I love how Helen can make complicated topics so clear. The way she worded it about intersex syndromes happening to either male or female people makes it much easier to understand. There's two sexes. Not three, four, in between or beyond.
I have spent the better part of the last three years studying and writing about this matter. I have heard both of these women before (and read Helen's book). I feel like I have just listened to the best of the best of all I have read and watched. This was a tour de force synthesis of (almost) all the concerns about trans ideology presented with wit, wisdom, and humility - a gentle introduction to what is actually quiet distressing and has some very dark elements to it. The last statements by both Abigail as a Catholic and Helen as an atheist were _so_ moving. I am very grateful to all involved in presenting this discussion and for Abigail and Helen engaging each other so beautifully. Well done.
I was a tomboy in the late 50s. I loved playing with toy cars instead of dolls and I never wanted to wear a dress. I still don’t. I’m afraid that if I were a tomboy in the 90s and had gender affirming parents and teachers and doctors I may well have been pushed into transitioning. Thank God I grew up in the 50s and 60s. My parents just let me play and grow out of it.
What Helen says about this being a language based movement is spot on. One of the most common responses I see to "migendering" is that it apparently eraases someone entire identity. How ridiculous that you could erase someone by merely using a word like he or she
When Mao and the Chinese Communist Party won power in 1949, their most precise instrument of ideological transformation was a massive program of linguistic engineering. They taught everyone a new political vocabulary, gave old words new meanings, converted traditional terms to revolutionary purposes, suppressed words that expressed “incorrect” thought, and required the whole population to recite slogans, stock phrases, and scripts that gave “correct” linguistic form to “correct” thought.
These extremely informed women are describing what amounts to a modern magic. Moderns often are not traditional religious people. And so who beliefs they acquire have no parameters to understand what is real or not.
The activism around this issue needs to stop if only for those with genuine biological intersex as well as dysphoria issues. My sympathies are with them and they do need help.
I found out a few years ago I was autistic. If I had been an undiagnosed child now I would have been set on that route and I would have incredible regrets about it. As well as being emotionally vulnerable autistic people tend to have comorbid medical problems which I am sure would cause complications in the medicalised trans process, along with the complications that happen with the process as it is It amazes me that people are so blinkered on this issue that they can't see to the safety of vulnerable children
Help for parents? Yes you're A game needed. Don't forget to get loving support for yourselves when you feel as if your game is slipping....it can be wearying on parents to hold an open hand and a firm resistance to invasive ideologies
I disagree with Helen that this idea hasn't gone anywhere aside from America and places which are culturally close. I know many people in African countries identifying as non binary and people have discussions about these issue. The main difference is that it hasn't gotten into our public nationwide politics and our governments aren't discussing it. It's mostly youths with internet access discussing it
same. i live in an eastern european country and though gender ideology is nowhere near being mainstream, local lgbt+ activists are very much on board with it. personally i have had a period of identifying as various brands of trans for a number of years, and for me it didn't start with tumblr etc. it was the influence of some of the local communities that have embraced ~queer~ culture that first led me to identify as trans. so it definitely isn't just america + culturally similar countries, and i'm very curious as to how these ideas will play out in places that are very very different. where i live, real sexism and homophobia are still very obviously present and it's going to be a challenge in and of itself to tackle those, but now we've also got people who will call you a bigot and a nazi for not referring to a non-binary person as "they". how will it all go, i wonder?
She didn't say it hadn't gone anywhere else, she explicitly said it moved from America FIRST to those places most like America (UK, Canada, Aus). And she is correct. It has unfortunately been vigorously exported further afield in recent years as well.
I should perhaps say that I first saw this bubbling up into the mainstream in approx 1998 in the US. Butler was all the rage when I was at Uni in early 90s. Research into planning documents of societies of transvestic fetishists show discussions on how to mainstream acceptance back then (and before) as well. Lesbian feminists started ringing the alarm about elements central to the ideology we see today in the late 70s. It's been a long march over the globe. Went slowly, then all at once.
