; see him as being lucky and not a victim, and the woman as someone who cant possibly be a groomer because she doesnt have it in her for eg. I hate the GC people stole the conversation around socialisation when its very real, they see every trans person as cis to be purposely transphobic so its so frustrating, socialisation is like for eg women are expected to lose weight post baby for eg as an implicit and immediate response thru society showing us and teaching women that its shld be a natural response, it can affect anyone feminine presenting but esp those who id as women since its directed at them for eg same w men have to be stoic. Its so irritating as somebody who actively studies and talks about gender and roles in relation to the world from an intersectional feminist perspective 😭🙏
(4 other replies, none visible.🤔)
I truly believe that masculine identities, as our culture (USA) articulates them, often cause profound harm to men.
So feminism should be challenging those harmful male role expectations.
...I'd try saying something about the MRA's, but the UA-cam censor bot is cranked up on high....
Great video! I've always wondered how a certain subset of radfems ended up in solidarity with, like, christofash Christian facebook moms and this helped me see the weird path a radfem might have taken to get there. I think it's also really an important lesson in how radicalism in and of itself isn't liberatory, that even a radical response to oppression can, under certain conditions, become oppressive itself, and even become allied with the original oppression it was raging against.
Glad to hear it helped explain things. I (quite generally) worried that it might be too "in the weeds" of its own niche/jargon. "Nerd shit", as you said in your cop vid back in (I think) May.
You're overthinking this. Radical feminists and right-wing Christians are just a small subset of a huge majority of the world's population that think gender ideology is a steaming pile of dogshit.
Even a lot of people who profess to believe this demented crap don't really believe it. In fact, you have to be pretty weird and creepy to endorse a cult that promotes the mutilation of children and the erasure of women.
And it's hardly a stunning revelation that radicals can go too far, especially leftist ones. You only need to read about the French Revolution to see that.
TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD
There is no internal feeling that is exclusive to men or women (or boys/girls), what makes anyone a man or a woman is being either male or female and reaching adulthood. Their sex and stage of physical maturity makes them men or women, not some "feeling" they have.
Believing there is some "essence" specific to males or female as far as feelings go, that can manifest "in the wrong body", is akin to a religious belief, having faith in something that is impossible to prove or disprove. The thing is though, that no one on the "trans" side can actually even explain what this "essence" is, they can't even explain it to themselves yet have convinced themselves that the feeling they have means they "are in the wrong body" - without realising that their discomfort simply stems from not realising that they view conforming to sexist stereotypes as legitimate measures of manhood or womanhood. That is why every explanation given of WHY a male "can't be a man, but is instead woman" etc. relies upon listing stereotypical stuff, or, in some cases is completely abstract and refuses to actually provide any explanation of what they mean, simply stating they "know" that what they feel means what they say it does, even though they can't actually provide a definition of it. "It's hard to explain but I know I'm right" is an attitude one constantly comes up against - a religious faith in something they can't define.
This idea that the terms "man" and "woman" carry all this baggage, sexist stereotypes, that people need to live up to or feel comfortable with is a complete fabrication coming from the "trans" side. You lot want a term to reflect aspects of your personality as well, you want to create more boxes to put people in, as you won't accept simply just being a man or a woman based on being born male or female (and reaching adulthood, obviously people are boys and girls before becoming men or women), but believe you need this "freedom of expression" to broadcast what sexist stereotypes you feel more comfortable with - thinking the world needs to adopt the sexist view you lot have (you fail to see just how much you have in common with Conservatives).
Replacing objective definitions which are based in physical reality, with entirely subjective metaphysical claims, is not logical in any way, is not morally superior, and is demonstrably harmful, not least to female rights and protections, but also to practically anyone that buys into it as it warps people's perception of the underlying issues. It hinders people in their quest for individuation, creating this false narrative of them becoming more "authentic" when the total opposite is true, they believe they need validation from others in order to be happy etc. instead of being encouraged to find more inner strength and resilience with less reliance on how people see them. Demanding to be legally recognised as the opposite sex of what one is, is in no way shape or form more authentic than accepting the physical reality one is born into.
To believe we as individuals can have 100% control over our identity in society, what we are seen as by others, in interaction with, and in relation to, society/the world/physical existence is a fool's errand, it is a delusional understanding of reality and existence.
@@ambientjohnny Very insightful comment, aside from the female rights and protections bit. Thanks for the read.
Rosencreutz, I swear to God you just can not miss.
I am incredibly impressed with the way you treat your subjects as legitimate thinkers while still vehemently disagreeing with their worldview. You effectively track the roots of this movement and are probably more fair to these TERFs than they deserve (though that does make for a better video). While I had heard some of these names before, I wasn't really familiar with their work. A couple times I paused to discuss the video with my wife, only to see you elaborate on what we were discussing when we turned the video back on. It's no easy task to keep an hour long discussion of such a thorny topic clear, but I think you did so excellently. Your range as a thinker is pretty incredible; I didn't think I could find videos on the historiography of Paradox games and academic treatises on the nature of gender on the same channel. Really good job.
i read a selection from charlotte perkins gilman’s “women and economy” for a class earlier this year and it was genuinely really interesting to see some of the earliest works that might be considered radfem-adjacent. her argument was predicated on natural selection, and the idea that, through patriarchal boundaries, women hadnt had the chance to evolve and advance as much as men. the big difference between her work in 1897 and radfems today is actually less in ideology and more in goals: gilman was arguing for the right for women to have the rights that many women have today, however challenged those rights may be.
22:52 Raymond there also seems to be (again) misconstruing trans-ness as a political ideology, as opposed to a personality trait. The claim is that "transgenderism" styles itself as an "iconoclastic rebellion", and that the failure of trans identity to be sufficiently iconoclastic is thus some kind of ideological failing or contradiction. But that's not how any of this works! People for the most part come out as trans simply because they can no longer bear to pretend that they aren't transgender! Not because they want to make a political statement or undermine the patriarchy.
