This is the very first time I hear the phrase "Gender is not a social construct, it's a DNA construct similar to chromosomes". And I need source on that because it sounds like bullshit
>"Gender is not a social construct, it's a DNA construct similar to chromosomes". And I need source on that because it sounds like bullshit
nvm, I found it, and it affirms that "gender" is a conjunction of features determined by hormones and brain anatomy, and that it's not determined by social constructs
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6677266/
Yes, that is true. Just like this guy said in the second video
>Have you answered the question?
get rekt chud
posted, he compares trans people to anorexic people, proving that trans gender people although they are a relality, they are an abnormality, a disorder, and this "identity" should be called dysphoria.
Well, "gender dysphoria" already is considered a mental disease, but the point is, Matt Walsh is wrong, gender is not a social construct, that's why people can't answer what is a woman from a gender perspective.
Oof. You won't find gender in the brain, no matter how much people prod and poke it. You will never, EVER find the "experience" of gender -- or even experience -- in the brain. It cannot even be elucidated what this "experience" is and how trans people somehow intuited it merely from aesthetic observation; because, let's face it, they think material reality somehow contains these experiences.
I am not saying you're doing this, but there are people who will say in one breath that sex is biological and gender is social, but when backed in a corner will point to the brain and say gender lies therein -- or the common idiocy of male/female brain -- thus eschewing the social foundation earlier.
This isn't really a complex issue because it really just cannot be substantiated. Every claim of "gender identity" or intuition of the opposite-gender/sex is self-referential and falls into circular reasoning. If everyone just admitted fetishization, it'd clear everything up.
>"Gender is not a social construct, it's a DNA construct similar to chromosomes". And I need source on that because it sounds like bullshit
nvm, I found it, and it affirms that "gender" is a conjunction of features determined by hormones and brain anatomy, and that it's not determined by social constructs
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6677266/
i could have saved time by checking wikipedias woman article but instead i watched this shitty film and its not even about women its mostly about this one guy who isnt even pro feminist. he should have just titled the movie "transgenders and why i hate them" because thats all this bullshit was.
>he should have just titled the movie "transgenders and why i hate them" because thats all this bullshit was.
Sounds based. Trannoids are unirinically subhuman.
Tucker, Dave Chappelle, and JK Rowling have already exposed how loony these people are though. The respective companies that they work for stood with them even when troons were upset by their comments
>unintentional
Nah, I'm basically a fascist but I look like a Liberal and it pays dividends because they don't suspect me. It's intentional camouflage.
I thought it was interesting in it's ability to bring to light just how fragile this movement is when approached with genuine criticism. I'm less concerned with the answer to the what is a woman and more concerned with how the people who are profiting off this conducted themselves in their interview. The trailer screamed that all these interviews would be done in bad faith but Matt usually was able to get his point across before he even started being critical. I'm pretty neutral on this issue in general but the movie succeeded in at least letting me see this side of the debate without relying on bigotry or hysteria. On the other side of the coin I think it's placed a massive shroud of doubt over the true intentions of the people supporting this movement. I'm still willing to listen but this has definitely swayed me a bit.
First half was pretty funny, second half was pretty dark. Honestly pretty decent. It worked best when he kept a straight face and let the weirdos be weird all on their own - same reason the libsoftiktok account works so well. It kind of falls apart a bit when it focuses on his children's book shenanigans and honestly they should have cut all that.
This documentary actually convinced me that gender theory is more right than wrong. The main premise this guy went around asking was for a definition of a woman. He can easily get that from a dictionary.
But when humans say they are a woman, for example, they are referring to their gender identity and not their sex assigned as birth. Yet, for some reason he keeps harping on that woman = female. It's apples and oranges.
Even the chicken example was ridiculous too. Our understanding of gender for humans has superseded biological definitions for sex, yet he purposely conflates it as well. We don't call female chickens "women" - they're not fricking humans.
