@@DystopianDeepDives many radfems appreciates Magdalene Berns and Posie Parker and other vocal radfems in various platforms. The more allies speaking against delusions the better
@@DystopianDeepDives it’s not cause he’s a man , it’s cause he has clearly a scientific background and it’s very interesting to listen to science . His videos on intersex conditions are very interesting and scientifically described . It’s not cause he’s a male , it’s cause he’s more interesting and scientific than people like Posie Parker who basically have no scientific background whatsoever and no scientific way to say things .
Feminism is wrong. It's a philosophy which advocates for w0m3n to get government-granted PRIVILEGES at the expense of men, instead of just being treated equal. The philosophy where everyone is actually treated fairly, receiving no government favoritisms, is libertarianism.
Every video you make is a win for truth, for the integrity of science and the body, and for the protection of women/girls as a sex. Thank you for your continued work!
This is what JK Rowling has been trying to say all this while, yet she's been misinterpreted, cancelled and labelled as transphobic. It's really scary to have an honest and civil conversation about the biological reality of sex without being called transphobic or a TERF these days.
Anyone who HASN'T been accused of being "transphobic" and "a TERF", by this point, is either (1) gullible and easily manipulated, (2) spineless and indifferent to truth, or (3) eager to trade the rights and safety of 100% of women/girls, for the "validation" of 0.2% of biological men. Any public figure who hasn't been "cancelled" AT LEAST 2 or 3 times, isn't worth valuing their opinion.
This is the definitive, compact, comprehensive overview we all direly needed. The visuals are sharp and perfectly complementary. Thank you so much Zach!
I just binged all of your videos and followed you on Twitter! It's a breath of fresh air to find videos (and a community of people) that still believe in biological sex, and it's undeniable implications on humanity.
Actually men are offended constantly when they say these things , even using less scientific terms than he does , we are not called terfs but we are called transphobic , haters , hateful , bigots , homophobes etc etc . Also if you look well in his videos there are some trans activists calling him transphobic . You’re delusional if you think men are not insulted for stating realities . I’ve been insulted and most of the times from women who are trans activist allies or women who identity as gender queers or other crap .
@@salvolondon no one is saying that men NEVER catch heat from speaking up about this. What we are saying is that women catch way more heat and are often completely shut down and have our platform removed. We are kicked off of social media and channels and accounts deleted.
I would like to add: how the police could identifie a criminel if they can't use biological fact? "The murderer was a woman, with a red dress!" Yes. But if anybody can be a woman just by saying it, it's impossible to identifie her.hil.them(for the non binary). The question is valuable to identifie a dead body with no... head or particular evidence of his sex! Above all, a dead body can't express his identity 😂😁. Great, great video! Thank you !👏🏾
Yes, such as Karen white who raped a women with "her penis". We are getting stronger, we are getting louder and our numbers rise by the day. Everyone will have their peak moment soon enough.
Totally agree. Biological sex has been under attack. Now, at a time when the Olympics in on in Japan we see that because the IOC agreed that trans gender athletes can compete in Women Sport how such policies are an injustice to biological females. We has seen how there is a promotion of untruths. Males have a physical advantage but Laurel Hubbard (a trans inidivdual) who was born male now compete in women's weightlifting event. Women's only spaces increasingly open to trans. Also interesting is that attacks on women have increased by 90% when mix sex changing rooms were introduced in British Swimming pools.
I am transexual male to female and I remember when this was barely even a topic a couple of years ago thank you for defending biological sex and gender identity without conflating the two, eliminating biological sex eliminates transitioning and trans rights and the trans experience as well as everybody elses as well as the struggles we had to go through up until 2015 and Even further back then that to achieve the human LGBT+ rights we have to day ultra woke progressive activist need to be stopped before they redefine everything trans was just the start and now they're redefining everything else while treating gender identity as if it's just a aesthetic.
I totally agree. I am FTM myself, and I recall those days too when we recognised the difference in sex. We are transsexual *because* we were born male or female. Erasing the definitions would even jeopardise our medical options. I don’t transition because "I feel masculine". I transition because there is a crippling disconnect between how my brain recognise my body, and how my body actually look and function. Our neurological condition is not a political statement, not a fashion choice, not an identity, not a feeling, not a movement.
Zach, thank you for you sanity, and maintaining cool and logic and a rational demeanour (and providing links to sources), even surrounded by insanity. It's scary to say this, but you are one of a kind in this increasingly Orwellian world. "Being in a minority, even in a minority of one, did not make you mad. There was truth and there was untruth, and if you clung to the truth even against the whole world, you were not mad." So many self-described feminists of the mainstream have completely (or at least partly) lost their marbles (if they even had any to begin with). "It was like swimming against a current that swept you backwards however hard you struggled, and then suddenly deciding to turn round and go with the current instead of opposing it." I hope you never do this. Thanks for the video. Incidentally, any thoughts on how long this will stay up before UA-cam bans it? It seems insane now, but a few years ago the idea of being banned from Twitter for saying, "Only females get cervical cancer," would have been inconceivable insanity, so...
I understand english but I would like to share it with french friend or plateform who will not make the same effort. It is possible to have a translation? I speak for my country but I'm sure that other people in other countries would lile to use it to explain what is happening with that strange ideology which deny sex reality (spanish, portugais, corean... Etc).
The transcript can be found on the website, which you can find in the link in the description. Under the video on the website, you will see a link to 'Transcript' and 'Transcript (PDF)'. That should help if you're wanting to copy the transcript and translate it using a program. Hope that helps!
Thank you for fighting the good fight. Sometimes I get the feeling like I'm sent back in time into the middle ages. Aristotle is all the rage, women are malformed, inverted men and homunculus is a controversial new theory. Your videos are like islands of reason in the sea of social media madness.
Thank you as always for your hard work at re-clarifying a subject that, while it should be simple, has been so intentionally complificated by propagandists that it's no small effort to unravel.
Based on the other videos by Paradox, the only thing that matters is whether or not you have the SRY gene. If you have SRY, you're male (because SRY leads to the development of the body plan that produces sperm), if you don't, you're female. I'll leave it to other viewers to decide whether this is indeed a necessary and sufficient condition for defining an individual's sex.
Here is my argument here *yes and nos for the “male” part*: Of course, people who usually is under the influence of androgens, has SRY gene, and has the Y chromosomes are biologically males (may or may not be transgender). Yes, SRY gene can lead to the production of the sperm and arrests some female features like the uterus, cervix, vagina, fallopian tubes, and ovaries into that of the opposite. Yet, this is about the reproductive system. Not the characteristics that blocks the features. If you are NOT under the influence of androgens BUT have the SRY gene (may or may not have the Y chromosome), you will have the phenotypical body of a female (including the external genitals) but you’re internal organs is male and you won’t really produce sperm due to lack of androgens. And not everyone who has the Y chromosome has the SRY gene (Swyer’s Syndrome) and Swyer’s Syndrome means that a person who lacks BOTH androgens and the SRY gene but has the Y chromosome. Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (Complete or Partial) means that the person lacks androgens (depending on what type of androgen insensitivity) but has the SRY gene and Y chromosome. *yes and nos for the “female” part*: of course, usually, people who doesn’t have the SRY gene also lacks androgen and doesn’t have the Y chromosome are biologically females (may or may not be transgender). But there are cases that this busts the idea. You see, if the person doesn’t have the SRY gene or doesn’t have the Y chromosome but is under the influence of androgens, this is called Persistant Müllerian Duct Syndrome and this is only found in MALES and since he doesn’t have the Y chromosome, he will get periods but has the external genital of a male. If he had a Y chromosome but has Persistant Müllerian Duct Syndrome, he or she can decide on whether he or she (based on identity) wants to remove his internal organs (male identity) or remove her external organs and take estrogen and androgen blockers (female identity). BUT if the person is BOTH the influence of androgens and has the SRY gene but doesn’t have a Y chromosome (De La Charlette Syndrome) and De La Charlette means a person has XX chromosomes but has the SRY gene and is under the influence of androgens. So mainly, IF you’re talking about biology, it should be based on if the person is under the influence of androgens or not. Not the SRY gene or if the person has the Y chromosome or not. Secondly, not everyone identifies as what they’re born as. They are people who was AMAB (assigned male at birth) but identifies themselves and is recognised as female or people who was AFAB (assigned female at birth) but identifies themselves and is recognised as male
Nah don't worry he is too small and his claims are too obviously dumb for it to be worth it for anyone to do a video to debunk them. He kinda does it himself tbqh
Hello :) I - as a biochemist - totally agree on the two gamet stuff. But so many of the aspects you highlighted, why biological sex cannot be replaced by gender, are of sociopolitical origin. Because we built a system around biological sex and devided humans in every aspect of life into the two sexes (when only in a few aspects, biological sex is importat), we created these sociopolitical definitions on what a woman and what a man is. It is not written in our gamets, which color we like, if we like dresses and make-up and also is we can only channel all of our emotions into anger - and therefore may do crime or rape or won't admit that we are suffering under depression and seek help. Still, when biological sex matters, such as in the medical field, of course we need to put know a persons biological sex so we can treat sex-based illnesses differently.