This is going to be fragmented and incoherent as I type reactions throughout my viewing rather than coherently at the end because my memory is awful, fair warning. First of all, this was a pleasant surprise to see on my recommendeds! I saw your video about Victoria 3 - and while I enjoyed your perspective, the subject matter (grand strategy games) is often a red flag for me that maybe someone doesn't have the greatest of intersectional politics. Happy to be surprised. The section about Wittig was interesting to me, I think it's kind of a good cautionary tale about perhaps how distinguishing distinct queer identities as a separate political category for the purpose of political struggle rather than just analysis can lead to exclusion (I think of an example I ran into recently how some older trans athletes, for instance, are fully on-board with dividing lines in sport depending on hormone levels - because a rigid definition of transition is essential to their identification of someone as 'trans' (I would argue, developed within the ideological construction of cis people), and are thus comfortable standing with gender crits on the subject of gating trans people in sport because they see it as 'fair'.)
(arbitrary paragraph break because I thought I was getting unreadable.)
The Raymond portion and your quip about how gender critical analysis has largely remained undeveloped since then made me laugh, because yes - it's hilariously similar to things I see all the time. The criticism of transgender existence as a capitulation to rigid gender roles is a particularly insidious one to me, because the implications of this argument are that transgender people aren't a development and/or shunning of existing rigid gender norms, rather a continuation of them. Putting TERFs in the position of being 'progressive', because they argue they are, in fact, in opposition to the traditional role of women and men. I've seen some attempt to squirrel their way into aligning with nonbinary people because they feel like this is ideologically compatible with their shunning of the idea of gender conformity ("I don't use pronouns because they're in fact -not progressive enough-!") but in practice (and despite Raymond's implications, most non-binary /and/ binary trans people generally understand this well) TERFs' activism, academia and political pressure lead to an endgame where trans people are erased and a rollback to the gender conversations of the 1980's, which - doesn't exactly sound progressive to me.
Her opposition to medical transition with the replacement of "consciousness-raising" raises a logistical concern to me, too - and you pointed it out in the Whittig section as well. If trans men are not allowed to become men, trans women are not allowed to become women, either. If the goal was a society that grappled with and struggled against patriarchal norms through discussion of 'women', I wonder how one struggles to square keeping oneself /within/ one's perception of what it is to be their assigned gender (while, I guess, doing it radically??????? sure) with the obvious loss of discussion of gender and conformity that the existence and congregation of trans people will and does obviously lead to. Our very existence (sorry, I forgot to mention I'm a trans woman) provokes consciousness, because radically shifting the way you present to one which is more natural to you /inherently provokes thought and consciousness about your role within gender hierarchy./
To me, I feel the reason that such a broad spectrum of conservative, fascist and centrist voices feel comfortable coalitioning with and empowering trans exclusionary /radical feminists/ is because they both kind of want the same thing out of the arrangement. For us to cease existing, and for the restoration of a very simple struggle - women against men. The battle lines have blurred as people of all walks have life have started questioning where they lie within society and their relationship to gender. One can never see into someone's heart what they actually want or feel, but the conclusion of what both are /doing/ is a rollback. And I appreciate you for pointing out the ways in which they are colluding to make sure trans people /can't/ exist. Anyway, this was a really interesting listen and thank you. (and imo, just one person's opinion, but I don't mind ads being turned on. I don't see any problem with it.)
I'm just going to say, that argument about how "X side is the real sexists" seems to be a fairly inciduos game of tennis, but my only argument I'll give is: how is the side that rejects that mere medical intervention and performance of certain roles being enough to make one a man/woman, embracing roles? There just some parts of being male or female that are practically innate, it doesn't make you a sexist. Ignoring that women are known to deal with certain issues related to biology isn't reinforcing gender roles
@@man4437 This is just biological essentialism and doesn't really add anything to the conversation?
There is no internal feeling that is exclusive to men or women (or boys/girls), what makes anyone a man or a woman is being either male or female and reaching adulthood. Their sex and stage of physical maturity makes them men or women, not some "feeling" they have.
Believing there is some "essence" specific to males or female as far as feelings go, that can manifest "in the wrong body", is akin to a religious belief, having faith in something that is impossible to prove or disprove. The thing is though, that no one on the "trans" side can actually even explain what this "essence" is, they can't even explain it to themselves yet have convinced themselves that the feeling they have means they "are in the wrong body" - without realising that their discomfort simply stems from not realising that they view conforming to sexist stereotypes as legitimate measures of manhood or womanhood. That is why every explanation given of WHY a male "can't be a man, but is instead woman" etc. relies upon listing stereotypical stuff, or, in some cases is completely abstract and refuses to actually provide any explanation of what they mean, simply stating they "know" that what they feel means what they say it does, even though they can't actually provide a definition of it. "It's hard to explain but I know I'm right" is an attitude one constantly comes up against - a religious faith in something they can't define.
This idea that the terms "man" and "woman" carry all this baggage, sexist stereotypes, that people need to live up to or feel comfortable with is a complete fabrication coming from the "trans" side. You lot want a term to reflect aspects of your personality as well, you want to create more boxes to put people in, as you won't accept simply just being a man or a woman based on being born male or female (and reaching adulthood, obviously people are boys and girls before becoming men or women), but believe you need this "freedom of expression" to broadcast what sexist stereotypes you feel more comfortable with - thinking the world needs to adopt the sexist view you lot have (you fail to see just how much you have in common with Conservatives).
