From my observation, a lot of the worry centers around: 1a) Children and adolescents making life-altering decisions about hormone therapy and major surgeries-say, to sterilize themselves before they have reached sexual maturity, or without fully understanding what kind of life-long choice they're making. The book argues that regret is infrequent, but the voices of detransitioners are loud and growing (though from what I understand the trans community is loath to show them any support). Their experiences with gender-affirming care are also worth hearing and reckoning with, aren't they? (I noticed that the word "detransition" was not used in the book, which I found an odd omission.) What is the author's position on access of minors to life-altering medical intervention? (Assuming we agree that legal protection for minors (tattoos, etc.) is a good feature of our society.) 1b) Connected to this is the fact of adolescents being forcibly removed from their parents by the state if the parent raises objections to the gender-affirming intervention. Does the author ratify the state's role to confiscate children from parents in such a case? (I don't think one can understand the fear that gender ideology wants to break apart the family unless one faces cases like this head-on.) 2) Rights regarding women's gyms and sports, for the biological facts of difference in size, strength, endurance, bone-density, etc., to be honored in terms of bathroom privacy, playfield safety, and fair competition. Of course there is great natural variance of physique and aptitude among bodies, but Title IX laws acknowledge the physical differences between men and women for a reason. Does the author believe that trans women should participate in women's sport? With some level of hormone therapy that modifies testosterone levels, or also without any medical transitioning? This issue is also one that will increasingly galvanize the 'common folk', as they see their daughter's opportunities taken by trans women. I submit these questions as a cultural observer. The speaker's cause would be much helped along if they took these specific worries more seriously.
@tmlavenz as far as I'm aware, the answers to your questions are: 1a) Butler fully supports unrestricted and unconditional access by minors to full medical transition at all ages. As soon as a child is able to articulate a desire to transition, they should be able to do so, regardless of parental objections. 1b) any and all parental objections should be met with the fullest criminal punishment the state can impose, and removal from the home should be one of the first, if not the first, response to parental objections. Butler does not believe in parental rights over children at all. 2) Butler believes that trans women are fully women, and must immediately be given full access to all women's facilities, institutions, and events, especially women's bathroms and sports, from the moment they begin the transition process.
Exactly. I had a childhood so bad it gave me PTSD. For real; diagnosed. But I try my best to feel *relief and joy* when I hear other people talk about having grown up with great childhoods. One like mine *should* be abnormal and rare. Even if I never know what that feels like, I can be happy for those other people. Instead of being so self-centered and bitter that I make myself believe they're lying and that all parents are bad.
@@AlexReynard "Exactly. I had a childhood so bad it gave me PTSD. " You have the right attitude. There's a "stigma" (shame) about needing psychotherapy which is affecting gender-confused people. They are rejecting it in favour of their religion.
@@viejolincanada Exactly; don't help me accept who I was truly born as. No, transform my body by removing totally healthy reproductive organs, change my name and metaphorically KILL my old male/female version of my self ie "Dead-Naming". Its absurd. Does this not sound like some kind of barbaric ritual you would find in an extant pre-agricultural tribe in fucking South America like 500 years ago!?
"A new long-term study from Germany suggests that the majority of young people diagnosed with gender identity disorders do not continue to identify as such over time. The study examined insurance data over five years, revealing that more than half of young people aged 5-24 across every age subgroup diagnosed with "gender identity disorder" no longer had the diagnosis after five years. Specifically, the desistance rate was 72.7% in 15- to 19-year-old females and 50.3% in 20- to 24-year-old males. Among the whole group of 5- to 24-year-olds, only about 36.4% of those diagnosed in 2017 still had the diagnosis five years later, indicating that more than 63% desisted. One of the strengths of this study is its comprehensive collection of outpatient billing data for all legally insured persons in Germany, providing a large and representative sample. Additionally, the long observation period from 2013 to 2022 offers valuable insights into long-term trends and changes in diagnosis rates."
So after receiving care most identify that they do not in fact need to transition, whereas those whose symptoms persist do transition. What exactly are you identifying as wrong here? This sounds like medical care working as intended.
@@ambientjohnny Trans identity as immutable is not a position taken by most queer theorists. (I’m guessing you’ve read nothing so we’ll not pursue that). But even if this was the case, we could assume that after sufficient care, those who desisted likely discovered they weren’t in fact trans. Nothing about this is related to an unchanging identity.