Great video!!! Now I understand how biological sex matters and why it must be defended. I haven’t quite understood the “evolution” part. Given the fact that men have “conquered the world” by subduing women reproductively and sexually throughout the history of humanity, I don’t see how the only explanation for how our species has evolved is mere consequence of sexual selection. Thanks you for your time.
A few thoughts. Even where there is no apparent choice - eg where the parents dole out their daughters to suitable allies in the tribe, there is still an element of practical choice. If the daughter happens to like the man she gets, the couple is more likely to be at it like rabbits than if she can't stand him. And dissatisfied daughters can have affairs and get away with it a fair amount of the time. And in those cases, the daughters are doing the choosing. It's also unlikely that the doling out of daughters was "patriarchal" most of the time. Traditional societies often leave the matchmaking to the distaff side of the family - in that sense it was the females choosing, and looking for "fitness" features in the potential grooms, just not the females who were getting married off. Being the son of the chief, though apparently a mere social quality, obviously also has genetic links to fitness - the chief wouldn't be the chief if he was useless. Likewise if there's a bride price to be paid, this is another fitness proxy, and probably a more accurate proxy in tribal societies than in modern ones. And finally it's unlikely that the daughters always and necessarily had zero say in the matter of who they were allocated to. For sexual selection to work, all that is required is that the males who are preferred by the females get more offspring because of that preference. It doesn't require that females get a free choice every time they feel like copulating.
The first one is the most important in my opinion, I'm glad you gave it first place. I perfectly understand what trans ideologues are asking for me, it is to lie so they can feel better. I'm sorry, the answer to that will have to be "no".
Look, just from the start this seems to make the assumption that we don't think sex matters in society. I think any trans person would say that biological sex is important. Obviously if a trans woman goes to the doctor they aren't going to operate on the idea that she has ovaries or something. Valuing biological sex and social gender concepts are not mutually exclusive. at the end of the day gender, in this context, would be a concept involving a lot of sociology and psychology. Its about mental states that clash with what one's biological sex is. These mental experiences exist. No matter how real and important sex is, and its not a matter of just falling in line. I guarantee you no one in this world cares more about their biological sex and reckons with it more than trans people. If I am reading into this too much and you are not trying to delegitimize sociological and psychological findings with the importance of biological sex, I apologize. I do agree with almost everything have said on that subject, the presentation just seems motivated to me.
>"I guarantee you no one in this world cares more about their biological sex and reckons with it more than trans people..." Then why do you prioritize the SEX-based right of 100% woman and girls, to physical safety, from the SEX who are 40% physically stronger, and commit >98% of sex crimes, as less important than the "validation"-feels of 0.2% of biological males? I fully support trans people have EVERY right the rest of us have (as they do, currently)- Dress how you want, live how you want, believe what you want. I don't even have much issue with doing you the courtesy of suspending normal grammar, to use wrong-sex pronouns, if that's what you prefer (but nobody OWES you the favour of this special treatment). I fully support the right of ANY consenting adult, to alter their own body in ANY way choose, for ANY reason, good or bad. But sex is based on EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE. Sex is just objective, undeniable TRUTH, like weight or height or age. "Gender" is 100% based on self-reported FEELINGS, with no empirical evidence that it's any more "real" than classifying people by star signs, or their "soul", or "chakras" or "karma". I'm genuinely sorry if this upsetting to you, but "gender" is 100% indistinguishable from ANY religious concept, which may FEEL very real to believers, but from the outside, concepts like "sin" or "gender" or "thetans" are just meaningless. (and having powerful people and groups support your religion, doesn't make it any more "true". Prominent medical and psych groups who support chemically-castrating 10yo's based on "gender" ideology today, supported chemically-castrating gay men, a single generation ago. Having a scientist, or an entire GROUP of scientists endorse a religious belief/pseudoscience, makes no difference, unless they have EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE... But "gender" ideology ADMITS a 100% absence of evidence, and zero likelyhood of future evidence, with it's "just a social construct" meme. So HOW COULD a "mere social construct" ever have empirical evidence? Like most religions, the beliefs themselves PRECLUDE any possibility of scientific validity) Laws need to based on empirical evidence. Not on self-reported, "it's true coz I FEEL it's true", 100% evidence-free religious concepts like "gender". Act/dress/believe/live HOWEVER you like (if it doesn't infringe on others), but you will NEVER be able compel others to believe that YOUR feelings (ie "gender") somehow outweigh evidence-based facts (ie sex). (Same as EVERY religion, who sincerely believes that "their totally-legit, capital-T REAL Truth" entitles them to impose their beliefs on non-believers)
It's absolutely hilarious what the internet if today brings out as versions of supposed experts that basically just mush up their own opinion and have a nice layout for their presentation. This is a studied architect with no medical degree whatsoever who selfproduced a couple of videos and write some books (that noone read according to no reviews to be found) claiming to be a selfmade expert because he wrote books. This has no scientific or even expert level background at all. Truly funny.
seriously, more fallacies? I can't believe the second reason was a serious one! Even if society wanted to "disrupt" sex, the sexual reproduction wouldn't disappear, like, do you honestly think people would stop reproducing? By extension, medicine wouldn't change the appropriate treatments applied to people, medicine would simply expand. Also, when you include something as "crime" and you claim there is differences among males/ females, you are already implying that there exist the two categories, which is a tautology.
Rather than being merely shifted towards either end of the male-female spectrum, transgender persons seem to present with their own unique brain phenotype. Mueller SC, Guillamon A, Zubiaurre-Elorza L, et al. The Neuroanatomy of Transgender Identity: Mega-Analytic Findings From the ENIGMA Transgender Persons Working Group. J Sex Med 2021;18:1122-1129. "Acknowledging sex is complex isn't "unscientific." The fact is: sex has several domains: Chromosomes External genitalia Internal sex organs Sex hormone profile Neurological sex Acknowledging complexity isn't denying biology. It's recognizing its reality." - Jack Turban MD
- Imagine if we replaced biological categories with socially defined identities. In other words: imagine if we only used "gender" and completely abandoned the concept of "sex". Sure that would suck. Why not keep both then? Each person could define themselves according to their own subjective perception, and yet we could still acknowledge that humans biologically have 2 sexes (with some anomalies). In social/cultural settings we use gender mostly as a concept. In other circumstances where it is fitting, we use the scientific category of sex. - Truth/Science and reality matters: Agree. The way people behave and identify is also part of that reality. And you can do science on the subject of gender and self-identity. it might not be biology, but it can definitely be science. - Reproduction: What is even your point? You are against homosexual couples then also I must assume... Or just the idea of not procreating? Sure it would suck if we went extinct because we somehow forgot how to procreate (even with the help of science), .. so I guess we agree on that... - Evolution: Not quite convinced that human creativity, art and craft is just solely courtship tools. - Medicine: I agree. But especially when it comes to the psyche I don't believe you can only look at sex-differences, it's only part of the story. - sports: yes, If we had completely stopped using sex as a concept, why would we have different sports for each sex? Sex is important to take into account when it comes to sports. Not quite sure where I stand on this issue actually. Maybe we ought to have trans sports, I don't know. - Crime: Males commit most violent crime. Do trans women also commit more violent crime than cis women? Or would it perhaps make as much sense to say that men (as opposed to males) commit most violent crimes? Do these so-called single sex spaces protect trans women from violence against cis men.. or how does that work? - safety: What do you mean by "unisex facilities"? What is typically meant by unisex, I believe, is uni-gender. But maybe you mean normal facilities that doesn't exclude trans people? Pretty unclear what you're actually referring to. No bathroom has a "sex-inspector" who checks your genitals before you're allowed in. Why would a trans woman be particularly more predatory towards a cis woman than say a cis lesbian woman? On the other hand, I can understand there might be some issues, and people shouldn't feel like their private spaces are invaded or people seem creepy toward them. But should we then exclude homosexuals from hetero facilities or something like that? Maybe we should just not expect people to stand together with a bunch of other naked people if they don't feel totally comfortable with this, I don't know. - Safety2/Prisons: A trans woman raped 2 cis women in prison. This sucks very much. But does this 1 example prove that this is something that happens more frequently than cis women raping other cis women, in prison or other places. Or what about trans women in men's prison, seems like they don't have it that easy, probably, just assuming. Seems like you would maybe prevent some rapes moving them to women's prisons, but I don't know the numbers, they could be all very big macho manly trans women. - fighting injustice: I'm sure a lot of trans women also have it very rough around the world. Why not fight for both cis-women's and also trans women's rights around the world? (As well as men's rights also). One doesn't seem to exclude the other. - Equality: Agree. But again. Both concepts, gender and sex, can, and should exist side by side. Sometimes gender is what should be focused on, sometimes sex. So in conclusion. I agree. If gender was totally replacing sex, If all stopped believing the concept of biological sex, the world would be very weird, it would not be a good idea. Good thing we don't live in that ridiculous scenario. Also very important, to believe in the scientific fact of gender as well.