Replacing objective definitions which are based in physical reality, with entirely subjective metaphysical claims, is not logical in any way, is not morally superior, and is demonstrably harmful, not least to female rights and protections, but also to practically anyone that buys into it as it warps people's perception of the underlying issues. It hinders people in their quest for individuation, creating this false narrative of them becoming more "authentic" when the total opposite is true, they believe they need validation from others in order to be happy etc. instead of being encouraged to find more inner strength and resilience with less reliance on how people see them. Demanding to be legally recognised as the opposite sex of what one is, is in no way shape or form more authentic than accepting the physical reality one is born into.
To believe we as individuals can have 100% control over our identity in society, what we are seen as by others, in interaction with, and in relation to, society/the world/physical existence is a fool's errand, it is a delusional understanding of reality and existence.
@@man4437 Tomboys counter what's inherently "feminine". Androgyny in 80's male fashion, particularly in glam rock and new romantic styles, are also about going "the most masculine thing that can happen is to embrace feminine looks, because to be man is to rebel".
Sounds like you're clinging to biology to try to justify that there's social expectations foisted on gender.
@@ambientjohnny Thank you. You are one of the only people here pushing against the idealist nonsense that is trans ideology
Gain a whole new respect for this channel and I love it
Great video! It was definitely worth the wait! I'm excited about whaterver it is you do next
Ok, so I'm french and I have a funny thing to add about the wokism thing :
It's part of a larger trend in french discourse, a feature even, where when we don't like something, we'll say it's american (as in from the US). Note that I said "we", and not just the far-right, because people from the left also do it all the time. Even opinion in matters that aren't inherently political will get express this way. I present to you a non-exhaustiv list of exemples :
-Far-righter don't like lgbtq+ people, women, people of color and intellectuals : so every revendication relating to those topics will be called "wokist", the universities are corrupted by "woke ideology", and of course it must be said that it comes from the US
-Some Left winger actually like China and Russia, who are seen as poor countries fighting against american imperialism. So every bad thing said about them must be "CIA propaganda". Note that far-righter who supported Putin were saying the same thing
-When we don't like the neoliberal reforms of our governement, we'll say they are transforming our society to be more like the US
-When someone dislike blocbusters action movies, they'll say that it is "dumb american cinema"
See the sad part is that 99% of what you just said is something that believably came out of the US.
may be not only in France ... but for example in Russia, too? When official xenophobia aligns with some real-world biases in who get most screen time/cultural hegemony in general ...(A lot of thinking was done in English language, and also in usa, so for uninformed it comes from this country .. even if was countervoice to official usa line .... )
Yeah cuz america sucks ass
That was 100 % opinion. . Merci
note to self to never scroll that far down youtube comments section on a video related to trans issues again. god that is bad for me lol
Wtf, I am doing the same thing! 😂 I'm in line at a store so I can't listen/watch, just jumping down a random trans debate rabbit hole
same haha
Another Trans Person has been freed from the comments, by your comment, thank you for your service.
Hmmm didn't plan on watching an hour long video on TERFs today but it was interesting to learn some feminist history
And that's the beauty of the internet.
Or their interpretation thereof
@@terenceflanagan1225 🙄
honestly we need to reclaim “transexual empire” because that phrase is sick af
🤣
as someone who likes math, "identity is not identity" is not something that I can argue against
BDSM isn't officially a part of the acronym, but there's a huge place for it in the community because of kinksters' contributions during the AIDS crisis
straight kinksters 🤝 vanilla gays
"why is my bedroom your business >:("
The leather pride flag is as old as the rainbow flag.
I feel so smart for understanding all of the words in this video. 10/10 made me think thoughts
Those were some quite incredible Venn diagrams, bravo. And a fascinating history lesson that contextualises a whoooole lot of present day bullshit. Nice work.
I saw your video on the New Vegas suit bug, and am astounded! Loved it
WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Another day, another banger. Thank you Rosencreutz.
Woah, I just found this channel yesterday through your Victoria 3 video, I wasn’t expecting this, but as someone who’s in a long term relationship with a trans woman, I really appreciate it.
I’m glad to hear people are receptive to it. I expected a bit more confused “backlash” and more indignant backlash backlash- like people just being very “I didn’t subscribe for this?(understandable)” and “why would you talk about this nonsense!(bad, go away)”
So some part of me was expecting this to just go poorly audience wise and I’m glad that’s not the case generally
I think my biggest takeaway from this video is perhaps being more careful in my use of the word TERF to describe transphobes. I think I perhaps had begun to use it in a more general sense for those you term as gender criticals, and I hadn't thought about that critically as much as I should have. With this video I feel I have a much better understanding of picking out the ideology where it does come up. Thank you for the video, keep being amazing.
I think the distinction is important (thus the video) and that it should be noted TERF is debated in being an externally or an internally sourced term, but Bindel did write about Raymond and call her "the first TERF." All that said, I'm sure if you went up to someone who was mad at a transphobic tweet and asked "was it from a GC or a TERF?" they would probably just go "uhh idk why that matters or what the distinction is"
It's a bit...semantic in common discourse, and I don't entirely expect to change that, but I thought I'd share my understanding of the whole thing.
@@Rosencreutzzz while it certainly is a bit semantic on the more "lived experience" realm of conversation, I feel like proper identification and understanding of ideology is the first step in combating it. On a side note you seemed very comfortable with using the word queer and seemed to not really use the lgbtqia+ label. While I and many people do use the queer label I know some people still take issue with it. If you ever felt inclined to make a video about these sorts of labels and their flux in use I would definitely watch!
@@jacobrudd821 Actually, one note I did find in "Unpacking Queer Politics" by Jeffreys did make mention of the comfort/discomfort of the term queer-- it was Jeffreys citing a gay male author from 1997 who believe the term queer could never be reclaimed. I believe the wording he used was "defanged."
