Gender ideology activists claiming Matt Walsh gave them 'numerous nightmares and depression spirals'

[gaara4158]

I don't agree with Walsh on a lot of things, but he brought up a great point...

I've said in the past "in order to designate, you need to be able to define" (he didn't use those words, but it was the same sentiment).

If one is going to say "this person is a woman", they need to be able to provide a definition of "woman".

Otherwise, the designation is meaningless.

The trap that a lot of gender ideology activists fall in, is the "gender is a societal construct so it's meaningless" vs. "gender recognition is super important"

If gender is a meaningless societal construct, then why does someone even care about 'misgendering'?

If it's super important, then it should be able to be succinctly defined.

I can't think of another vitally important biological designation within society that has a "fluid" definition...

Nobody says "blue eyes means something different to everyone" or "I identify as diabetic even though my blood sugar is in the normal range"

Can you provide a definition of “chair” that encompasses all chairs and nothing that isn’t a chair?

 

[gaara4158]

WALSH: If Men Can Be Women Then This White Dude Can Be Korean | The Daily Wire

Then there is transracial Rachel Dolezal.

Ironic, since the concept of “whiteness” has fluctuated and evolved to exclude and include different ethnic backgrounds at different times. If “whiteness” can expand to include more people, why can’t “woman?”

 

[bekkilyn]

Matt Walsh was the only sane person in that discussion. Now he's showing how deluded gender ideology is by addressing a woke preacher in the U.K. who says that Jesus was transgender because he did some things that were typically done by women according to said preacher.

So we all need to be careful to stay rigidly within our stereotypical gender roles at all costs unless we want to be magically transformed into the other sex as it is literally impossible by woke rules for a boy to like to play with dollhouses or a girl to take out the garbage in the evening.

 

[Michie]

Matt Walsh was the only sane person in that discussion. Now he's showing how deluded gender ideology is by addressing a woke preacher in the U.K. who says that Jesus was transgender because he did some things that were typically done by women according to said preacher.

So we all need to be careful to stay rigidly within our stereotypical gender roles at all costs unless we want to be magically transformed into the other sex as it is literally impossible by woke rules for a boy to like to play with dollhouses or a girl to take out the garbage in the evening.

Insanity.

 

[durangodawood]

They did...they called it both at various points in the debate.

They said both, if you watch the video one of them refers to a social construct (at 12:45), and then at another point in the video, one said "everyone gets to define what it means to them because it's different for everybody" (at 7:30), they also said "womanhood is an umbrella term" (at 8:45)

So they're all over the board...

If it seems confusing, it's because it is. They're wanting to change the rules on the fly. That's the problem with not having definitions for things.

Getting "lost" in those rules is just as easy as it would be for a mechanic to get "lost" trying to follow a procedure if his boss kept changing what "repair" meant or said "the brake fluid is low" and when prompted for how low it was, gave the reply "well that's not for me to say, 'low' means something different to everyone, it's not for us to say how much brake fluid a car should have"

I agree. Its confusing.

But, I think thats normal and to be expected in a time of transition re long held norms. I would say: dont panic, things will work out. Meantime, there will be some fuss and awkwardness. Its not the end of the world.

Also. its probably not instructive to pick on the sillier people in the issue, unless the goal is just to dismiss the whole thing without challenging yourself.

 

[gaara4158]

Insanity.

And now you’re taking liberties with the label “insane.” Almost as though you understand that labels are social constructs…

 

[Michie]

And now you’re taking liberties with the label “insane.” Almost as though you understand that labels are social constructs…

Oh do please forgive me wise one.

 

[Captain Ahab]

I identify as a multi-billionaire oil tycoon. Income and money are just social constructs. But these transfinancialphobic bigots in real estate are discriminating and won’t give me that $50,000,000 seaside mansion so I can be the real me.

 

[gaara4158]

Oh do please forgive me wise one.

Oh, no need! You’re making my point for me.

 

[gaara4158]

I identify as a multi-billionaire oil tycoon. Income and money are just social constructs. But these transfinancialphobic bigots in real estate are discriminating and won’t give me that $50,000,000 seaside mansion so I can be the real me.

How’s your crypto wallet doing?

 

[Captain Ahab]

How’s your crypto wallet doing?

The term crypto wallet reeks of toxic masculinity and the oppressive heteronormative cisgender patriarchy. They need to start offering crypto purses to be more inclusive.

 

[bekkilyn]

The term crypto wallet reeks of toxic masculinity and the oppressive heteronormative cisgender patriarchy. They need to start offering crypto purses to be more inclusive.

After all, it has the word "wall" in it, and that's racist.

 

[Michie]

After all, it has the word "wall" in it, and that's racist.

It’s enough to make one spiral into depression and have nightmares.

 

[gaara4158]

The term crypto wallet reeks of toxic masculinity and the oppressive heteronormative cisgender patriarchy. They need to start offering crypto purses to be more inclusive.

Someone sounds triggered…

 

[Captain Ahab]

Someone sounds triggered…

LOL, someone is projecting.

 

[SilverBear]

The example he mentioned in the video (about wanting to play with the girls toys) was referencing the same weak standards some of the advocates on the other side use for it, so why can't he use that as a point of reference?

If MayoClinic is publishing articles that are suggesting "these are the potential signs"
View attachment 311377

Then those are fair game to be discussed and critiqued.