Overall it was a pretty disingenuous piece of commentary but can totally get the appeal if you're still someone living in the past.
>but can totally get the appeal if you're still someone living in the past >IT'S THE CURRENT YEAR AND YOU DON'T LET YOUR CHILDREN GET GROOMED BY TROONS BIGOT
honest review is that it was surprisingly well done, I thought it was going to be just a Ben Shapiro monologue type of documentary but it presented both sides' argument and Matt didn't try to insult/mock the trannies right away but genuinely asked questions and waited for them to be ridiculized by their own words
I agree with everything you wrote, but the problem with people like Walsh/Shapiro is that they put themselves before the "issue". Meaning that their 5 minutes of fame and monetary gain are more important than the "message".
Its not a real documentary. It feels more like a biographical journey akin to Michael Moore. If he just showed the interviewees without himself in the dialogue it would feel more honest. And every second voice over is an appeal to emotion from him. Lastly, the way he bullies that trans thing on the street was just mean. "I identify as a cat", it was such a typical Shapiro "professional college student debate" moment, where you could tell he was stumped and just pulled out a whataboutism/nonseniscal argument.
Sadly when fear merchants like Walsh are making sense in their talking points, you know that were in the dark ages.
he needs to work on his technique and delivery, but the bit talking about cats was fair I thought, he was trying to demonstrate the point that you can identify something in the external world even if you yourself aren't that thing
A more considerate comparison may have been more useful for both sides. I still think it can be a useful comparison for the sake of discussion though, there are multiple ways to identify a cat, from biology to social constructs, the comparison can work for both sides of the argument. The main problem was that the troony took offense and stormed off when I don't think he was being as disingenuous as storming off would imply
Same with the dr phil stuff, they make it out like he's acting extremely maliciously which I don't think is quite true
>A more considerate comparison may have been more useful for both sides.
I dont wanna focus too much on that interaction, since it truly was just a random person on the street. But yeah, felt unkind.
>Same with the dr phil stuff, they make it out like he's acting extremely maliciously which I don't think is quite true
I agree. He doesnt insult, he doesnt mock and he doesnt interrupt. He doest have a resting b***h face at times, but hes courteous and polite.
why would i choose to lose my time on this?
already know the answer, we all know basic biology
trannies are so delusional
i get why this needs to exist, and is sad
>"Gender is not a social construct, it's a DNA construct similar to chromosomes". And I need source on that because it sounds like bullshit
nvm, I found it, and it affirms that "gender" is a conjunction of features determined by hormones and brain anatomy, and that it's not determined by social constructs
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6677266/
It's like that Zizek joke about decaffeinated coffee and chocolate laxatives. Trannies are women without veganas and men without penises. It's peak fake advertising clown world.
troonyism can be caused by demons. I know because the only time I've ever been inclined to any kind of homosexualry is when I've been interested in the occult. American fundamentalist Protestants are right, you literally can pray the gay away, at least sometimes.
>Have you answered the question?
Yes. Something you will never have sex with.
Ok troony.
Based, this joke did get made in the documentary itself though and Walsh has no response. Only kino moment
I'm a straight woman.
>u virgin lol
so this is the peak of left wing "humor"
you mean, like a car?
A woman is someone with a nice big pair of X chromosomes.
You CHUDS are STILL spreading toxic dangerous transphobic misinformation? That's it, no more Mr. Nice Guy.
MAYONNAISE CHUD, your toxic rhetoric will NOT divide us.
Mayonnaise CHUD, we do not forget. We do not forgive. You have been warned.
We are the Chudbusters. Mayonnaise Chud of Chuddonnaise, consider yourself WARNED. This is ChudWATCH.
Chudbuster OUT.
this is an English speaking board, please stop speaking Hindi.