I don't have like, survey, data, but I do know some people, and know of many people who use it self-refferentially, and not just in a joke/deprecation way as some women do with "bitch." The word, I would say is far more reclaimed than most other slurs I've seen people try and "take back" (though, it should be noted taking back is often a misnomer given that the community targeted by a slur seldom is the inventor of it.)
I don't know a ton about the history and turning points of use, so if I did ever do something about it, it would mean learning something new, which is good, but it would also turn into more of a project than just reporting findings. I dunno if it'd be a video, maybe a tweet thread or a mini thing in some format. We'll see. I make no promises for now.
A woman, is an adult human female, it is not an "identity" or a feeling, dress, attitude etc., that whole line of thinking is regressive in the extreme. Claiming there is some "essence" to "womanhood" that also males can access, but the reality is that women do not have to look or act any certain way, or act out some ludicrously sexist idea of the “social role of a woman”, all females who reach adulthood are women regardless of how they feel or look, and the one thing they ALL have in common, the one experience they ALL share, is that they are FEMALE, they do not have to "identify" as anything, they physically ARE women because they are female.
Why should MALES be allowed access to SINGLE-SEX spaces reserved for FEMALES based on their "gender identity"? If sex and gender are separate, then a male announcing his "gender identity" is "trans woman" does nothing to change their sex, they are still MALE - so why should they be afforded rights reserved for the opposite SEX? The movement is regressively sexist, and misogynistic.
Why do you believe females do not deserve any spaces free of males? What is hateful about upholding female sex-based rights that were fought long and hard for?
Believing sexist stereotypes define men and women, instead of their biological sex, is unquestionably sexist to the core, because you are saying men and women are not actually free to behave however they want but need to conform to these sexist stereotypes in order to be men or women - if you say no they don't have to act any sort of way as a man or woman, and being a man or woman has nothing to do with biology - then what are you describing by calling someone a man or woman? If you think it doesn't describe biology, and doesn't describe anything about their looks or behaviour, then what on earth are you basing defining anyone as a man or woman on??? Why would a man need to become a "trans woman" in order to be their "authentic selves", why can't they just be a very feminine man and dress/act however they want?
If trans ideology isn't sexist, then why would a man ever need to "transition" if either sex is completely free to act however they want? How can you claim to be opposing sexism when the whole basis for anyone feeling the need to transition, literally is sexism?
@@ambientjohnny What a load of animalistic slobbering proejction, all to affirm the delusion that you are in any way a good or sincere person when you have become this level of obsessed with your anti-trans sadism. Every single one of your strawmen or fake arguments were debunked decades ago.
This was very informative, thanks for this!
Thanks for supporting it! You were a last minute addition for the last patreon cycle, so you got into the credits too, I honestly appreciate it and meant to reach out on there to ask if there was any particular name you preferred to have in the credits, so hopefully what got in is acceptable.
@@Rosencreutzzz It's perfect as is!
For the curious the painting in the thumbnail was created by Cat Graffam, she has a video on her channel about the process of creating it. Seems a bit unfair not to credit her anywhere.
You're right. Someone made a comment referring to it a long time ago that I pinned, but I changed the pin and forgot that I didn't move it to the description. I'll be putting the video in there now.
Thank you. I'm trying to get a better understanding of transness and everything surounding it (which is and interesting journey for a cishet white dude who's lived for nearly half a century in a fully binary world). While very theory heavy, essays like this are always very interesting and enlighting. While dry (because Theory) you kept it both entertaining and interesting (I had to pauze to laugh at fhe bi erasure joke).
Lol, there's actually a video that a friend made that's about Gender Theory from a more comedic perspective "for dudes"
ua-cam.com/video/Sp0I-qoQLuA/v-deo.html&
Maybe that will also resonate.
@@Rosencreutzzz that video was rexommended to me probably because I watched this one and I'm just done viewing it :D. That said, I didn't mean any of my comment in a negative way. I find Theory like this very interesting but know I don't have the patience to dive into it and read it myself (ironic, given that I'll happily watch an hour or more on yotube about it) so I wildly appreciate video's like yours!
Edit: I only now properly registered the "also resonates". I'm trying so hard to not be put into to "just asking questions!" Crowd that my goto response is embracing my inner Canadian (I am not actually Canadian) and apologise :)
TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD TTD
I’m a trans girl, and I don’t mind answering questions if you have them. One thing to note, being trans is a matter of psychology. While there are things in common, the way one perceives being “trans” is different from person to person
@@Amara87387 Yeah, I actually enjoy answering questions about my transness if they are asked in good faith. Unfortunately, especially on the Internet, so many questions are asked in bad faith that I always have to have my guard up.
Never stop making videos dude, don't stop what you're doing. I love the variety of topics you cover and the depth you go into on every topic.
personally i find "scissoring to own the man" very fun. /j
great video!!
24:40 thank you, yes, these people are so *frustrating*, i've been sitting here nodding along, going 'yes this does very much encapsulate my ambivalence to the whole concept of gender' and then they drive right off into the land of complete horseshit. really appreciate this, i've been looking for a good summary of the overall feminist theory at play here because the whole history of the movement is just fascinating looking back at it from here. thanks so much!!
just stumbled into your channel and it's right up my alley! Video essays on broad, philosophical and political topics are interesting enough, but your videos that touch on gaming too are a whole other goldmine. Thank you for your work dude. Please keep it up!
Commenting for engagement and shared it ! Loved this video
It's funny to look back at any of this stuff and go "oh, it was stupid. It was always stupid." Yet we still have to deal with these people.
Amazing shaun-level video. Am gonna binge your content now👍🏻
Through the whole Wittig section I never heard it mentioned that in French a woman "femme" has her social role changed based on her relation with a man. The word for wife is __ femme as in a man would say "ma femme" literally my woman if he was talking about his wife. I'm still learning French so don't grill me but I just thought this was an interesting point.