When it comes to the mentality of "people who don't know enough about it just need to stay out of it"...that logic only flies for things and preferences that don't have externalities.

It's the same reason why a gun enthusiast doesn't get to tell liberal "you don't know anything about guns, so you just to need to shut up, you don't get to have an opinion because you're under-informed on them" That person having a gun comes with externalities, therefore, the other people get to voice their concerns about it (even if they can't tell the difference between fully and semi automatic)

Calling it "obsessed" is a bit unfair... if nobody was trying to compel everyone else in society to make accommodations, it's likely most wouldn't have a strong opinion one way or the other.

what accommodations are you personally being compelled to make?

 

[SilverBear]

The person in the video he was debating against said it...(and it's a common rebuttal, they're not the first ones I've heard use that)

They said it was a construct and everyone gets to define what it means to them... Which was their reply to being asked "what does Woman mean, define it?"

Yet, we have entire social media platforms who will ban people for "misgendering"... so that would imply that would imply that it's "super important"

So which is it? If it's a fluid idea/terminology that can mean something different to everyone, then there's no such thing as "misgendering", only two people having different definitions of what a term means to them.

race is entirely a social construct but if you refer to a person of color using the N word on most social media you will likely be banned.
Of course if you are purposefully referring to black people with the N word you are doing so to provoke a response and demonstrating what is likely hate on your part. Similarly if you are misgendering someone you are likely doing it to provoke a response and demonstrating what is likely hate on your part.

If it's so important that using it incorrectly is grounds for a Twitter ban, or even punitive measures at work (depending on where you work), or in court (depending on where you live)...
Misgendering Is a Human Rights Violation, Canadian Court Rules

...so important, that in fact, a Canadian tribunal ruled: A human rights tribunal ruled that pronouns are “a fundamental part of a person’s identity.”

Then someone ought to be able to define what the terms mean.

the court ruled that DELIBERATE misgendering in the workplace is a violation of human rights. and in reading your link it seems that the misgendering was not just deliberate it was used to attack and harass.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Can you provide a definition of “chair” that encompasses all chairs and nothing that isn’t a chair?

One can argue shapes and sizes of the chair, but in a practical sense, if someone says "do you have an extra chair we can pull up to the table?" We all know what they mean.

If someone comes up with a personally redefined definition of "carrot" that means something completely different and they want to start using the term "carrot" to describe a potato, when they say "pass the carrots", they shouldn't be shocked when someone hands them something other than what they were wanting, and they don't get to insist that everyone else at the dinner has to participate in their redefinition, and then imply that "it's everyone that has a problem, why are you guys so obsessed with the color, taste, and texture of vegetables?" as to make it sound like it's everyone else being pedantic and petty.

 

[bekkilyn]

View attachment 311420

One can argue shapes and sizes of the chair, but in a practical sense, if someone says "do you have an extra chair we can pull up to the table?" We all know what they mean.

If someone comes up with a personally redefined definition of "carrot" that means something completely different and they want to start using the term "carrot" to describe a potato, when they say "pass the carrots", they shouldn't be shocked when someone hands them something other than what they were wanting, and they don't get to insist that everyone else at the dinner has to participate in their redefinition, and then imply that "it's everyone that has a problem, why are you guys so obsessed with the color, taste, and texture of vegetables?" as to make it sound like it's everyone else being pedantic and petty.

Now let me make a prediction. You will have responses to this post that will question your definition and perhaps provide an example or two of an outlier that doesn't exactly fall within the definition, or perhaps you'll get an argument insisting that a "stool" can be a chair too even if it doesn't have a back, etc. This is a known woke technique of instilling doubt in the objective reality that we all know to be true in order to promote instability. If we believe the transgender arguments are ridiculous now, just wait until they've moved on to enforcing transhumanism, i.e. "What really is a human? Robots aren't taking over human jobs because they are humans too, etc." There is no objective truth or reality. Each individual has "their" own truth. If "they" believe a carrot is a potato, then it's true. Freedom is slavery.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

race is entirely a social construct but if you refer to a person of color using the N word on most social media you will likely be banned.
Of course if you are purposefully referring to black people with the N word you are doing so to provoke a response and demonstrating what is likely hate on your part. Similarly if you are misgendering someone you are likely doing it to provoke a response and demonstrating what is likely hate on your part.

An argument can be made that certain aspects of race are a construct, but not in the same way as this topic.

The designation of race typically more used as "consolidation terms" to consolidate heritages or consolidate ethnicities, and is defined as “a category of humankind that shares certain distinctive physical traits.”

For instance, on a survey when they ask for race, and give you the options of (White,Black,Asian,Hispanic/Latino,Other)

The term "White" would be what's used to describe me (being someone who's from Irish, Polish, and Swedish descent)

Despite the designation being a "high level construct", it still represents something that accurate.

The designation of "Black" would be the same deal, but I certainly couldn't go around and start telling people "I identify as Black" and then try to defend it on the grounds that "it's just a social construct, so why does it matter?"

the court ruled that DELIBERATE misgendering in the workplace is a violation of human rights. and in reading your link it seems that the misgendering was not just deliberate it was used to attack and harass.

So if a "White" person started referring to themselves as "Black" at the office, and everyone collectively said "Sorry, nope, I'm not playing along with that", does that person get to claim that they feel "attacked"? I guess they technically could, but I doubt it'd get very far.