Simone De Beauvoir is much maligned. She wasn’t arguing that woman is an idea or that both sexes can be female. What she was arguing is that women are shaped by the societal demands (as are men) and that women are severely limited to specific narrow roles because of their biology. This is about as contrary to nihilistic gender theory as you can get. De Beauvoir was arguing for women’s rights not that women are a stereotype. Her themes were taken up by radical second wave feminists to push forward the rights of women qua women to not be limited by their biology and the patriarchy. It’s an intellectual insult to take De Beauvoir to be the root of this toxic cult. It leads to true feminists being blamed for this idiotic cult. Whereas the reality is the opposite, for example a brief perusal of Sheila Jeffreys’ radical work. She was highlighting the dangers of men’s fetishistic and pornographic demands on women decades ago. Judith Butler is making a good living out of this dangerous ideology. The joke is that, judging her appearance, she is clearly joking at our expense.
Remarkable conversation, though I find it deeply amusing for a religious person to be taking other religious people to task for their reifying things that aren’t real. If there is a soul (we have no evidence there is), why isn’t it male or female & why can’t it be connected to an incorrectly sexed body?
Yes, I had similar thoughts. The religious speaker is trying to convince me gender separate from sex is not based in reality but Christian religious beliefs definitely are, even through there is no evidence (other than a feeling). The kettle and pot comes to mind.
@@gizmo5601 well, i think their response to you would be that God does not make mistakes ... we do. However i do not subscribe to mainstream christianity so i could be wrong. It is ridiculous in any case to say a man can be a woman or a woman a man. Masculinity and femininity are the only social constructs.
I find it deeply amusing that you find that deeply amusing, then talk about 'the soul' in a way that indicates you haven't the fainted familiarity with the classical meaning of the term. FYI, it's not originally and has never been exclusively a religious term. If you had any familiarity with the classical literature on the subject, you'd realize that saying "we have no evidence there is a soul" is like saying "we have no evidence there is life."
Religious freedom in the US has always been highly contested whatever is enshrined in our Constitution. One group claimed their religious freedom, but condemned the religious beliefs of another and their claim to religious freedom. That was true in the past and is true today. Look at the contested belief system and the ever fracturing of Protestant sects in the US. And some of the most reactionary ideas about women and their place in the world are coming out of the union of the patriarchal religions today. So Abigail has great faith but doesn't seem to understand the history of her own religion.
Sadly the US remains hypocritical as it claims to allow religious freedom but of course what it actually means is that you must first agree to believe in a supernatural overlord of some sort, hence atheism is not tolerated, most especially in politicians and second, that one’s “God” has to be the one described in Christianity. Anyone who believes in Alllah, or Buddhism or any of the 3000+ other religions practised by humans is unacceptable. Thus religious freedom in the US no more exists than their delusion that they are a democracy founded on the principles of law and Justice.
Why do you have to give religion an outing on a discussion like this? It’s as irrational as gender theory. It should be kept private. I’m amazed Helen was prepared to lend herself to such a session
50:00 whaaaat. Having no idea this talk was put on by a Catholic organisation, I was just a bit caught off-guard. 35:05 is troubling to me. Do Catholics in this day and age still forbid homosexuality? The rest of the talk has been superb, but I must say given how frequently feminists are savaged by trans activists for being supposedly anti-LGBT, the view that religion is the way out of gender ideology sets my teeth on edge.
It's not religion It's self as a single path, but the deep ocean of humanist philosophy that has been preserved and further explored by the Catholic faith. E.g. Natural Law, the firm reality of observed nature. That the body and mind (and soul) are integrally dependent.
It depends on what we mean by "forbid homosexuality." The Catholic Church would not reject homosexuality as a state of being - after all, doing so would be rejecting a person deserving the same respect and dignity as that of any other human. The Catholic Church would point out that we all have the opportunity to act well, neutrally, poorly, etc. In fact just this morning I lost patience with my daughter in getting ready for school! We're all striving toward greater kindness, charity, the regard for and love of others. And every last person is welcome to strive alongside us!