>right wing humor
>Have you answered the question?
get rekt chud
This is the very first time I hear the phrase "Gender is not a social construct, it's a DNA construct similar to chromosomes". And I need source on that because it sounds like bullshit
>"Gender is not a social construct, it's a DNA construct similar to chromosomes". And I need source on that because it sounds like bullshit
nvm, I found it, and it affirms that "gender" is a conjunction of features determined by hormones and brain anatomy, and that it's not determined by social constructs
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6677266/
All this article "proves" is that transgenders have a chemical and hormonal imbalance, something that's found in most mental illnesses
Yes, that is true. Just like this guy said in the second video
posted, he compares trans people to anorexic people, proving that trans gender people although they are a relality, they are an abnormality, a disorder, and this "identity" should be called dysphoria.
Well, "gender dysphoria" already is considered a mental disease, but the point is, Matt Walsh is wrong, gender is not a social construct, that's why people can't answer what is a woman from a gender perspective.
if this is true why don't they just brain scan all the trains
>brain anatomy
Oof. You won't find gender in the brain, no matter how much people prod and poke it. You will never, EVER find the "experience" of gender -- or even experience -- in the brain. It cannot even be elucidated what this "experience" is and how trans people somehow intuited it merely from aesthetic observation; because, let's face it, they think material reality somehow contains these experiences.
I am not saying you're doing this, but there are people who will say in one breath that sex is biological and gender is social, but when backed in a corner will point to the brain and say gender lies therein -- or the common idiocy of male/female brain -- thus eschewing the social foundation earlier.
This isn't really a complex issue because it really just cannot be substantiated. Every claim of "gender identity" or intuition of the opposite-gender/sex is self-referential and falls into circular reasoning. If everyone just admitted fetishization, it'd clear everything up.
based biology
>10% of all people are gay
lol. everything stated in this video is so suspect
You post on Cinemaphile, and you doubt 10% of the population are homosexuals?
bi erasure is real
Is this some Breadtube degenerate like hontra?
decently edited and lots of unadulterated troony seethe. 8/10
it was kino
i could have saved time by checking wikipedias woman article but instead i watched this shitty film and its not even about women its mostly about this one guy who isnt even pro feminist. he should have just titled the movie "transgenders and why i hate them" because thats all this bullshit was.
TERFs can make their own movie but they'll b***h about this dude instead of getting off Twitter
>he should have just titled the movie "transgenders and why i hate them" because thats all this bullshit was.
Sounds based. Trannoids are unirinically subhuman.
Sounds frickin based is that why all the leftists on it flipped out so much? Or do you just molest little boys like them?
What is the USS Liberty?
I knew there was something about this guy I didn't like after watching the movie. what a gay.
>Have you answered the question?
Woman: a pile of lies
Why do you need a documentary to tell you that troons are demented
Because nobody at the media/corporate level with say this.
Tucker, Dave Chappelle, and JK Rowling have already exposed how loony these people are though. The respective companies that they work for stood with them even when troons were upset by their comments
If you can lose your job by not getting the right pronouns on these fricks you still haven't won the culture war.
>Tucker, Dave Chappelle, and JK Rowling
Tucker, yes. Chappelle and JK's crimes were only giving them 99% validation
We don't.
General society does.
Please note you are not allowed to ask this question to a liberal on reddit.
WHAT THE HELL IS A WOMAN
AAAAAAAAAAAA
It's funny how Matt Walsh unintentionally looks like a liberal.
>unintentional
Nah, I'm basically a fascist but I look like a Liberal and it pays dividends because they don't suspect me. It's intentional camouflage.
I thought it was interesting in it's ability to bring to light just how fragile this movement is when approached with genuine criticism. I'm less concerned with the answer to the what is a woman and more concerned with how the people who are profiting off this conducted themselves in their interview. The trailer screamed that all these interviews would be done in bad faith but Matt usually was able to get his point across before he even started being critical. I'm pretty neutral on this issue in general but the movie succeeded in at least letting me see this side of the debate without relying on bigotry or hysteria. On the other side of the coin I think it's placed a massive shroud of doubt over the true intentions of the people supporting this movement. I'm still willing to listen but this has definitely swayed me a bit.