@@dominic9983 Assuming I've read nothing. Hahahaha. I've read everything I've been able to access over at least 5 years buddy and have had literally hundreds of conversations with "trans" people. Willing to bet I have more experience actually talking to people than you do. The overwhelming majority of people on the "trans" side are adamant about it not being a choice, and that any sort of therapy is cruel and akin to "conversion therapy", completely rejecting that it has anything to do with mental health. How could anyone discover they aren't really "trans" if it is innate from birth like the majority claim? Are you out there pushing back against all the insane rejection of exploratory therapy which is rampant among the "trans" demographic?
@@dominic9983 What exactly do you say about the proposition that detransitioners give the lie to the assertion that persistence to transition is evidence that medical "care" is working? Plainly it cannot be relied upon. However, when it is intended to make money by "affirming" someone's delusion then yes, as part of the growing trans industry, it is working on that score.
Fascinating, but Ivory Tower at it's finest. Try to form a manifesto, a party, and build a society on the idea of disidentification. We need a flag, a word with a distinct meaning, and a set of binary rules for that to work. But, you can try it. Good luck.
While Butler and Halberson work hard to disassociate themselves from sex they look so uncomfortable as they twist around trying to do it. They really seem to be putting an anchor around unattractive women everywhere. BiG QUESTION: what is their "sexuality"? I dont care about their identity - identity is what you do. But they are drawn to what sexually? Oh, yes: women. Not feminine or necessarily masculine women JUST ANY woman that isn't a biological man. These two are so blantly "performative" in their effort to demonstrate their non-comforming, and I mean performative in the way the word is defined NOT as the deep thinker Butler spins it, these two would submit to a trans-woman if for no other reason than to prove the purity of their theory and being. This is after all just how commited to the cause of gender based feminism that they are.
No, it's actually encouraging given the the extent to which transgenderism is undermining the sex-based rights and interests of women, gay people, children, parents, desisters and people with disabilities. Try engaging with the other side and you might learn something.
Listening to it talk about sex assignment is stomach turning. I guess biology escapes Butler. If there is confusion (because of Intersex) sort it out. Male and female is pretty straightforward. We can even figure it out before birth and someone CONFIRMS sex at birth.
Not really. It actually evinces a surprisingly level of literateness in this discourse and contests Butler in robust ways she doesn't seem capable of contending with. At least, her book doesn't.
If you are interested in trans, no matter what side, YT proposes videos about trans, no matter from what side. The other way around it works also, I often leave comments to anti-trans videos.
@@miriamlana833Do people like, search up their name and watch these videos though? That's kind of crazy that a philosophy person has this much press that people do that and comment on videos with a few thousand views.
Transphobe is a slur used to deride someone who states what science shows us and that is that sex is real, binary and not on any kind of continuum or spectrum. The slur is also used to shut down any rational discussion by someone stating that the confected use of non-grammatical pronouns should not be forced on anyone - as it is and people have been fired from their jobs for not kowtowing to the idiocy. @horleckshelmos8472 try reading some Judith Butler - phantasmatic!
When I attempt to post on here with science based rebuttals of the preference that trans is - and it is nothing more - my comments are not allowed. Phantasmatic.
I don't understand why it is so difficult to accept that males and females can behave in all sorts of ways and have all sorts of characteristics. But that doesn't mean your sex is just a guess or a social construct.
World is easier to cope with, if you just use box everything into categories. Boxes which allow no variance. Then fit yourself in one of those boxes and life is so simple. Not in my boxes? Enemy. In my boxes? A friend. Imagine having to consider every person you meet as an variable and complex human being? Horrible waste of energy (Brain chemistry, no joke). Okay a joke: To reduce emissions, the Green party has banned treating people as individuals.
It really seems like pseudo intellectual babble - the social sciences don’t have the same stringent requirements as the natural sciences - instead they can point to each other as evidence “this person is smart and writes in an intellectual way - therefore it is correct”
Because: a) Queer is a political stance; b) in defiance of all that is normal. It was created to oppose normativity, which (no joke) is a codeword for Capitalism. The aim of Queer is to destabilize the nuclear family by attacking gender, so that the nuclear family no longer remains as the means of production for the Capitalist order; i.e. to end that which reproduces children who are raised to form Capitalist families, and so on. The final end goal is getting rid of Capitalism through violent Revolution and replacing it with Equity (Marxism). That's what this is all about. All the marbles.