I think it’s important for people from different religious backgrounds to come together and discuss these issues. They want us fighting each other while they push laws that most people don’t want
@@MaraJadeTX and yet shares the esoteric claim of some kind of “soul” with the very ideology being dismantled here. That other religious people don’t see this & pause for thought, always amuses me.
@@mumtrader Christian understanding of the soul is the opposite of trans ideology. Did you miss the phrase **integrally dependent**? The body, mind, and soul within a human person are integrated and interdependent. The body is the mind is the soul. This also follows in a scientific, biological, objective reality perspective. The cells and hormones and their development effect the *whole* person, physical, mental, emotional, which is why the hormone rush of natural puberty has a chance healing gender dysphoria that ranges from 67-90%. The trans cult thinks that the body and mind can be mismatched. That humans are meat legos. That the mind is completely separate from and different from all the rest of the body. Ie. the lie of "female brain" trapped in a male body. It's nonsense. Life ruining, dangerous idiocy that has no coherence or cohesiveness in science, medicine or philosophy.
I do not agree with Abigail about the place of the body in Catholic Christian theology. In the early church the body was condemned as a source of corruption, of evil. And the source of that corruption and evil is the female body due to the belief in Eve as the destroyer of Eden and responsible for the fall of "man." It is odd that she cannot see that. This dualism existed in the ancient pagan world and in the religion of the Jews. It was carried over into Christian theology and exists to this day in all the Abrahamic religions which assert the autonomy of males and condemn women to the Other. Yes, some recent popes have written about the importance of women, while doing nothing to change the basic anti-woman theology of the Church. In the Middle Ages the cult of the Virgin Mary was a response to their dualism but it did not liberate women from the role she was consigned by religion because Mary was made into an entity that could not be emulated by actual human women. The Catholic Church has a long history regarding the hatred for the body, or indeed even the idea that one should clean the body. These contradictions are not understand by believers who persist in their belief in something about which we have no proof. Abigail has much more to say about the identity crisis that makes sense, however.
St. Catherine Siena, St. Claire of Assisi. St. Zelie, St. Theresa of Avila. St. Therese Liseaux, Hildegard of Bigen. Writings of the Popes, to my knowledge, in 1930s talked about women as equals and likely much earlier. The Catholic Church absolutely valued women in the past and values us in current times much more highly than most protestant sects. The Catholic Church recognizes in the single life and religious vocations that women have value in themselves and not only as wives and mothers. Judging/comparing the Church to contemporaries in the same decades and centuries shows that the Church treatment of women was revolutionary.
People who believe will find sophisticated ways to hang on to their faith and to reconcile passages in their books with their own morality. Whatever resources they can find in their faith to help young people navigate this new ideology without doing what they’ve done, and do, to people who are homosexual in orientation is a good thing no?
Well said. My mother was raised catholic and was indoctrinated with incredible shame and loathing of natural bodily functions. The the speaker claimed Catholicism teaches that bodies are good (forgive me I can’t recall her exact words) I nearly spit out my coffee! Catholicism is rubbish, particularly when it comes to issues of sex.
"It is odd that she cannot see that." What's odd is that you can't see that she obviously knows a lot more about it than you do. And yet you peremptorily dismiss her far better informed view on the matter! Odd. I guess ignorant prejudices are hard to overcome.
The interesting conversation where Christianity was brought into this conversation ... although I am a Christian... I think it's an incredible idea that a person can believe in an imaginary God, at the same time claim they know "facts" of what a person is or should be! Equally being constant with my God believes therefore I do - Hellen was like there is no God just as there is a fundamental truth of what a body is or should be... which if she does not believe in a creator who has a design how can she possibly claim the "truth" of someone's body? That is an argument apologist use against atheist how can there be moral "rights" if it doesn't come from a higher authority?
The truth Helen refers to is biology. It isn't an ideology, an idea. It's reality. We are created in physical bodies governed by the laws of nature. There is no "gender identity".
They are both social constructs and they both have discernible and demonstrable facts about them. No one is saying there is no such thing as reality. This is terribly deceptive. She is denying reality and how we know it. She is an epistemic infant.