>" Why would a trans woman be particularly more predatory towards a cis woman than say a cis lesbian woman? " >"Males commit most violent crime" You answer your own question. You CLAIM to not deny biological sex... Yet what you say implies you see "transwomen" as a subset of females, when the objective, evidence-based reality is that "transwomen" are ENTIRELY, OBJECTIVELY a subset of males. Many of your questions/statements (eg above) make no sense, coming from someone (whether they support "trans identities" or not), from someone who acknowledges biological sex. There is absolutely zero evidence that "transwomen" are ANY less likely to be sexual predators than ANY male. For all we know, that evidence may show "transwomen" to be MORE predatory than the average male (or maybe less- But assuming one way, is equally valid to the other). But there IS evidence that (actual, real-world) women (who are statistically several hundred of times more likely to be VICTIM of a sex-crime, than be the PERPETRATOR) are put at risk, by sharing private spaces with "transwomen" (who are shown by the data we DO have, have are roughly EQUALLY likely, to be victim or perpetrator, of a sex crime). >Very important, to believe in the scientific fact of gender as well. lolwut?!? "Scientific fact of gender", huh? Even believers in "gender" admit (once you really them down, and get them to drop the spin, and be honest) there's absolutely ZERO empirical evidence for gender- That's WHY they have the "just a social a construct" meme, tacitly admitting this 100% absence of evidence. coz "how could you POSSIBLY expect a mere social construct, to have empirical evidence, silly? Then it would be MORE than just a social construct, wouldn't it?" "Gender" can EITHER be "just a social construct", OR ELSE it can be "scientific fact" (ie, a synonym for sex, based on EVIDENCE, not feelings- Fundamentally different to the "whatever I say is true, BECOMES true" gender-ideology that dominates today) It can't be both at once. >Good thing we don't live in that ridiculous scenario. Yes, we absolutely do. Trans activists have consistently rejected ALL your compromises, for years- Transwomen ARE women, doncha know?!? They make it very clear that 100% "self-ID" is the ONLY standard they'll accept (ie literally ANYONE who says "I'm a woman", at ANY time, instantly transforms into "a woman"; 100% male-presenting bearded convicted rapist, who's never shown ANY history of "trans"-ID gets busted assaulting 7yo girl in the ladies room? As long he speaks the magical spell "I identify as a woman", AFTER getting busted, he's now 100% "a woman", who had EVERY right to be in that ladies-room. And under "self-ID", he now becomes one of the poor, victimized "transwoman", who you support, when all those evil, hateful transphobes try to stop "her" for going to men's prison) "TWAW" is 100% your "ridiculous scenario"- A demand (primarily from biological males, demanding the right to re-define "womanhood", to suit them) to 100% ignore sex, and ONLY recogniZe feelings-based "gender" self-ID. A demand for unlimited access to ALL female spaces, and if a few women/girls get raaped every now and then, well that's just a price we gotta pay- But the REAL priority is the all important VALIDATION-feels of 0.2% of biological males... not the trivial physical safety, and privacy of 100% of girls/women, which is expendable. You cannot support BOTH the women/girls who want privacy/safety from biological males, AND the biological males who feel their need for "validation" entitles them to access those same spaces. You can't BOTH value evidence-based truth, AND an ideology that requires DENYING evidence-based truth (sex), in favour of feelings-based, "it's true coz I SAY it's true!!" claims with ZERO evidence ("gender")
Homosexual abuse (such as cis women raping cis women or cis men raping trans women) cannot be conflated with biological male on biological female rape (such as trans women raping cis women), as that can cause unwanted pregnancy. Plus, there is no way to separate gay people from their potential victims. They're the same sex as them. And heterosexuality is way more common than homosexuality. Also, if a trans woman gets raped by cis men because she is in a male space, she's only one victim who cannot get pregnant. But she rapes cis women because she's in a female space, there could be many victims, and they could get pregnant. And it must be understood that the heterosexual orientation of most men means they're unlikely to be attracted to trans women. Unless they pass, I guess. Maybe a sterile trans woman who passes should be in female spaces. Except sports, because she might still have an advantage.
The rape statistic is skewed by definitions. The incidence of males being raped in the general population is almost as high as that of women. The problem is that the CDC and FBI have prevented "made to penetrate" from being acknowledged as rape. So, that statistic explicitly excludes male victims, because feminist ideology has made it verboten to consider male victims of rape as having _been_ raped. (That is, "rape culture" is in relation to male rape victims, not female.) Moveover, this statistic also excludes the single largest cohort of rape victims entirely: prison rape. Because nobody cares, and people think they deserve it and laugh at it. Again, there is no "rape culture" except when it comes to when men are raped, then it's a joke.
For reference, look up Mary Koss, a feminist who spent her career insisting that men could never be raped, and going out of her way to be a rape cultura apologist.
ery little supported by actual fact and rather takes great leaps between theory and your references. This is such a weird video. I probably don't disagree with what your overall point is, but this is just total garbage.
why do you use a black and white argument? does science or reproduction fall apart if a few genderfuild people exist? if we just let everyone be who they are, would society be happier? if your worried about male violence, why don’t you address that directly then enforcing category
No such thing, sweetie. The fact you don't relate to idiotic gender ideology stereotypes of what a man and a woman are doesn't make you some other thing. You're male or female, you're a man or a woman, you're a boy or a girl. You might be a femme boy or a butch girl, but that doesn't change what you are. It's utterly deranged how gender ideologists will insist that sex is bimodal, but won't recognize that gender behabiors are bimodal, and thus "gender fluid" is incoherent. Sweetie, get over yourself.
@@TagSpamCop you have a lot to learn and space to grow for tolerant for other people on this earth. when you see the color black and the white, you would say there only color black or white. But reality there a spectrum in between. Nature has created rules of chromosomes where XY is a man and XX is a woman, but in nature DNA chromosomes isn’t perfect and there are mistakes, like XXY and other disorders. And chromosomes help the body to grow and develop the particular gentiles, but it may not always develop right and the testes don’t descend. And while chromosomes help determine how much estrogen and testosterone to produce in the body, it doesn’t always have the right ratio and we also have chemical estrogen from products that has raise the estrogen in men causing some to become feminine. And so what do you do when somebody doesn’t live to their gender or chromosomes. It’s why you need to have tolerance. People don’t always live up to their chromosomes and that’s life. It may not be what you want, but you cannot dictate life as it will be what people mind make their experiences to be. You can call those people crazy but it doesn’t make them disappear. You have to develop acceptance that in this big crazy world, those people exist. They will break your rule of what you think they should act base on chromosomes. Life is about seeing the different perspectives that might conflict with yours so you can better grasp of a global view of the human condition
You're mixing many things here. All your other videos show a bias that's pretty noticeable but in this one you have mixed such a quantity of topics and matters very strongly.
@M Gagua if gender is just personally why do we need the word gender? It make no sense to me, woman means adult human female, man means adult human male and boy and girl means child human male/female. If these are the words we think of as gender where does personality come in? Animals have different behaviours between the sexes, do animals have genders too then? And isn't personally a individual thing, effected by a individual sex, environment, up bring and life experiences? Why would we need the word gender if personally fits the bill on describing a individual behaviour?
Way back when I took biology classes gender was interchangeable with sex. On US birth and death certificates it lists sex not gender. This is an excellent and succinct video showing why sex matters.
@M Gagua in that case is there only two genders? Seeing that gender is a stereotype base on sex, and there only being two sexes. The reason I ask is I'm trying to understand why people think there is more then two genders and it has nothing to do with sex.
@@blunelson8226 Ok, I think I can explain. The reason why there are so many genders is due to how people feel. Some people feel between a man and woman, some feel partly like a man but also don't feel like a woman at all, some feel like both a man and a woman at the same time and some associate with masculinity but not to the point where they want to be called a man but they also don't associate with femininity and being a woman at all. All of those are different genders. It's just based on how a person feels.
@@blunelson8226 To describe fashions and expectations of behaviour for a sex class (stereotypes), and to - in the past - have a synonym for (naughty) sex (these days are gone).