A review of Butler's work by Abigail Favale: "Any reader with passing knowledge of the perspectives Butler disputes will recognize her accounts as caricatures. Admittedly, I am not the reader she has in mind. In fact, her book seems to preclude the possibility that someone like me could exist: a Catholic feminist well versed in gender and trans theory who has engaged thoughtfully with those ideas and has some good-faith objections. Her ideal reader is someone who is primed to accept her sweeping statements without checking the footnotes, whose anxieties will be stoked by her hyperbolic portrayal....Her opening jab at Pope Francis, for example, cites not a magisterial text, or even one of his infamous airplane interviews, but a clickbait piece from The Daily Beast. Even when she engages with scholarly, peer-reviewed content, she retains a narrow field of vision. Her primary references exemplifying the Catholic perspective, for example, are articles with title phrases like “the Vatican’s anathematization of gender” and “the Vatican’s War on ‘gender ideology’”-fair-minded accounts of the Catholic viewpoint, I’m sure....On one of the rare occasions when Butler cites a primary source from outside the echo chamber, she blatantly misrepresents what the source actually states." www.firstthings.com/article/2024/08/judith-butlers-sophistry
Quote from the desc: "Now, in Who’s Afraid of Gender? (2024), Butler returns to the topic that made their name, to illuminate how “anti-gender ideology movements” have become central to reactionary politics and rising authoritarianism worldwide." In other words, gender ideology movements have become the goad in Capitalist society's vitals that provokes the reaction that tends towards authoritarian fortification. Folks, this is the desired development: causing authoritarianism to rise up, and finally the rebel response. Once Capitalism is gone, Equity (Marxism) would be ushered in. There is no private property in Equity. None. Land, intellectual, biological, children, individual rights, NONE.
@Acebell72 "Debunked" is doing some heavy lifting there, sparky. A number of studies were rejected for being of Low or Very Low quality. That means that the studies were badly designed, had no controls, lost too many subjects to follow-up etc. Using these poor studies to determine how to treat disturbed children is the opposite of medicine and the opposite of caring for those children.
@@XKenny77in fact they aren't low low quality, they're just not the abstract gold standard. As many peer reviewed analyses have pointed out, the reason there aren't any "gold standard" studies is because they would be UNETHICAL to perform. Double blind studies, the "gold standard," are not applicable in every circumstance. In a double blind, one group gets the meds and one group doesn't. The reason this is unethical is because of the high rates of unalive ideation and attempts in the people being studied. In one attempt at a double blind, the gender non-conforming youth in the control group getting the placebo figured it out because their puberty blockers weren't blocking their puberty and left the study. It is well known that a large set of smaller or not quite good standard studies can produce gold results in the aggregate. Not that I expect this, or anything, to convince you.
Explain what specific standards “trans” people are measuring themselves against to determine that there is a "mismatch" - THEY are the ones with a regressively sexist idea of what it means to be a boy/girl or man/woman and that is the issue causing all the problems - their own misunderstanding and severely limited perspective/sexist misunderstanding of what sexist stereotypes/"gender norms" actually entail - they are not rules, they are not real boundaries, they are regressive ideas and generalisations - no one needs to live up to any such nonsense or feel comfortable with those stereotypes to be a boy/girl/man/woman - all those terms represent, and all they should represent, is sex and stage of maturity - by creating this whole "gender identity" nonsense they create an unnecessary distorted framework which needlessly causes distress. Again, since you apparently understand this issue through and through; how are males or females "supposed to" think or feel, want to dress like or act? You must be able to provide specific standards for each sex for what you are contending to make any sense whatsoever. If there is no correct way of being male or female, then how can there be a "mismatch" between what they are and how they feel?
They are unhappy with some facet of their existence... Then, are told that if they were the other sex, their problems would disappear. Well, we all know thats a crock, but to them, the silver bullet solution is attractive. They can demand to be celebrated for their insanity, or else you are evil...
Also, how can you know what it feels like to be a man if your concept of man is so theoretical that anyone can claim to be a man? How do female trans activists first say that a man is anyone who says they are a man regardless of their anatomy and then turn around and say "I require surgery to live authentically as a man"? If man is just this academic concept that doesn't refer back to anything concrete in the material world, how do women know they want to be men?
I don't believe in gender ideology and am uncomfortable with too much identity politics, but I am still a leftist. I find Judith Butler's description of the left alienating. I can't find common ground with irrational extremists like her, but I am still not a moderate. She has strange fantasies about who her detractors are. She is not in reality.