How about doing this video with a selection of psychologists and and endocrinologists? These women sound intelligent, on the surface, but are making assumptions that they are not qualified to make.
Both of those professions have been ideologically captured. Please look up Dr William Monroe’s interview on the pod “Gender a wider lens” here on youtube, very eye-opening. It’s episode 5 “Hormonal Interventions” Another vital interview on the capture of the psychology profession & the impact of so-called “conversion therapy” bans would be Helen Joyce’s recent interview with Stephanie Winn on “You must be some kind of therapist” podcast here on yt also.
So, in your world, only experts can have discussions and opinions? Wouldn't that rule you out, though? To coin a phrase from Richard Dawkins there are many "intelligent laypersons" around who are perfectly capable of understanding quite complex issues without formal training.
Hi. Can you explain in what way? I hear the term 'transphobic' thrown around to such varying degrees as to suggest the threshold for such an accusation as being tremendously low. Not looking for confrontation, just clarification if you can over some. Cheers
So much easier to just shout 'transphobic.....hateful....bigot....TERF' than to present a logical, science-based argument for your position. Happy to listen if you have one....
I love how Helen can make complicated topics so clear. The way she worded it about intersex syndromes happening to either male or female people makes it much easier to understand.
There's two sexes. Not three, four, in between or beyond.
I have spent the better part of the last three years studying and writing about this matter. I have heard both of these women before (and read Helen's book). I feel like I have just listened to the best of the best of all I have read and watched. This was a tour de force synthesis of (almost) all the concerns about trans ideology presented with wit, wisdom, and humility - a gentle introduction to what is actually quiet distressing and has some very dark elements to it. The last statements by both Abigail as a Catholic and Helen as an atheist were _so_ moving. I am very grateful to all involved in presenting this discussion and for Abigail and Helen engaging each other so beautifully. Well done.
Abigail expressed a wonderful Catholic view. Helen is the voice of logic and sense. How marvelous this was. Thank you!
The last two contributions of both Helen and Abigail made me cry. So touching, yet so true
I was a tomboy in the late 50s. I loved playing with toy cars instead of dolls and I never wanted to wear a dress. I still don’t. I’m afraid that if I were a tomboy in the 90s and had gender affirming parents and teachers and doctors I may well have been pushed into transitioning. Thank God I grew up in the 50s and 60s. My parents just let me play and grow out of it.
Wonderful discussion. Both of these women are great and deserve far more exposure.
What Helen says about this being a language based movement is spot on. One of the most common responses I see to "migendering" is that it apparently eraases someone entire identity. How ridiculous that you could erase someone by merely using a word like he or she
Yes, who has that power over anyone?
It's a very fragile identity that can be erased by someone else's opinion
When Mao and the Chinese Communist Party won power in 1949, their most precise instrument of ideological transformation was a massive program of linguistic engineering.
They taught everyone a new political vocabulary, gave old words new meanings, converted traditional terms to revolutionary purposes, suppressed words that expressed “incorrect” thought, and required the whole population to recite slogans, stock phrases, and scripts that gave “correct” linguistic form to “correct” thought.
If you build a belief on a lie, then truth hurts.
These extremely informed women are describing what amounts to a modern magic. Moderns often are not traditional religious people. And so who beliefs they acquire have no parameters to understand what is real or not.
The activism around this issue needs to stop if only for those with genuine biological intersex as well as dysphoria issues. My sympathies are with them and they do need help.
I found out a few years ago I was autistic. If I had been an undiagnosed child now I would have been set on that route and I would have incredible regrets about it.
As well as being emotionally vulnerable autistic people tend to have comorbid medical problems which I am sure would cause complications in the medicalised trans process, along with the complications that happen with the process as it is
It amazes me that people are so blinkered on this issue that they can't see to the safety of vulnerable children
This is a particularly enlightening discussion. We shall recommend this video.
Help for parents?
Yes you're A game needed.