No. Definitions are useful. For example, women experience heart attacks differently than men. Clearly, you don't give a shit about people's lives, you just care about your fragile feelings. To demand that definitions are irrelevant is to insist that lives don't matter. You're deranged. What's utterly amazing is that your deranged fundamentalist ideology is fixated entirely on definitions. Redefining "trans" for example. What you're doing is a deflection and a distraction. You're accusing this guy of exactly what you people are doing. You want us to stand by while you do your little redefining thing and let you get away with it. We see you, you realize? We know what you're doing. If definitions weren't important, than why do you care about co-opting so many of them? Like "woman". The reality is you care even more.
Oh, please. There's no "patriarchy" in the west. You want "patriarchy"? Go to Iran or Saudi Arabia or Pakistan. Women have every right a man has, and several they don't. That men and women have different results does not constitute a "patriarchy" unless you are going to insist that "man" is the default and standard. And "toxic masculinity" doesn't exist any more than "toxic femininity" exists. It's code for "things men do that I don't like." "Patriarchy" is "male is default" (i.e. when women don't do things the way a man would do them), while "toxic masculinity" is "female is default" (i.e. when men don't do things the way women do them). You don't get to argue both simultaneously. It's pathologically dishonest, while demonstrating the gynocentrism of society.
@@TagSpamCop m8 I can tell by the level of your critical thinking and atitude that defending my position would be pointless. Let me put it this way, instead of thinking of the patriarchy as a switch that some countries have and others don't, think about it like a spectrum, and it's always positive to try to reduce it to 0 as much as possible
@@jessam4875 I'm a trans woman a woman is a adult human female a trans woman is a adult male who transitions to have female sexual characteristics/traits to align with her gender identity it's not that hard to differentiate ourselves without erasing each other existance and experiences.
@@jessam4875 I'm just being Jaye like your being Jessica and being a woman isn't a class it's a gender identity that physically describes our bodies I'm just a transexual woman xy and your a biological women xx I transitioned because I suffer from gender dysphoria/gender identity disorder a neuro-psychological birth defect that gives me psychological distress from my male sexual characteristics the only way to treat the destress is to physically change my male secondary sexual characteristics to female ones by physical transitioning my body through medical intervention and since I started hrt aka estrogen and testosterone blockers I went from AA cup to a A cup and my breast buds are full formed and I'm developing milk ducts and I've gone from 250lbs to 184lbs and I'm noticing meaning other changes I'm happy with because this is my experience and I've never been more comfortable in my own skin than I am now and this is who I am I will always be biological male but I'm developing as a trans female and that is my experience as Jaye and that is who I'll all be.
Whilst I agree with some of your points, there are some serious flaws in your methodology and I disagree with some of your points. First, be aware that in terms of reproduction, we are different from animals as in the culture had shaped how we live and choose our mates rather than sole biological instincts. Our living conditions is also drastically different today compared to millions of years ago. Make sure that you acknowledge that. Second, I disagree with the amount of roles sexual dimorphism had played in building the society. The society is built with customs, cultures, experiences, languages and many complex factors. Sexual dimorphism itself is undeniably one of those factors, but is far from being the determining factor. What is more determining is how the society interpret such sexual dimorphism, as evident in many native american cultures that does not have a binary gender distinction. With medical practices I agree with most of them, except for the psychiatric part. You are overlooking the social factors that contributes to those psychiatric illnesses, which has significantly more contribution compared to physical illnesses. They manifest differently in males and females, and the social factors is instrumental in shaping these differences. The social factor is once again, not resulted from sexual dimorphism itself, but societal interpretation of sexes and many other factors, such as childhood trauma or physical injury. In terms of sport, make sure that you acknowledge that your data is mostly from cisgender population if your underlying distinction of male and female is biological sex. Transgender population has vastly different hormonal profiles and therefore different performances compared to cisgender populations. There are no conclusive study that says transgender women has a better performance on average compared to cisgender women. With that case of transgender women assaulting other inmates, do you have the statistics of how many transgender women actually sexually assaults cisgender women inmates, out of the whole transgender women inmate population? And how many cisgender women inmates sexually assault other cisgender women inmates? I heavily suspect that you are cherry picking cases (as there are always bad eggs no matter the population), and it would do for you to disprove my suspicion. 1 in 50 transgender women (or male claimed to be female in your language) being admitted into women's facilities also do not serve any cause to further your argument other than fearmongering. Also bear in mind that sex slavery is also affecting trans populations, but it was overlooked frequently. You are once again overlooking trans people who are also the victim of these sex specific crimes (by saying that they suffer "not because of gender identity", which they do except in cases such as genital mutilation and sex specific abortion). www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/23322705.2020.1690116?journalCode=uhmt20 Lastly, it is true that recognising biological is a component to equality. However, it is just one component out of many. again, the society does not operate based on biological sex, but mainly on how these sexes and by extension gender identity are interpreted. You cannot achieve equality by overlooking those social factors and how do they affect people, because often times they play a far more important role than biological sex. Thank you for reading all of these.
"in terms of reproduction..." Regardless of place or time in history, reproduction requires large and small gamates. This is a fact that culture, history and gender play no role in.
@@jessam4875 Sex "binary" does not precede society, as hermaphorodites and intersex people also exist back then. Not only that, in some species of animals the sex will change. Therefore, the idea of a sex "binary" is completely subjective and a social construct. Despite his best attempt at making it look objective, even he knows that the number of those who conforms to binary development is not 100%. This clearly disproves the "sex binary" as an objective truth and places it into the realm of social construct, hence it cannot "precede society". And yes, reproduction does indeed involves small and large gametes.
@@Meowcat2226 also in the few species that can change sex (spoiler alert, humans can't) they change to produce the opposite gamates. This highights the sex binary rather than dispelling it.
I would say that your video is about gender: male or female. Gender is binary. Sex is an abbreviation for sexual reproduction; it is something you do and not something you are.
@@Raziel433 I agree. I find ironic the phenomenon of "gender reveal" parties for pregnant women, when by historical grammatical/semantic usage, the parlance of political correctness, and common sense, the parent(s) are revealing the child's assigned SEX. (Sarcasm alert: or am I supposed to say "fetus"?)
Gender used to be a synonym for biological sex category, but now is often used to mean either gender roles or gender identity, leaving “sex” or “biological sex” as the clearest word to use.
As a woman, as a feminist, and as someone who believes in reality, truth and science, thank you for making this video :)
@@DystopianDeepDives As a radical feminist myself, I am aware and I've posted similar comments under their videos/posts ;)
@@DystopianDeepDives many radfems appreciates Magdalene Berns and Posie Parker and other vocal radfems in various platforms. The more allies speaking against delusions the better
@@DystopianDeepDives it’s not cause he’s a man , it’s cause he has clearly a scientific background and it’s very interesting to listen to science . His videos on intersex conditions are very interesting and scientifically described . It’s not cause he’s a male , it’s cause he’s more interesting and scientific than people like Posie Parker who basically have no scientific background whatsoever and no scientific way to say things .
@@salvolondon when women do the same thing we are shut down. It has happened time and time again.
Feminism is wrong. It's a philosophy which advocates for w0m3n to get government-granted PRIVILEGES at the expense of men, instead of just being treated equal. The philosophy where everyone is actually treated fairly, receiving no government favoritisms, is libertarianism.
Every video you make is a win for truth, for the integrity of science and the body, and for the protection of women/girls as a sex. Thank you for your continued work!
This is what JK Rowling has been trying to say all this while, yet she's been misinterpreted, cancelled and labelled as transphobic. It's really scary to have an honest and civil conversation about the biological reality of sex without being called transphobic or a TERF these days.
Anyone who HASN'T been accused of being "transphobic" and "a TERF", by this point, is either (1) gullible and easily manipulated, (2) spineless and indifferent to truth, or (3) eager to trade the rights and safety of 100% of women/girls, for the "validation" of 0.2% of biological men. Any public figure who hasn't been "cancelled" AT LEAST 2 or 3 times, isn't worth valuing their opinion.
This is the definitive, compact, comprehensive overview we all direly needed. The visuals are sharp and perfectly complementary. Thank you so much Zach!
I just binged all of your videos and followed you on Twitter!
It's a breath of fresh air to find videos (and a community of people) that still believe in biological sex, and it's undeniable implications on humanity.
Meesa thank you 😊
When a man says it: 👏👏👏👏
When a woman says it: burn the TERF 😡🔥
Exactly.