I that's true! It's really weird.
I'm not French, but from what I understand, it's becoming more common for people to use the word "épouse" (spouse) for wife for this reason. I don't know if it's replacing "mari" for husband as much, though.
@erraticonteuse it exists, but both are not that used, even less so for épouse. The reason is that it is perceived as "too formal" and almost outated.
Fun fact, the word "wife" is literally just old English for "woman". It's still used in some compound words, like "fishwife", and in parts of Scotland, women are still called "wifies".
@robokill387 I call my spouse wifie so by my internal logic you're wrong.
I'm so late to this one, but I need to say how much I appreciate this breakdown and analysis.
I appreciate when it's gotten to at all. Even if my other work eclipses it, it's still the work I cherish most for the sake of...importance, I suppose. It's the one I think people need to see, if that makes sense. (And it will probably be my pinned on twitter forever, because it also acts as a filter, of sorts).
Damn... that section on Wittig brings up something that I've been trying to properly articulate for a while now.
In terms of identity I am simply a man... But whenever I want to talk about how I interface with the society around me "man" suddenly takes a back seat behind terms like "genderqueer," and "transf🅰️g."
I am a man, but that's nowhere close to an adequate description of my class position.
I just don't get why they make biological sex sound so awful. It doesn't help their cause, if anything it just makes people more trans
real
this is the secret 5D chess the secret world government is playing to make the entire planet trans. After that, they're going to turn the frogs gayer by putting chemicals in the water ( /j if it wasn't obvious because text really does not convey sarcasm well)
Whom is they ? Doctors ? Biologists? Why would that be? I'm good with mine . Im unique too. We ALL are . Some people just aren't anyone without artifice apparently
@@terenceflanagan1225 I also don't get why they keep pretending they don't know how words work. That doesn't help their cause either
You know what I mean by they. Don't pretend I need to spell everything out for you like you're a baby.
This is a very interesting breakdown of the history of gender critical theory. Great video.
One of the best assessments I have encountered. A truly talented intellectual.
new to your channel but love what i’ve seen so far :))
I haven’t even finished yet, but had to comments as listening to your explanation of Wittig really resonated with what I experience living in Korea. Very few of my Korean friends identified as feminists, and those that did (and those that didn’t) saw the title of feminist as an adopted class, similar to how Wittig used “lesbian.” Not only did they go against gender norms, but really challenged heterosexuality as well, as if it wasn’t an identity but a form of class struggle involving swearing off marriage and men and coerced domestic work.
Oh god, I love your videos so much
Some questions I had in my youth (when I was around 12-14 maybe...) about why transsexuality is a thing. (I have never thought that it was wrong, didn´t exist, put down people for not being happy in their assigned gender). My question, as someone who has never felt like a girl, but neither a boy, is why instead of having to be one or the other (transitioning or not), why not try to work towards removing gender stereotypes/gender all together. "Why not just let people be girly if they want to be girly, let people be boyish if they want to be boyish, and people who want to be somewhere in between, or just completely something else, be that?"
This is something I still think about sometimes, but as an adult I know that it isn´t exactly that easy, and the world as it is today, is not designed to support that kind of mindset.
I still don´t rly know what to identify myself as, so to make things easy I´ve just stuck to girl, even though I don´t always feel like one just because of the expectations of how I´m supposed to act.
I love dressing up and stuff like that, but I don´t act/behave in a feminime fashion, which led me to not be as "accepted" by teachers and classmates during my school years. I was even deathly afraid of girls when I was younger, bc I never fit in with them, and dindn´t know how to act. (Didn´t help that back then I had not yet started being interested in fashion, and dressed like an emo boy)
Anyway, thank you for further explaining everything. For me it cleared up at least a little bit of some confusion
So, I feel like responding to this requires the definition of a few terms as a preface. While I use them to mean pretty much exactly what their established definitions are, with how this topic is it's best to define them so as not to be misunderstood.
Sex: the bimodal differentiation of humans as male or female (with intersex as the space between the modes), as determined by genitalia, genetics, secondary sexual characteristics, and hormones
Sex assigned at birth/SAAB/assigned gender at birth/AGAB: the above, but specifically in terms of being recorded as male, female, or intersex at the time of your birth (i.e. what was first put on your birth certificate, barring a clerical error)
Gender: the neuropsychosocial phenomenon of being a man, woman, neither, etc
Transgender: someone whose gender and SAAB are not the same
Transsexual: a (often considered outdated) term referring to people who have had medical intervention to make changes to their sex, whether hormones, surgery, etc.
Gender roles/gender stereotypes: the societal expectations placed on people of a certain gender (e.g. "women are homemakers" "men are breadwinners" "women like shopping" "men like sports", that sort of thing)
Gender expression: how one expresses themself in ways that are seen as gendered, particularly in terms of aesthetic aspects of gender roles (e.g. wearing certain colors or styles of clothing, engaging in certain hobbies that are seen as "masculine" or "feminine", etc)
Gender nonconformity: exhibiting a gender expression in a way that does not fit the gender roles society has placed on you, whether pertaining to the gender commonly associated with your AGAB or the gender you are in spite of that. To some extent, this includes being transgender, as that's nonconformity with your AGAB, but it's often used in a more deliberate sense
Okay, with all of that out of the way...
To start, the abolishment of gender stereotypes is something that a lot of trans people work towards already. There isn't any reason activities, behaviors, or interests should be seen as "boyish" or "girly" in the first place, since gender doesn't intrinsically have any impact on what you can do or want to do. A lot of us feel pressure to overperform gender roles, but that's because we're often outright denied legitimacy, medical care, and the right to exist peacefully if we don't. A trans woman not intentionally shifting her gender expression to the absolute extreme of (modern) femininity is more likely to be harassed, more likely to be assaulted, more likely to be denied access to things ranging from stable employment to transition-related healthcare to even more basic things like being able to use the bathroom. A trans man not intentionally shifting his gender expression to well within the limits of "acceptable" for men is likely to suffer the same.