Don't forget to get loving support for yourselves when you feel as if your game is slipping....it can be wearying on parents to hold an open hand and a firm resistance to invasive ideologies
I disagree with Helen that this idea hasn't gone anywhere aside from America and places which are culturally close. I know many people in African countries identifying as non binary and people have discussions about these issue. The main difference is that it hasn't gotten into our public nationwide politics and our governments aren't discussing it. It's mostly youths with internet access discussing it
same. i live in an eastern european country and though gender ideology is nowhere near being mainstream, local lgbt+ activists are very much on board with it. personally i have had a period of identifying as various brands of trans for a number of years, and for me it didn't start with tumblr etc. it was the influence of some of the local communities that have embraced ~queer~ culture that first led me to identify as trans. so it definitely isn't just america + culturally similar countries, and i'm very curious as to how these ideas will play out in places that are very very different. where i live, real sexism and homophobia are still very obviously present and it's going to be a challenge in and of itself to tackle those, but now we've also got people who will call you a bigot and a nazi for not referring to a non-binary person as "they". how will it all go, i wonder?
She didn't say it hadn't gone anywhere else, she explicitly said it moved from America FIRST to those places most like America (UK, Canada, Aus). And she is correct. It has unfortunately been vigorously exported further afield in recent years as well.
I should perhaps say that I first saw this bubbling up into the mainstream in approx 1998 in the US.
Butler was all the rage when I was at Uni in early 90s. Research into planning documents of societies of transvestic fetishists show discussions on how to mainstream acceptance back then (and before) as well. Lesbian feminists started ringing the alarm about elements central to the ideology we see today in the late 70s.
It's been a long march over the globe. Went slowly, then all at once.
Christian or not Christian, regarding the gender morass, they are both talking reality-science-biology-based sense.
Great discussion. Thanks.
Great discussion.
A profound discussion somewhat diluted by Abigail's opportunistic religious jabber.
Ironically she talks about humans seeking the truth.
Simone De Beauvoir is much maligned. She wasn’t arguing that woman is an idea or that both sexes can be female. What she was arguing is that women are shaped by the societal demands (as are men) and that women are severely limited to specific narrow roles because of their biology. This is about as contrary to nihilistic gender theory as you can get. De Beauvoir was arguing for women’s rights not that women are a stereotype. Her themes were taken up by radical second wave feminists to push forward the rights of women qua women to not be limited by their biology and the patriarchy. It’s an intellectual insult to take De Beauvoir to be the root of this toxic cult. It leads to true feminists being blamed for this idiotic cult. Whereas the reality is the opposite, for example a brief perusal of Sheila Jeffreys’ radical work. She was highlighting the dangers of men’s fetishistic and pornographic demands on women decades ago. Judith Butler is making a good living out of this dangerous ideology. The joke is that, judging her appearance, she is clearly joking at our expense.
Is she trans?
It is interesting that Abigail is Catholic convert and Joyce was raised in the faith. Both have access to a very different vision.
The idea of having Catholic priests counsel pre pubescent boys about their sexuality made me cringe a little.
Remarkable conversation, though I find it deeply amusing for a religious person to be taking other religious people to task for their reifying things that aren’t real. If there is a soul (we have no evidence there is), why isn’t it male or female & why can’t it be connected to an incorrectly sexed body?
Yes, I had similar thoughts. The religious speaker is trying to convince me gender separate from sex is not based in reality but Christian religious beliefs definitely are, even through there is no evidence (other than a feeling). The kettle and pot comes to mind.
@@gizmo5601 well, i think their response to you would be that God does not make mistakes ... we do. However i do not subscribe to mainstream christianity so i could be wrong. It is ridiculous in any case to say a man can be a woman or a woman a man. Masculinity and femininity are the only social constructs.
I find it deeply amusing that you find that deeply amusing, then talk about 'the soul' in a way that indicates you haven't the fainted familiarity with the classical meaning of the term. FYI, it's not originally and has never been exclusively a religious term. If you had any familiarity with the classical literature on the subject, you'd realize that saying "we have no evidence there is a soul" is like saying "we have no evidence there is life."
@@davidmcpike8359 Oh if you say so sir.
@@mumtrader Well it's true. That's the only reason I said so.
This is why we need health care that is not for profit.