Actually men are offended constantly when they say these things , even using less scientific terms than he does , we are not called terfs but we are called transphobic , haters , hateful , bigots , homophobes etc etc . Also if you look well in his videos there are some trans activists calling him transphobic . You’re delusional if you think men are not insulted for stating realities . I’ve been insulted and most of the times from women who are trans activist allies or women who identity as gender queers or other crap .
@@salvolondon no one is saying that men NEVER catch heat from speaking up about this. What we are saying is that women catch way more heat and are often completely shut down and have our platform removed. We are kicked off of social media and channels and accounts deleted.
I'm pretty sure the sex-deniers would see everyone as transphobic for saying biological sex is real. Maybe they wouldn't call men TERFs though.
I would like to add: how the police could identifie a criminel if they can't use biological fact? "The murderer was a woman, with a red dress!" Yes. But if anybody can be a woman just by saying it, it's impossible to identifie her.hil.them(for the non binary). The question is valuable to identifie a dead body with no... head or particular evidence of his sex! Above all, a dead body can't express his identity 😂😁. Great, great video! Thank you !👏🏾
They are already doing it. The most recent I know about is this one. twitter.com/BBCNWT/status/1283063792482557958
Yes, such as Karen white who raped a women with "her penis". We are getting stronger, we are getting louder and our numbers rise by the day. Everyone will have their peak moment soon enough.
In fairness, you may still need to say "appears to be a woman", because it's hard to tell these days!
Totally agree. Biological sex has been under attack. Now, at a time when the Olympics in on in Japan we see that because the IOC agreed that trans gender athletes can compete in Women Sport how such policies are an injustice to biological females. We has seen how there is a promotion of untruths. Males have a physical advantage but Laurel Hubbard (a trans inidivdual) who was born male now compete in women's weightlifting event. Women's only spaces increasingly open to trans. Also interesting is that attacks on women have increased by 90% when mix sex changing rooms were introduced in British Swimming pools.
I am transexual male to female and I remember when this was barely even a topic a couple of years ago thank you for defending biological sex and gender identity without conflating the two, eliminating biological sex eliminates transitioning and trans rights and the trans experience as well as everybody elses as well as the struggles we had to go through up until 2015 and Even further back then that to achieve the human LGBT+ rights we have to day ultra woke progressive activist need to be stopped before they redefine everything trans was just the start and now they're redefining everything else while treating gender identity as if it's just a aesthetic.
I totally agree. I am FTM myself, and I recall those days too when we recognised the difference in sex. We are transsexual *because* we were born male or female. Erasing the definitions would even jeopardise our medical options. I don’t transition because "I feel masculine". I transition because there is a crippling disconnect between how my brain recognise my body, and how my body actually look and function. Our neurological condition is not a political statement, not a fashion choice, not an identity, not a feeling, not a movement.
I like your no nonsense/direct style of videos a lot, great video!
This whole gender theory is the new age "subjective idealism".... Thanks for the video !
Transgender people have literally existed for 3,000 years. They're not a new thing.
this should be common sense
Zach, thank you for you sanity, and maintaining cool and logic and a rational demeanour (and providing links to sources), even surrounded by insanity. It's scary to say this, but you are one of a kind in this increasingly Orwellian world.
"Being in a minority, even in a minority of one, did not make you mad. There was truth and there was untruth, and if you clung to the truth even against the whole world, you were not mad."
So many self-described feminists of the mainstream have completely (or at least partly) lost their marbles (if they even had any to begin with). "It was like swimming against a current that swept you backwards however hard you struggled, and then suddenly deciding to turn round and go with the current instead of opposing it." I hope you never do this. Thanks for the video.
Incidentally, any thoughts on how long this will stay up before UA-cam bans it? It seems insane now, but a few years ago the idea of being banned from Twitter for saying, "Only females get cervical cancer," would have been inconceivable insanity, so...
Oh my goodness, it's an island of sanity. Thank you so much, keep doing this important work.
This video was needed!
Great stuff, keep up the good work, Zach!
I understand english but I would like to share it with french friend or plateform who will not make the same effort. It is possible to have a translation? I speak for my country but I'm sure that other people in other countries would lile to use it to explain what is happening with that strange ideology which deny sex reality (spanish, portugais, corean... Etc).
The transcript can be found on the website, which you can find in the link in the description. Under the video on the website, you will see a link to 'Transcript' and 'Transcript (PDF)'. That should help if you're wanting to copy the transcript and translate it using a program. Hope that helps!
Thank you for fighting the good fight. Sometimes I get the feeling like I'm sent back in time into the middle ages. Aristotle is all the rage, women are malformed, inverted men and homunculus is a controversial new theory. Your videos are like islands of reason in the sea of social media madness.
Sad that this kind of video is needed today. Has the World gone mad?
World now: I will explain you why sex matters. World in 2120: I will explain you why age matters.
@@wiktoriafrompoland2453 2201: Why consent matters.
Thank you for putting science first before "gender theism" excellent work
Thank you as always for your hard work at re-clarifying a subject that, while it should be simple, has been so intentionally complificated by propagandists that it's no small effort to unravel.
this is so depressing. women finally make headway, now they are defining us out of existence.
Based on the other videos by Paradox, the only thing that matters is whether or not you have the SRY gene. If you have SRY, you're male (because SRY leads to the development of the body plan that produces sperm), if you don't, you're female. I'll leave it to other viewers to decide whether this is indeed a necessary and sufficient condition for defining an individual's sex.
Here is my argument here
*yes and nos for the “male” part*: Of course, people who usually is under the influence of androgens, has SRY gene, and has the Y chromosomes are biologically males (may or may not be transgender). Yes, SRY gene can lead to the production of the sperm and arrests some female features like the uterus, cervix, vagina, fallopian tubes, and ovaries into that of the opposite. Yet, this is about the reproductive system. Not the characteristics that blocks the features. If you are NOT under the influence of androgens BUT have the SRY gene (may or may not have the Y chromosome), you will have the phenotypical body of a female (including the external genitals) but you’re internal organs is male and you won’t really produce sperm due to lack of androgens. And not everyone who has the Y chromosome has the SRY gene (Swyer’s Syndrome) and Swyer’s Syndrome means that a person who lacks BOTH androgens and the SRY gene but has the Y chromosome. Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (Complete or Partial) means that the person lacks androgens (depending on what type of androgen insensitivity) but has the SRY gene and Y chromosome.
*yes and nos for the “female” part*: of course, usually, people who doesn’t have the SRY gene also lacks androgen and doesn’t have the Y chromosome are biologically females (may or may not be transgender). But there are cases that this busts the idea. You see, if the person doesn’t have the SRY gene or doesn’t have the Y chromosome but is under the influence of androgens, this is called Persistant Müllerian Duct Syndrome and this is only found in MALES and since he doesn’t have the Y chromosome, he will get periods but has the external genital of a male. If he had a Y chromosome but has Persistant Müllerian Duct Syndrome, he or she can decide on whether he or she (based on identity) wants to remove his internal organs (male identity) or remove her external organs and take estrogen and androgen blockers (female identity). BUT if the person is BOTH the influence of androgens and has the SRY gene but doesn’t have a Y chromosome (De La Charlette Syndrome) and De La Charlette means a person has XX chromosomes but has the SRY gene and is under the influence of androgens.
So mainly, IF you’re talking about biology, it should be based on if the person is under the influence of androgens or not. Not the SRY gene or if the person has the Y chromosome or not.
Secondly, not everyone identifies as what they’re born as. They are people who was AMAB (assigned male at birth) but identifies themselves and is recognised as female or people who was AFAB (assigned female at birth) but identifies themselves and is recognised as male
Spot on Zachary! Thank you for telling like it is!❤
Such an important video
These videos are definitely being suppressed
Great video though I must point out at 6:25 when you refer to the UK, you've got a map that also includes Ireland which is not a part of the UK.
I'm surprised the attack videos haven't started yet. You guys are doing great work. But be prepared, the outrage mob will come.
@@DystopianDeepDives sadly ...
ua-cam.com/video/pb1V-k9MSHw/v-deo.html
Nah don't worry he is too small and his claims are too obviously dumb for it to be worth it for anyone to do a video to debunk them. He kinda does it himself tbqh
Thank you for your amazing work and support of women’s sex based rights. 👏✅
There is no religion higher than truth.
They're trying. And they're more fanatical.
Never in my life did I think we'd need to have these discussions. This is common sense. But I guess common sense isn't so common anymore.
Excellent video! Thank you for presenting information so clearly and concisely.