First half was pretty funny, second half was pretty dark. Honestly pretty decent. It worked best when he kept a straight face and let the weirdos be weird all on their own - same reason the libsoftiktok account works so well. It kind of falls apart a bit when it focuses on his children's book shenanigans and honestly they should have cut all that.
This documentary actually convinced me that gender theory is more right than wrong. The main premise this guy went around asking was for a definition of a woman. He can easily get that from a dictionary.
But when humans say they are a woman, for example, they are referring to their gender identity and not their sex assigned as birth. Yet, for some reason he keeps harping on that woman = female. It's apples and oranges.
Even the chicken example was ridiculous too. Our understanding of gender for humans has superseded biological definitions for sex, yet he purposely conflates it as well. We don't call female chickens "women" - they're not fricking humans.
Overall it was a pretty disingenuous piece of commentary but can totally get the appeal if you're still someone living in the past.
>but can totally get the appeal if you're still someone living in the past
>IT'S THE CURRENT YEAR AND YOU DON'T LET YOUR CHILDREN GET GROOMED BY TROONS BIGOT
Stale pasta
honest review is that it was surprisingly well done, I thought it was going to be just a Ben Shapiro monologue type of documentary but it presented both sides' argument and Matt didn't try to insult/mock the trannies right away but genuinely asked questions and waited for them to be ridiculized by their own words
I agree with everything you wrote, but the problem with people like Walsh/Shapiro is that they put themselves before the "issue". Meaning that their 5 minutes of fame and monetary gain are more important than the "message".
Its not a real documentary. It feels more like a biographical journey akin to Michael Moore. If he just showed the interviewees without himself in the dialogue it would feel more honest. And every second voice over is an appeal to emotion from him. Lastly, the way he bullies that trans thing on the street was just mean. "I identify as a cat", it was such a typical Shapiro "professional college student debate" moment, where you could tell he was stumped and just pulled out a whataboutism/nonseniscal argument.
Sadly when fear merchants like Walsh are making sense in their talking points, you know that were in the dark ages.
he needs to work on his technique and delivery, but the bit talking about cats was fair I thought, he was trying to demonstrate the point that you can identify something in the external world even if you yourself aren't that thing
Yeah, but any actual intellectual would call that out as reductio ad absurdum.
A more considerate comparison may have been more useful for both sides. I still think it can be a useful comparison for the sake of discussion though, there are multiple ways to identify a cat, from biology to social constructs, the comparison can work for both sides of the argument. The main problem was that the troony took offense and stormed off when I don't think he was being as disingenuous as storming off would imply
Same with the dr phil stuff, they make it out like he's acting extremely maliciously which I don't think is quite true
>A more considerate comparison may have been more useful for both sides.
I dont wanna focus too much on that interaction, since it truly was just a random person on the street. But yeah, felt unkind.
>Same with the dr phil stuff, they make it out like he's acting extremely maliciously which I don't think is quite true
I agree. He doesnt insult, he doesnt mock and he doesnt interrupt. He doest have a resting b***h face at times, but hes courteous and polite.
>It's not a real documentary.
What is a documentary?
>troony obsession thread #9582755729475728
a woman is someone who is born with a vegana.
why would i choose to lose my time on this?
already know the answer, we all know basic biology
trannies are so delusional
i get why this needs to exist, and is sad
see
It's like that Zizek joke about decaffeinated coffee and chocolate laxatives. Trannies are women without veganas and men without penises. It's peak fake advertising clown world.
Zizek based
troonyism can be caused by demons. I know because the only time I've ever been inclined to any kind of homosexualry is when I've been interested in the occult. American fundamentalist Protestants are right, you literally can pray the gay away, at least sometimes.
Stop shilling your doco. Maybe it's not actually worth watching if you have to force it this much