We wouldn't have any health care then because doctors and hospitals want to make money.
Religious freedom in the US has always been highly contested whatever is enshrined in our Constitution. One group claimed their religious freedom, but condemned the religious beliefs of another and their claim to religious freedom. That was true in the past and is true today. Look at the contested belief system and the ever fracturing of Protestant sects in the US. And some of the most reactionary ideas about women and their place in the world are coming out of the union of the patriarchal religions today. So Abigail has great faith but doesn't seem to understand the history of her own religion.
Sadly the US remains hypocritical as it claims to allow religious freedom but of course what it actually means is that you must first agree to believe in a supernatural overlord of some sort, hence atheism is not tolerated, most especially in politicians and second, that one’s “God” has to be the one described in Christianity. Anyone who believes in Alllah, or Buddhism or any of the 3000+ other religions practised by humans is unacceptable. Thus religious freedom in the US no more exists than their delusion that they are a democracy founded on the principles of law and Justice.
Why do you have to give religion an outing on a discussion like this? It’s as irrational as gender theory. It should be kept private. I’m amazed Helen was prepared to lend herself to such a session
50:00 whaaaat.
Having no idea this talk was put on by a Catholic organisation, I was just a bit caught off-guard. 35:05 is troubling to me. Do Catholics in this day and age still forbid homosexuality?
The rest of the talk has been superb, but I must say given how frequently feminists are savaged by trans activists for being supposedly anti-LGBT, the view that religion is the way out of gender ideology sets my teeth on edge.
It's not religion It's self as a single path, but the deep ocean of humanist philosophy that has been preserved and further explored by the Catholic faith. E.g. Natural Law, the firm reality of observed nature. That the body and mind (and soul) are integrally dependent.
It depends on what we mean by "forbid homosexuality." The Catholic Church would not reject homosexuality as a state of being - after all, doing so would be rejecting a person deserving the same respect and dignity as that of any other human. The Catholic Church would point out that we all have the opportunity to act well, neutrally, poorly, etc. In fact just this morning I lost patience with my daughter in getting ready for school! We're all striving toward greater kindness, charity, the regard for and love of others. And every last person is welcome to strive alongside us!
I think it’s important for people from different religious backgrounds to come together and discuss these issues. They want us fighting each other while they push laws that most people don’t want
@@MaraJadeTX and yet shares the esoteric claim of some kind of “soul” with the very ideology being dismantled here. That other religious people don’t see this & pause for thought, always amuses me.
@@mumtrader Christian understanding of the soul is the opposite of trans ideology. Did you miss the phrase **integrally dependent**?
The body, mind, and soul within a human person are integrated and interdependent. The body is the mind is the soul.
This also follows in a scientific, biological, objective reality perspective. The cells and hormones and their development effect the *whole* person, physical, mental, emotional, which is why the hormone rush of natural puberty has a chance healing gender dysphoria that ranges from 67-90%.
The trans cult thinks that the body and mind can be mismatched. That humans are meat legos. That the mind is completely separate from and different from all the rest of the body. Ie. the lie of "female brain" trapped in a male body. It's nonsense. Life ruining, dangerous idiocy that has no coherence or cohesiveness in science, medicine or philosophy.
I do not agree with Abigail about the place of the body in Catholic Christian theology. In the early church the body was condemned as a source of corruption, of evil. And the source of that corruption and evil is the female body due to the belief in Eve as the destroyer of Eden and responsible for the fall of "man." It is odd that she cannot see that. This dualism existed in the ancient pagan world and in the religion of the Jews. It was carried over into Christian theology and exists to this day in all the Abrahamic religions which assert the autonomy of males and condemn women to the Other. Yes, some recent popes have written about the importance of women, while doing nothing to change the basic anti-woman theology of the Church. In the Middle Ages the cult of the Virgin Mary was a response to their dualism but it did not liberate women from the role she was consigned by religion because Mary was made into an entity that could not be emulated by actual human women. The Catholic Church has a long history regarding the hatred for the body, or indeed even the idea that one should clean the body. These contradictions are not understand by believers who persist in their belief in something about which we have no proof. Abigail has much more to say about the identity crisis that makes sense, however.