Just stumbled upon your channel had to subscribe! Really great 👍
You are a guy who cares about females. You are awesome. 😍😍😍
Excellent video - such a valuable resource in these times
Hello :) I - as a biochemist - totally agree on the two gamet stuff. But so many of the aspects you highlighted, why biological sex cannot be replaced by gender, are of sociopolitical origin. Because we built a system around biological sex and devided humans in every aspect of life into the two sexes (when only in a few aspects, biological sex is importat), we created these sociopolitical definitions on what a woman and what a man is. It is not written in our gamets, which color we like, if we like dresses and make-up and also is we can only channel all of our emotions into anger - and therefore may do crime or rape or won't admit that we are suffering under depression and seek help. Still, when biological sex matters, such as in the medical field, of course we need to put know a persons biological sex so we can treat sex-based illnesses differently.
Great video!!! Now I understand how biological sex matters and why it must be defended.
I haven’t quite understood the “evolution” part. Given the fact that men have “conquered the world” by subduing women reproductively and sexually throughout the history of humanity, I don’t see how the only explanation for how our species has evolved is mere consequence of sexual selection.
Thanks you for your time.
A few thoughts. Even where there is no apparent choice - eg where the parents dole out their daughters to suitable allies in the tribe, there is still an element of practical choice. If the daughter happens to like the man she gets, the couple is more likely to be at it like rabbits than if she can't stand him. And dissatisfied daughters can have affairs and get away with it a fair amount of the time. And in those cases, the daughters are doing the choosing.
It's also unlikely that the doling out of daughters was "patriarchal" most of the time. Traditional societies often leave the matchmaking to the distaff side of the family - in that sense it was the females choosing, and looking for "fitness" features in the potential grooms, just not the females who were getting married off. Being the son of the chief, though apparently a mere social quality, obviously also has genetic links to fitness - the chief wouldn't be the chief if he was useless. Likewise if there's a bride price to be paid, this is another fitness proxy, and probably a more accurate proxy in tribal societies than in modern ones.
And finally it's unlikely that the daughters always and necessarily had zero say in the matter of who they were allocated to.
For sexual selection to work, all that is required is that the males who are preferred by the females get more offspring because of that preference. It doesn't require that females get a free choice every time they feel like copulating.
I'm curious, what software do you use for the graphics? Thanks.
Adobe After Effects
My new fav yt channel 😻
PI: Here's 9 reason why biological sex must be defended
Woke: AHHHHHHH THATS SO TRANSPHOBIC
You're doing great work, my dude!
The fact that your channel is even needed is horrifying. Great work nevertheless
Thank you
Thank you so, so much.
Thank you for this fantastic video
This video is like Tylenol, but it's specific only for headaches caused by *Sex is Non-Binary*
Are you sure about selection for intelligence?
I am having serious doubts these many years, and most especially in 2020.
another banger per usual
The first one is the most important in my opinion, I'm glad you gave it first place. I perfectly understand what trans ideologues are asking for me, it is to lie so they can feel better. I'm sorry, the answer to that will have to be "no".
This is a great video!
This is a really neat video
THANK YOU .
These arguments are presented on such a clear way. Anyone who doesnt agree or thinks this is nonsense truly must have an IQ of at least 60.
But Gary has a dress
lol
Many thanks for posting this.
Look, just from the start this seems to make the assumption that we don't think sex matters in society. I think any trans person would say that biological sex is important. Obviously if a trans woman goes to the doctor they aren't going to operate on the idea that she has ovaries or something.
Valuing biological sex and social gender concepts are not mutually exclusive.
at the end of the day gender, in this context, would be a concept involving a lot of sociology and psychology. Its about mental states that clash with what one's biological sex is.
These mental experiences exist. No matter how real and important sex is, and its not a matter of just falling in line. I guarantee you no one in this world cares more about their biological sex and reckons with it more than trans people.
If I am reading into this too much and you are not trying to delegitimize sociological and psychological findings with the importance of biological sex, I apologize. I do agree with almost everything have said on that subject, the presentation just seems motivated to me.
>"I guarantee you no one in this world cares more about their biological sex and reckons with it more than trans people..."
Then why do you prioritize the SEX-based right of 100% woman and girls, to physical safety, from the SEX who are 40% physically stronger, and commit >98% of sex crimes, as less important than the "validation"-feels of 0.2% of biological males?
I fully support trans people have EVERY right the rest of us have (as they do, currently)- Dress how you want, live how you want, believe what you want. I don't even have much issue with doing you the courtesy of suspending normal grammar, to use wrong-sex pronouns, if that's what you prefer (but nobody OWES you the favour of this special treatment). I fully support the right of ANY consenting adult, to alter their own body in ANY way choose, for ANY reason, good or bad.
But sex is based on EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE. Sex is just objective, undeniable TRUTH, like weight or height or age. "Gender" is 100% based on self-reported FEELINGS, with no empirical evidence that it's any more "real" than classifying people by star signs, or their "soul", or "chakras" or "karma". I'm genuinely sorry if this upsetting to you, but "gender" is 100% indistinguishable from ANY religious concept, which may FEEL very real to believers, but from the outside, concepts like "sin" or "gender" or "thetans" are just meaningless. (and having powerful people and groups support your religion, doesn't make it any more "true". Prominent medical and psych groups who support chemically-castrating 10yo's based on "gender" ideology today, supported chemically-castrating gay men, a single generation ago. Having a scientist, or an entire GROUP of scientists endorse a religious belief/pseudoscience, makes no difference, unless they have EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE... But "gender" ideology ADMITS a 100% absence of evidence, and zero likelyhood of future evidence, with it's "just a social construct" meme. So HOW COULD a "mere social construct" ever have empirical evidence? Like most religions, the beliefs themselves PRECLUDE any possibility of scientific validity)
Laws need to based on empirical evidence. Not on self-reported, "it's true coz I FEEL it's true", 100% evidence-free religious concepts like "gender".
Act/dress/believe/live HOWEVER you like (if it doesn't infringe on others), but you will NEVER be able compel others to believe that YOUR feelings (ie "gender") somehow outweigh evidence-based facts (ie sex). (Same as EVERY religion, who sincerely believes that "their totally-legit, capital-T REAL Truth" entitles them to impose their beliefs on non-believers)
It's absolutely hilarious what the internet if today brings out as versions of supposed experts that basically just mush up their own opinion and have a nice layout for their presentation.
This is a studied architect with no medical degree whatsoever who selfproduced a couple of videos and write some books (that noone read according to no reviews to be found) claiming to be a selfmade expert because he wrote books.
This has no scientific or even expert level background at all.
Truly funny.
Great content!!
seriously, more fallacies? I can't believe the second reason was a serious one! Even if society wanted to "disrupt" sex, the sexual reproduction wouldn't disappear, like, do you honestly think people would stop reproducing? By extension, medicine wouldn't change the appropriate treatments applied to people, medicine would simply expand. Also, when you include something as "crime" and you claim there is differences among males/ females, you are already implying that there exist the two categories, which is a tautology.
Helen Joyce a brave Irish woman,her book TRANS on the reality of biological sex .. same theme.Reality will eventually prevail.
Rather than being merely shifted towards either end of the male-female spectrum, transgender persons seem to present with their own unique brain phenotype. Mueller SC, Guillamon A, Zubiaurre-Elorza L, et al. The Neuroanatomy of Transgender Identity: Mega-Analytic Findings From the ENIGMA Transgender Persons Working Group. J Sex Med 2021;18:1122-1129. "Acknowledging sex is complex isn't "unscientific." The fact is: sex has
several domains:
Chromosomes
External genitalia
Internal sex organs
Sex hormone profile
Neurological sex
Acknowledging complexity isn't denying biology. It's recognizing its reality." - Jack Turban MD
- Imagine if we replaced biological categories with socially defined identities. In other words: imagine if we only used "gender" and completely abandoned the concept of "sex". Sure that would suck. Why not keep both then? Each person could define themselves according to their own subjective perception, and yet we could still acknowledge that humans biologically have 2 sexes (with some anomalies). In social/cultural settings we use gender mostly as a concept. In other circumstances where it is fitting, we use the scientific category of sex.
- Truth/Science and reality matters: Agree. The way people behave and identify is also part of that reality. And you can do science on the subject of gender and self-identity. it might not be biology, but it can definitely be science.
- Reproduction: What is even your point? You are against homosexual couples then also I must assume... Or just the idea of not procreating? Sure it would suck if we went extinct because we somehow forgot how to procreate (even with the help of science), .. so I guess we agree on that...
- Evolution: Not quite convinced that human creativity, art and craft is just solely courtship tools.
- Medicine: I agree. But especially when it comes to the psyche I don't believe you can only look at sex-differences, it's only part of the story.
- sports: yes, If we had completely stopped using sex as a concept, why would we have different sports for each sex? Sex is important to take into account when it comes to sports. Not quite sure where I stand on this issue actually. Maybe we ought to have trans sports, I don't know.