Nothing about gender roles are intrinsic to a person. We may internalize them at a young age, but there's no biological basis for boys liking cars and the color blue or girls liking dolls and the color pink.
However, in a world where gender roles are completely abolished, there will still be trans people (though there's debate as to whether there would be more or less of us). The part of our brains that map to gender still differentiate both before we're born and in early childhood. This would still cause things like gender dysphoria and the desire to transition, whether socially, medically, or both. Fundamentally, our gender and our AGAB would still be different.
For example, I still would be pursuing GRS (aka bottom surgery). There is no gender role-related reason that I have gender dysphoria regarding my sex. It's not like "oh, I like purple, so I need a vagina". Hell, the whole notion that TERFs seem to have regarding sexual roles (in this case, the dominant/submissive and such kind) and gender might be why some of them take such issue with gender-affirming care in the first place. But no amount of dominance or submission, no amount of attraction to men or women, no amount of sexuality or asexuality would change the fact that I, fundamentally, have a body map that does not match my sex.
And that's not to say that being transgender is inherently linked to being transsexual, either. I can't say what the social understanding of gender would look like in a world without gender roles, but they aren't the same thing, and abolishing one doesn't abolish the other. Barring a world where there isn't even a linguistic way to differentiate gender (and even then, probably not), there will still be trans women, there will still be trans men, and there will still be nonbinary people.
Again, I can only fully speak to myself, but I'm still nonbinary. On the axis of "man" versus "woman", I'm somewhere vaguely between, vaguely removed altogether. And weirdly enough, my own self-concept of my gender and my gender expression seem to go in opposite directions. When I see myself as more "man", my expression usually goes more feminine, and vice versa. I can't say exactly why I know this, because it's just this... deep, almost intuitive understanding of myself that's come after a lot of introspection.
I can't say for certain what your relation to all this is. I don't know you, and there's no amount of anonymous exchanges that could ever give me the answer for you. Hell, even if I did know you, I couldn't give the answer for you outright.
Maybe you're just gender nonconforming. Maybe it's just a matter of how you dress, what you like to do, and so on. A change in gender expression could solve the conflict you feel. There's no one way to be a woman. You could be a tomboy, you could be butch, you could just be "not like other girls" (in the face value meaning of the phrase, not the meme kind of way).
Maybe you're trans and/or nonbinary. Maybe the term "woman" just... doesn't fit. It could be a matter of being called a different name, using different pronouns, and maybe gender expression is a part of that, maybe it isn't. And if you are, there's no requirement to medically transition or not. If you don't experience a disconnect with your physical sex, then social changes might be all you need. If you do, maybe more. I couldn't say.
Maybe you're agender. You might just not experience gender in any meaningful way as part of your self-concept. Same sort of thing applies as nonbinary, but rather than being a *different* gender, it's just not something you experience at all. (Keep in mind, though, that this is different than just being detached from gender roles)
Regardless of the why, whether it's a matter of gender nonconformity or gender dysphoria, there's nothing wrong with it. Yeah, society sucks, and I'm not going to pretend we aren't pressured to act according to gender roles and socially (and sometimes legally or physically) punished if we don't. You could take all this in and just... not want to think about it further, because the world sucks when it comes to any form of gender nonconformity. And I completely get that. But I didn't want you to have to have things go unanswered, yknow?
You don't have to reply at all if you don't want to, but if you have questions, need clarification, or want to talk about things in deeper detail, I'm happy to respond.
I love the phrase "Earned Opinion," it's like a short version of "I actually know what I'm talking about, so sit down!"
Can someone help me with the arguments suggested at 23:38 , the arguments that refutes transgender as re-enforcing the class binary? Sorry if the wording of this might be insensitive, I'm still learning.
It's a tough one and I come back to it from time to time in my own understanding. As far as the class/material argument, the issue is that those interested in the "class" angle (not always TERFs, mind you) are having a different conversation than the one had by the average trans person who is "embodying" gender. The Trans gender expression of "being a woman" involves traits, signifiers, and the self, while the TERF definition of a woman is based in class status.
From that, you don't really see a trans woman who "knows they're a woman" because they have a "materially subordinate relation to men"
This is one of the fundamental disconnects of TERF ideology to the lived experience of trans people-- that TERFs are using a definition of women as "the oppressed class" and trans women aren't basing their gender on that idea.
Or, put another way, a trans woman doesn't "realize" they're a woman by going "Oh, I associate with being reduced, trivialized, and oppressed."
Now as for if a given trans person and their presentation "reinforces the binary"... that's complicated and case by case, but it's also turning a systemic issue into an individualist one: saying the trans woman has now "upheld gender" when really the systemic concern is not "ending gender" so much as ending a hierarchy.
IDK I just think if you're convinced trans people are reinforcing gender stereotypes, you don't know many trans people.
@@Rosencreutzzz Thank you. Your channel is the first that I've found that addresses original literature on gender discourse. People fighting in the current culture war seem to be perpetually in reaction to their opposition, where the rhetoric doesn't go beyond the mere villainisation of the other side. Knowledge of the fundamental discourse on trans rights and its relationship to feminist thought has been very valuable to me.
@@Rosencreutzzz A trans 'woman' is a man. That is the basic, biological reality. You do not become a woman through wishing and poncing around like Dylan Mulvaney in 'girl' mode.
Lived experience at best is another term for anecdotal evidence but in this context, it is pure nonsense. A man cannot under any circumstances have a 'lived experience' as a woman because he will never be one, no matter how he dresses, what name or pronouns he gives himself, and no matter how he is drugged or physically mutilated.