She’s Catholic not Protestant, Protestants used to believe what you are talking about, Catholics called that a heresy.
St. Catherine Siena, St. Claire of Assisi. St. Zelie, St. Theresa of Avila. St. Therese Liseaux, Hildegard of Bigen.
Writings of the Popes, to my knowledge, in 1930s talked about women as equals and likely much earlier. The Catholic Church absolutely valued women in the past and values us in current times much more highly than most protestant sects. The Catholic Church recognizes in the single life and religious vocations that women have value in themselves and not only as wives and mothers.
Judging/comparing the Church to contemporaries in the same decades and centuries shows that the Church treatment of women was revolutionary.
People who believe will find sophisticated ways to hang on to their faith and to reconcile passages in their books with their own morality. Whatever resources they can find in their faith to help young people navigate this new ideology without doing what they’ve done, and do, to people who are homosexual in orientation is a good thing no?
Well said. My mother was raised catholic and was indoctrinated with incredible shame and loathing of natural bodily functions. The the speaker claimed Catholicism teaches that bodies are good (forgive me I can’t recall her exact words) I nearly spit out my coffee! Catholicism is rubbish, particularly when it comes to issues of sex.
"It is odd that she cannot see that." What's odd is that you can't see that she obviously knows a lot more about it than you do. And yet you peremptorily dismiss her far better informed view on the matter! Odd. I guess ignorant prejudices are hard to overcome.
The interesting conversation where Christianity was brought into this conversation ... although I am a Christian... I think it's an incredible idea that a person can believe in an imaginary God, at the same time claim they know "facts" of what a person is or should be! Equally being constant with my God believes therefore I do - Hellen was like there is no God just as there is a fundamental truth of what a body is or should be... which if she does not believe in a creator who has a design how can she possibly claim the "truth" of someone's body? That is an argument apologist use against atheist how can there be moral "rights" if it doesn't come from a higher authority?
The truth Helen refers to is biology. It isn't an ideology, an idea. It's reality. We are created in physical bodies governed by the laws of nature. There is no "gender identity".
𝕡𝕣𝕠𝕞𝕠𝕤𝕞
I’m so tired of people who misrepresent because they are lying or haven’t done the research.
Gender was never "rooted in the body", it was coined to refer to something not limited to physical features.
By John Money
They are both social constructs and they both have discernible and demonstrable facts about them. No one is saying there is no such thing as reality. This is terribly deceptive. She is denying reality and how we know it. She is an epistemic infant.
Who is this she you're referring to?
How about doing this video with a selection of psychologists and and endocrinologists?
These women sound intelligent, on the surface, but are making assumptions that they are not qualified to make.
What assumptions exactly?
Both of those professions have been ideologically captured. Please look up Dr William Monroe’s interview on the pod “Gender a wider lens” here on youtube, very eye-opening. It’s episode 5 “Hormonal Interventions”
Another vital interview on the capture of the psychology profession & the impact of so-called “conversion therapy” bans would be Helen Joyce’s recent interview with Stephanie Winn on “You must be some kind of therapist” podcast here on yt also.
You seem to have missed the epidode about reality.
So, in your world, only experts can have discussions and opinions? Wouldn't that rule you out, though? To coin a phrase from Richard Dawkins there are many "intelligent laypersons" around who are perfectly capable of understanding quite complex issues without formal training.
@@mj6901One year on and still no answer...
Money was not even close to being the first to talk about Gender. You’re also lying about Butler. This is Gross
Textbook examples of Transphobic.
Hi. Can you explain in what way? I hear the term 'transphobic' thrown around to such varying degrees as to suggest the threshold for such an accusation as being tremendously low. Not looking for confrontation, just clarification if you can over some.
Cheers
Textbook “sjw disengage brain” response
So much easier to just shout 'transphobic.....hateful....bigot....TERF' than to present a logical, science-based argument for your position. Happy to listen if you have one....
That word is meaningless so who cares
Way to support that current thing