- Crime: Males commit most violent crime. Do trans women also commit more violent crime than cis women? Or would it perhaps make as much sense to say that men (as opposed to males) commit most violent crimes? Do these so-called single sex spaces protect trans women from violence against cis men.. or how does that work?
- safety: What do you mean by "unisex facilities"? What is typically meant by unisex, I believe, is uni-gender. But maybe you mean normal facilities that doesn't exclude trans people? Pretty unclear what you're actually referring to. No bathroom has a "sex-inspector" who checks your genitals before you're allowed in. Why would a trans woman be particularly more predatory towards a cis woman than say a cis lesbian woman?
On the other hand, I can understand there might be some issues, and people shouldn't feel like their private spaces are invaded or people seem creepy toward them. But should we then exclude homosexuals from hetero facilities or something like that? Maybe we should just not expect people to stand together with a bunch of other naked people if they don't feel totally comfortable with this, I don't know.
- Safety2/Prisons: A trans woman raped 2 cis women in prison. This sucks very much. But does this 1 example prove that this is something that happens more frequently than cis women raping other cis women, in prison or other places. Or what about trans women in men's prison, seems like they don't have it that easy, probably, just assuming. Seems like you would maybe prevent some rapes moving them to women's prisons, but I don't know the numbers, they could be all very big macho manly trans women.
- fighting injustice: I'm sure a lot of trans women also have it very rough around the world. Why not fight for both cis-women's and also trans women's rights around the world? (As well as men's rights also). One doesn't seem to exclude the other.
- Equality: Agree. But again. Both concepts, gender and sex, can, and should exist side by side. Sometimes gender is what should be focused on, sometimes sex.
So in conclusion. I agree. If gender was totally replacing sex, If all stopped believing the concept of biological sex, the world would be very weird, it would not be a good idea. Good thing we don't live in that ridiculous scenario. Also very important, to believe in the scientific fact of gender as well.
>" Why would a trans woman be particularly more predatory towards a cis woman than say a cis lesbian woman? "
>"Males commit most violent crime"
You answer your own question. You CLAIM to not deny biological sex... Yet what you say implies you see "transwomen" as a subset of females, when the objective, evidence-based reality is that "transwomen" are ENTIRELY, OBJECTIVELY a subset of males. Many of your questions/statements (eg above) make no sense, coming from someone (whether they support "trans identities" or not), from someone who acknowledges biological sex.
There is absolutely zero evidence that "transwomen" are ANY less likely to be sexual predators than ANY male. For all we know, that evidence may show "transwomen" to be MORE predatory than the average male (or maybe less- But assuming one way, is equally valid to the other). But there IS evidence that (actual, real-world) women (who are statistically several hundred of times more likely to be VICTIM of a sex-crime, than be the PERPETRATOR) are put at risk, by sharing private spaces with "transwomen" (who are shown by the data we DO have, have are roughly EQUALLY likely, to be victim or perpetrator, of a sex crime).
>Very important, to believe in the scientific fact of gender as well.
lolwut?!? "Scientific fact of gender", huh? Even believers in "gender" admit (once you really them down, and get them to drop the spin, and be honest) there's absolutely ZERO empirical evidence for gender- That's WHY they have the "just a social a construct" meme, tacitly admitting this 100% absence of evidence. coz "how could you POSSIBLY expect a mere social construct, to have empirical evidence, silly? Then it would be MORE than just a social construct, wouldn't it?"
"Gender" can EITHER be "just a social construct", OR ELSE it can be "scientific fact" (ie, a synonym for sex, based on EVIDENCE, not feelings- Fundamentally different to the "whatever I say is true, BECOMES true" gender-ideology that dominates today) It can't be both at once.
>Good thing we don't live in that ridiculous scenario.
Yes, we absolutely do. Trans activists have consistently rejected ALL your compromises, for years- Transwomen ARE women, doncha know?!? They make it very clear that 100% "self-ID" is the ONLY standard they'll accept (ie literally ANYONE who says "I'm a woman", at ANY time, instantly transforms into "a woman"; 100% male-presenting bearded convicted rapist, who's never shown ANY history of "trans"-ID gets busted assaulting 7yo girl in the ladies room? As long he speaks the magical spell "I identify as a woman", AFTER getting busted, he's now 100% "a woman", who had EVERY right to be in that ladies-room. And under "self-ID", he now becomes one of the poor, victimized "transwoman", who you support, when all those evil, hateful transphobes try to stop "her" for going to men's prison)
"TWAW" is 100% your "ridiculous scenario"- A demand (primarily from biological males, demanding the right to re-define "womanhood", to suit them) to 100% ignore sex, and ONLY recogniZe feelings-based "gender" self-ID. A demand for unlimited access to ALL female spaces, and if a few women/girls get raaped every now and then, well that's just a price we gotta pay- But the REAL priority is the all important VALIDATION-feels of 0.2% of biological males... not the trivial physical safety, and privacy of 100% of girls/women, which is expendable.
You cannot support BOTH the women/girls who want privacy/safety from biological males, AND the biological males who feel their need for "validation" entitles them to access those same spaces.
You can't BOTH value evidence-based truth, AND an ideology that requires DENYING evidence-based truth (sex), in favour of feelings-based, "it's true coz I SAY it's true!!" claims with ZERO evidence ("gender")
Homosexual abuse (such as cis women raping cis women or cis men raping trans women) cannot be conflated with biological male on biological female rape (such as trans women raping cis women), as that can cause unwanted pregnancy. Plus, there is no way to separate gay people from their potential victims. They're the same sex as them. And heterosexuality is way more common than homosexuality. Also, if a trans woman gets raped by cis men because she is in a male space, she's only one victim who cannot get pregnant. But she rapes cis women because she's in a female space, there could be many victims, and they could get pregnant.
And it must be understood that the heterosexual orientation of most men means they're unlikely to be attracted to trans women. Unless they pass, I guess. Maybe a sterile trans woman who passes should be in female spaces. Except sports, because she might still have an advantage.
The rape statistic is skewed by definitions. The incidence of males being raped in the general population is almost as high as that of women. The problem is that the CDC and FBI have prevented "made to penetrate" from being acknowledged as rape. So, that statistic explicitly excludes male victims, because feminist ideology has made it verboten to consider male victims of rape as having _been_ raped. (That is, "rape culture" is in relation to male rape victims, not female.)
Moveover, this statistic also excludes the single largest cohort of rape victims entirely: prison rape. Because nobody cares, and people think they deserve it and laugh at it. Again, there is no "rape culture" except when it comes to when men are raped, then it's a joke.
For reference, look up Mary Koss, a feminist who spent her career insisting that men could never be raped, and going out of her way to be a rape cultura apologist.
Thank you for this.
You're so handsome
The Creation of the two sexes you mean.
ery little supported by actual fact and rather takes great leaps between theory and your references. This is such a weird video. I probably don't disagree with what your overall point is, but this is just total garbage.
why do you use a black and white argument? does science or reproduction fall apart if a few genderfuild people exist? if we just let everyone be who they are, would society be happier? if your worried about male violence, why don’t you address that directly then enforcing category
No such thing, sweetie. The fact you don't relate to idiotic gender ideology stereotypes of what a man and a woman are doesn't make you some other thing. You're male or female, you're a man or a woman, you're a boy or a girl. You might be a femme boy or a butch girl, but that doesn't change what you are.
It's utterly deranged how gender ideologists will insist that sex is bimodal, but won't recognize that gender behabiors are bimodal, and thus "gender fluid" is incoherent.
Sweetie, get over yourself.
@@TagSpamCop you have a lot to learn and space to grow for tolerant for other people on this earth. when you see the color black and the white, you would say there only color black or white. But reality there a spectrum in between. Nature has created rules of chromosomes where XY is a man and XX is a woman, but in nature DNA chromosomes isn’t perfect and there are mistakes, like XXY and other disorders. And chromosomes help the body to grow and develop the particular gentiles, but it may not always develop right and the testes don’t descend. And while chromosomes help determine how much estrogen and testosterone to produce in the body, it doesn’t always have the right ratio and we also have chemical estrogen from products that has raise the estrogen in men causing some to become feminine. And so what do you do when somebody doesn’t live to their gender or chromosomes. It’s why you need to have tolerance. People don’t always live up to their chromosomes and that’s life. It may not be what you want, but you cannot dictate life as it will be what people mind make their experiences to be. You can call those people crazy but it doesn’t make them disappear. You have to develop acceptance that in this big crazy world, those people exist. They will break your rule of what you think they should act base on chromosomes. Life is about seeing the different perspectives that might conflict with yours so you can better grasp of a global view of the human condition
You're mixing many things here.
All your other videos show a bias that's pretty noticeable but in this one you have mixed such a quantity of topics and matters very strongly.
Yet you can't point out A SINGLE factual error...