Radical feminists say a lot of stupid things but their definition of a woman is based on the reality of sex. The oppression they perceive which is aimed at women is also based on sex. Gender just means the expected behaviour of the two sexes. Unfortunately, the radical feminist insistence on divorcing sex and gender did help fuel the trans cult and the grooming of children we are witnessing today.
An argument would be, if gender is a class, people changged chlass throughout history, now more than ever, yeah its not that easy and has factors, but so has transitioning. People change their presentation, status and standing all the time looking very different after.
The that people change identity and class all thhe time is, an arument?@@Rosencreutzzz
I'm still at the beginning of the video but i came up as a trans person in early 10s Tumblr, so I remember when we just called them radfems, before "terf" was in common use.
Shout out ecco the dolphin reference, Rosen. 😎
I played it recently on a sega mini plug n play and take a *far* weirder game than I would have anticipated, even knowing the music beforehand thanks to vaporwave
I feel so ... transgressive.
As a cis woman and a lesbian, I listened to this while doing the washing up (and, yes, round 2 did take me about an hour ... we don't like washing up in this house).
Lol, I also listed to part of this while washing dishes, finished before the end though.
I wish I'd found this channel years ago. Do you find yourself fascinated with studying systems? Because your content is filled with all the weird, diverse array of things I think about constantly, and I know in a general sense that that is a fascination of mine.
59:45 Guys, I think that after almost two decades we found the author of "My Immortal" 😰
Man, this was a heavy one. Time to hopefully brighten my mood by hunting for that Spudgun comment
Thanks for the video. It won't change the minds of fascists (their attention span couldn't survive the length), but it's still valuable to construct clear arguements against their ideology.
Thanks for spelling this out so clearly. I was late to discovering "TERFism" and found it horrifying. I did think TERFs shared some of the worst qualities of what we used to call lesbian separatists, but I didn't hear anyone referring to that. And it seemed more as if the lesbian separatists must have got swept up into some destructive cult somewhere along the way. Which seems not an unfair characterization, but it's better to have more of the actual history of it. It's hard for me, because I do remember "radical feminism" as having some important insights and messages. For one thing, they were the first to notice that r*pe & child SA were damaging people long term. But the insane hatefulness and the willingness to cooperate with outright misogynists -- it feels as if someone must have released some kind of bizarre mind control gas in radical feminist meetings or something. Glad I got too isolated to be part of it.
thanks for this video this is a great breakdown
This is a really fascinating video!
27:40 Raymond specifically calls out Sandy Stone when in reality everyone at Olivia was super chill with her. i encourage everyone to look up Stone's "Interview with a Transsexual Vampire" as she addresses the "controversies" years later, and has amazing insights into how to think about gender that ppl can still learn from today.
It's sobering to see how terf bigotry is simultaneously older than I thought, and also very little changed since the earliest iterations.
Hearing the exact some points used today being used in books from the 70s is absolutely wild
Great video!
I can only assume that all of these political Lesbian-Feminists are bisexual and are assuming that everyone else is too, which would explain why they view it as a pure matter of (political) choice. Being a Lesbian is a choice to not be with men and being Bisexual is a choice to be with both men and women. This is the only reading that makes any sense to me.
That makes sense. But I'd add to that the fact some political lesbians basically self ID as lesbians, while having a husband that is submissive to here, letting her think thats its OK, because he obeys you.
@@dodonixx953 oh, i see, that’s kind of surprising!
@asdfghyter I actually a lot terf think in those ways. It's actually more common among them than among regular lesbian feminist. It's actually disgusting how many terf think males are irrationally, dangerous bieng, naturally violent, only good when obeying a woman, who they see as intellectually and emotionally superior, but weaker. Therefore, trans women are men who believe themselves intellectually equal to women, making them self-deceived to tame and trans men sheep throwing themselves to the wolfs, hoping they will be spared... as a trans woman, it's so f*cked up.
@@dodonixx953Note: This also tracks neatly onto white supremacy, with black people categorized as physically gifted, sexually voracious brutes, and white people as intellectually and politically dominant in the racial hierarchy.
As much as our power structures and hierarchies can intrude into our sex lives and gender expressions, the fact is your gender identity and sexual orientation are things that exist beyond those things. You cannot become a lesbian for political purposes. At best some bi and repressed lesbian women came out to themselves. This fact alone undermines a lot of the lesbian feminist ideas expressed by some of your sources. Being trans is not an -ism (as you mentioned, though there is no reason not to BOLD TYPE it). Hit back any time you hear someone saying that people are turning people trans. They can no more do that than they can turn people gay.
I love this channel, come for the historical analysis of games that depict history, stay for the examination of radical feminism
I once called a TERF a TERF, and they got offended... but only at the RF part. They fully owned the TE.
That’s funny I’m the opposite I am a radical feminist but I don’t like the trans exclusion part because I think trans identified women who dress as men should be welcomed fully into the movement I would rather it be exclusively male exclusionary.
@@samsalamander8147 including trans men as women isnt including trans people in your feminism. it just hurts us more
@@samsalamander8147so... The cookie cutter, essentialist position that pretty much all TERFs take?
@@the_pipster Identity i far less important than results and only an insane amount of privilege would make you believe otherwise. Most trans men in the world and through history have had to live as women their whole life and have been targeted by patriarchy violently their whole lives. They/we deserve a seat at the table and to be fought for. Predators do not give a single shit how you ID. They see your sex and act accordingly.
That just a transphobe
I’ve read and like Wittig (her theory) so I’m looking forward to hearing this critique
Definitely going to recommend this to my friends. It's a fascinating approach to this subject that I haven't seen done as often. Love this channel so far!
There is no internal feeling that is exclusive to men or women (or boys/girls), what makes anyone a man or a woman is being either male or female and reaching adulthood. Their sex and stage of physical maturity makes them men or women, not some "feeling" they have.