Gee, i wonder why?
So is there really anything to gender? I'm asking because I always like most people thought gender was sex.
@M Gagua if gender is just personally why do we need the word gender? It make no sense to me, woman means adult human female, man means adult human male and boy and girl means child human male/female.
If these are the words we think of as gender where does personality come in?
Animals have different behaviours between the sexes, do animals have genders too then?
And isn't personally a individual thing, effected by a individual sex, environment, up bring and life experiences?
Why would we need the word gender if personally fits the bill on describing a individual behaviour?
Way back when I took biology classes gender was interchangeable with sex. On US birth and death certificates it lists sex not gender. This is an excellent and succinct video showing why sex matters.
@M Gagua in that case is there only two genders? Seeing that gender is a stereotype base on sex, and there only being two sexes.
The reason I ask is I'm trying to understand why people think there is more then two genders and it has nothing to do with sex.
@@blunelson8226 Ok, I think I can explain. The reason why there are so many genders is due to how people feel. Some people feel between a man and woman, some feel partly like a man but also don't feel like a woman at all, some feel like both a man and a woman at the same time and some associate with masculinity but not to the point where they want to be called a man but they also don't associate with femininity and being a woman at all.
All of those are different genders. It's just based on how a person feels.
@@blunelson8226 To describe fashions and expectations of behaviour for a sex class (stereotypes), and to - in the past - have a synonym for (naughty) sex (these days are gone).
No the 6 chromosome combinations matter, Sex and Gender don’t. Stop tryna define people by “sex” and “gender”.
No. Definitions are useful. For example, women experience heart attacks differently than men. Clearly, you don't give a shit about people's lives, you just care about your fragile feelings. To demand that definitions are irrelevant is to insist that lives don't matter.
You're deranged.
What's utterly amazing is that your deranged fundamentalist ideology is fixated entirely on definitions. Redefining "trans" for example. What you're doing is a deflection and a distraction. You're accusing this guy of exactly what you people are doing. You want us to stand by while you do your little redefining thing and let you get away with it. We see you, you realize? We know what you're doing. If definitions weren't important, than why do you care about co-opting so many of them? Like "woman". The reality is you care even more.
Number 6 is surprisingly left wing. Im totally on-board to overthrow the patriarchy and toxic masculinity!
Oh, please. There's no "patriarchy" in the west. You want "patriarchy"? Go to Iran or Saudi Arabia or Pakistan.
Women have every right a man has, and several they don't. That men and women have different results does not constitute a "patriarchy" unless you are going to insist that "man" is the default and standard.
And "toxic masculinity" doesn't exist any more than "toxic femininity" exists. It's code for "things men do that I don't like." "Patriarchy" is "male is default" (i.e. when women don't do things the way a man would do them), while "toxic masculinity" is "female is default" (i.e. when men don't do things the way women do them).
You don't get to argue both simultaneously. It's pathologically dishonest, while demonstrating the gynocentrism of society.
@@TagSpamCop m8 I can tell by the level of your critical thinking and atitude that defending my position would be pointless. Let me put it this way, instead of thinking of the patriarchy as a switch that some countries have and others don't, think about it like a spectrum, and it's always positive to try to reduce it to 0 as much as possible
cringe
@Josh the Art Critic ok boomer
Yes it is cringe to see what these reality-disconnected activists are doing. It's indistiguishable from fundamentalist religion.
@@alexandriabreitinger1824 Okay, Groomer.
Trans woman is also woman your video is good but don't make any debate on transgender
What is a woman? Define it for me without using the term in the description.
@@jessam4875 I'm a trans woman a woman is a adult human female a trans woman is a adult male who transitions to have female sexual characteristics/traits to align with her gender identity it's not that hard to differentiate ourselves without erasing each other existance and experiences.
@@jayebailey9332 you are appropriating our our sex class.
@@jayebailey9332 womanhood is not a costume.
@@jessam4875 I'm just being Jaye like your being Jessica and being a woman isn't a class it's a gender identity that physically describes our bodies I'm just a transexual woman xy and your a biological women xx I transitioned because I suffer from gender dysphoria/gender identity disorder a neuro-psychological birth defect that gives me psychological distress from my male sexual characteristics the only way to treat the destress is to physically change my male secondary sexual characteristics to female ones by physical transitioning my body through medical intervention and since I started hrt aka estrogen and testosterone blockers I went from AA cup to a A cup and my breast buds are full formed and I'm developing milk ducts and I've gone from 250lbs to 184lbs and I'm noticing meaning other changes I'm happy with because this is my experience and I've never been more comfortable in my own skin than I am now and this is who I am I will always be biological male but I'm developing as a trans female and that is my experience as Jaye and that is who I'll all be.
Whilst I agree with some of your points, there are some serious flaws in your methodology and I disagree with some of your points.
First, be aware that in terms of reproduction, we are different from animals as in the culture had shaped how we live and choose our mates rather than sole biological instincts. Our living conditions is also drastically different today compared to millions of years ago. Make sure that you acknowledge that.
Second, I disagree with the amount of roles sexual dimorphism had played in building the society. The society is built with customs, cultures, experiences, languages and many complex factors. Sexual dimorphism itself is undeniably one of those factors, but is far from being the determining factor. What is more determining is how the society interpret such sexual dimorphism, as evident in many native american cultures that does not have a binary gender distinction.
With medical practices I agree with most of them, except for the psychiatric part. You are overlooking the social factors that contributes to those psychiatric illnesses, which has significantly more contribution compared to physical illnesses. They manifest differently in males and females, and the social factors is instrumental in shaping these differences. The social factor is once again, not resulted from sexual dimorphism itself, but societal interpretation of sexes and many other factors, such as childhood trauma or physical injury.
In terms of sport, make sure that you acknowledge that your data is mostly from cisgender population if your underlying distinction of male and female is biological sex. Transgender population has vastly different hormonal profiles and therefore different performances compared to cisgender populations. There are no conclusive study that says transgender women has a better performance on average compared to cisgender women.
With that case of transgender women assaulting other inmates, do you have the statistics of how many transgender women actually sexually assaults cisgender women inmates, out of the whole transgender women inmate population? And how many cisgender women inmates sexually assault other cisgender women inmates? I heavily suspect that you are cherry picking cases (as there are always bad eggs no matter the population), and it would do for you to disprove my suspicion.
1 in 50 transgender women (or male claimed to be female in your language) being admitted into women's facilities also do not serve any cause to further your argument other than fearmongering.
Also bear in mind that sex slavery is also affecting trans populations, but it was overlooked frequently. You are once again overlooking trans people who are also the victim of these sex specific crimes (by saying that they suffer "not because of gender identity", which they do except in cases such as genital mutilation and sex specific abortion).
www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/23322705.2020.1690116?journalCode=uhmt20
Lastly, it is true that recognising biological is a component to equality. However, it is just one component out of many. again, the society does not operate based on biological sex, but mainly on how these sexes and by extension gender identity are interpreted. You cannot achieve equality by overlooking those social factors and how do they affect people, because often times they play a far more important role than biological sex.
Thank you for reading all of these.
Humans precede society. Females precede society. The sex binary precedes society.
"in terms of reproduction..." Regardless of place or time in history, reproduction requires large and small gamates. This is a fact that culture, history and gender play no role in.
@@jessam4875 Sex "binary" does not precede society, as hermaphorodites and intersex people also exist back then. Not only that, in some species of animals the sex will change. Therefore, the idea of a sex "binary" is completely subjective and a social construct. Despite his best attempt at making it look objective, even he knows that the number of those who conforms to binary development is not 100%. This clearly disproves the "sex binary" as an objective truth and places it into the realm of social construct, hence it cannot "precede society".
And yes, reproduction does indeed involves small and large gametes.
@@Meowcat2226 there are absolutely ZERO human hermaphrodites
@@Meowcat2226 also in the few species that can change sex (spoiler alert, humans can't) they change to produce the opposite gamates. This highights the sex binary rather than dispelling it.
I would say that your video is about gender: male or female. Gender is binary. Sex is an abbreviation for sexual reproduction; it is something you do and not something you are.
Male or Female does not exist in the meaning of Gender.
No clue what you were taught.
Lol
@@Raziel433 I agree. I find ironic the phenomenon of "gender reveal" parties for pregnant women, when by historical
grammatical/semantic usage, the parlance of political correctness, and common sense, the parent(s) are revealing the child's assigned SEX. (Sarcasm alert: or am I supposed to say "fetus"?)
Gender used to be a synonym for biological sex category, but now is often used to mean either gender roles or gender identity, leaving “sex” or “biological sex” as the clearest word to use.
Sex is binary. Large and small gametes. Try again. You're very ignorant.