Believing there is some "essence" specific to males or female as far as feelings go, that can manifest "in the wrong body", is akin to a religious belief, having faith in something that is impossible to prove or disprove. The thing is though, that no one on the "trans" side can actually even explain what this "essence" is, they can't even explain it to themselves yet have convinced themselves that the feeling they have means they "are in the wrong body" - without realising that their discomfort simply stems from not realising that they view conforming to sexist stereotypes as legitimate measures of manhood or womanhood. That is why every explanation given of WHY a male "can't be a man, but is instead woman" etc. relies upon listing stereotypical stuff, or, in some cases is completely abstract and refuses to actually provide any explanation of what they mean, simply stating they "know" that what they feel means what they say it does, even though they can't actually provide a definition of it. "It's hard to explain but I know I'm right" is an attitude one constantly comes up against - a religious faith in something they can't define.
This idea that the terms "man" and "woman" carry all this baggage, sexist stereotypes, that people need to live up to or feel comfortable with is a complete fabrication coming from the "trans" side. You lot want a term to reflect aspects of your personality as well, you want to create more boxes to put people in, as you won't accept simply just being a man or a woman based on being born male or female (and reaching adulthood, obviously people are boys and girls before becoming men or women), but believe you need this "freedom of expression" to broadcast what sexist stereotypes you feel more comfortable with - thinking the world needs to adopt the sexist view you lot have (you fail to see just how much you have in common with Conservatives).
Replacing objective definitions which are based in physical reality, with entirely subjective metaphysical claims, is not logical in any way, is not morally superior, and is demonstrably harmful, not least to female rights and protections, but also to practically anyone that buys into it as it warps people's perception of the underlying issues. It hinders people in their quest for individuation, creating this false narrative of them becoming more "authentic" when the total opposite is true, they believe they need validation from others in order to be happy etc. instead of being encouraged to find more inner strength and resilience with less reliance on how people see them. Demanding to be legally recognised as the opposite sex of what one is, is in no way shape or form more authentic than accepting the physical reality one is born into.
To believe we as individuals can have 100% control over our identity in society, what we are seen as by others, in interaction with, and in relation to, society/the world/physical existence is a fool's errand, it is a delusional understanding of reality and existence.
@@ambientjohnnyPreach. But I don’t agree with your comparison to religious beliefs. Believing that the universe came from a big bang that had no cause is literally the exact same level of guesswork. We just don’t know. I don’t believe in gender dyphoria. There was no one who used to be thinking to change gender back in old times, but there was many gay people in Ancient Greece. I think that being gay is a disorder (hear me out) akin to something like ADHD or Autism (I have ADHD myself). It is a difference to a neurotypical brain, and similarly to ADHD and Autism, it cannot be cured, it can only be masked. We don’t know what causes gender dysphoria, there is no theory either. We believe that disabilities like ADHD are caused by a lack of dopamine and differences in brain development and structure. But what could possibly make a man have the brain of a woman? The brains are too different to simply be genetic variation or adaptations during childhood
This is a little more academic than I'm used to and I struggle to rearticulate what I learned to people but this video was very interesting to watch and inspired me to look more into queer theory :0
This was absolutely god tier discourse and deconstruction. Thank you
Rosen kills me by saying 'well that's simple enough so I won't explain it ' after the most convoluted sentiment I heard in a year 😭
A really informative, well researched video, but all I can think about is how one of the Venn diagrams looks like a vulva (which I suspect was intentional).
That Dang Dad sent me. Liked and subscribed!
I’m so happy I found this video as I was struggling to understand the theory scaffolding needed to justify transness as a radical notion (to me, in my own head) because I was firmly in the, “but wait if a trans man dress male then isn’t that just conforming gender stereotypes?!” But with videos like this and with talking with those we are trans I’ve been able to understand the theoretical framework to refute that and I’m so fricken happy that I found this video. Seriously, thank you. ❤
Hey Rosencreutz, finally got around to this one and it was super interesting! For the future, if possible it would nice if you could consider getting some extra voices to help read out the many quotes from this video. It's pretty easy for me to zone out or tab away during an hourlong video essay with minimal visual elements and it made it sometimes a bit hard to separate when you were speaking from yourself and when you were quoting. I had to rewind a couple of times to grasp some paragraphs in the right context.
45:43 an eternal struggle is one of the core tennents of fascism
You mean tenets.
@@cleoldbagtraallsorts3380 🤓
I just started this video and I'm sure I'll have a million things to say by the end, but I'll try to shut up, listen, and just note how crazy it is that "lesbian" is a word the algorithm will suppress. Fuckin youtube...
EDIT: This is borderline acedemic. Imma rewatch this and take notes. Good shit.
I hope I'm not the only person to comment on this (I scrolled down for a while to check and see if that was the case because I don't want to harp on this if it's already been addressed): I really appreciate your putting the time and research into this video that you did and was really interested in learning more about this subject. However, my one critique is that it was very difficult to follow at certain points where there were large blocks of text on the screen that differed significantly (or, almost worse, when it substantively added to) what you were saying in the voiceover. It makes those sections jarring and forces frequent pausing in order to take in both your text and your spoken words. The most frustrating part of this is that often, the comments you add in text onscreen provide very important added context or clarifying nuance. These sections gave me a headache because it was either pause the video every few moments to read your comments, or strain to try to keep listening while reading the text (which is ultimately impossible). I think this somewhat detracts from getting your message across, and it's an important message on a subject that is already complex and meticulously researched. Making it easier to follow and fully process what you're trying to say would be helpful in my opinion. I had to stop halfway through because it was too difficult to take everything in clearly.
thanks for tackling this topic in such an expansive and respectful way, it's really good, if a bit horrifying to look into this abyss of malignant thoughts