That's the black and white perspective you get in extremity, in an over-reliance on the left-hemisphere perspective which cannot see things in context. What the modern "left" is sadly unaware of, is enantiodromia, that when you take a position to a far enough extreme, it becomes like its opposite, becomes like the thing it started off as an opposite to. So the "progressive left" has become authoritarian.
@@surlypiratewench1969 Thanks ! it's always a pleasure to disagree with self righteous silly people.Oh, and it doesn't hurt at all. Do you have tattoos, piercings and blue hair ? You know, in order to show how open minded you are... Ha ha ha...
No one can be "born in the wrong body", our brains ARE our body just as much as any other part of it. We are the sex we are, regardless of what our personal relationship is with the sexist stereotypes in society. "Trans" ideology, is regressive and sexist, as there is no "correct way" of being a boy or girl, man or woman, all those terms do is indicate sex and stage of maturity - decoupling sex and gender and trying to make gender into this ludicrous concoction of personality and sexist stereotypes is beyond regressive - it actively harms people who buy into it - the idea that there is something wrong with a kid's body that needs to be chemically altered because they believe living up to sexist stereotypes is some real measure of whether they are a boy or a girl (and man or woman for adults obviously), is insanity. I have asked hundreds of "activists" and "allies" to explain what they are, or what they perceive “trans” people are, measuring themselves against to determine that they have a need to transition - NOT ONE person has been able to articulate what that is - not one person is able to distance themselves sufficiently to realise that THEY are the ones with a regressively sexist idea of what it means to be a boy/girl or man/woman and that that is the issue causing all the problems - their own misunderstanding and severely limited perspective/sexist misunderstanding of what sexist stereotypes/"gender norms" actually entail - they are not rules, they are not real boundaries, they are regressive ideas and generalisations - no one needs to live up to any such utter nonsense or feel comfortable with those stereotypes to be a boy/girl/man/woman - all those terms represent, and all they should represent, is sex and stage of maturity - by creating this whole "gender identity" nonsense, THAT IS WHAT CAUSES ALL THE DISTRESS, THIS FABRICATION OF A FRAMEWORK WHICH DISTORTS REALITY. No one in the movement has been able to explain or articulate what this supposed "womanly essence" or "manly essence" is that they feel/know/need to transition in order to represent etc. actually is - yet you all actively believe in it and push for it to be accepted. Sometimes activists try to slither out of this fact, by claiming they don’t believe in any “essence”. This is pure semantics and sophistry, they will always fall back on claiming there is indeed “something” that can “make a male a woman” that they then can’t even define when pressed… How exactly that is nothing like an essence is anyone’s guess.
What a steaming pile of well articulated bullshit. Number one, you’re not talking to anyone transgender. Second you need to learn the difference between sex, identify and gender. Third please stfu about “ideology” it’s not. Let me give you some knowledge, that you’ll ignore. I have an adopted/bonus son who is transgender. I , with terror in my heart, let him start the talk therapy at 17. Two years later, he went on hormones. My husband and I lived in fear. You never want your child to suffer life in constant abuse. Three shots in and his change started to appear and it manifested itself as pure joy. He went from a very introverted unhappy person who had entertained suicide to a person confident and happy. I ask a lot of questions so of course I asked how he felt before-“ Mom my body felt stuck in the horror of puberty,all the time”. These people aren’t hurting anyone just leave them alone. My son is an artist and a gentle soul. He has the same right to live just as you.
@@surlypiratewench1969 You don't understand the meaning of the word "ideology". If you have a system of beliefs, that is an ideology. Are you trying to argue that "trans" advocates do not have differing beliefs and claims about reality? So what exactly is the disagreement about?. Try educating yourself before making a fool of yourself next time. I've been actively engaging with people on the "trans" side for over 5 years, the claim that I have no experience with "trans" people is pure nonsense. My understanding of their position, multiple positions since there are several different viewpoints, comes from direct engagement. You should have provided the kid the opportunity to go to exploratory therapy instead, or Jungian analysis, to actually delve into the root of their problems, instead of setting them up for a life of drug use and chemical castration in the long run. Brains do not stop developing until the age of 25, a 17-year old cannot possibly comprehend the long-term consequences of what they opted into, the level of emotional immaturity at that age... well, too bad you as parents couldn't be more mature yourselves, or have more understanding of human psychology and development. Puberty is a natural process each human goes through in order to fully develop, a child claiming it is a horror to go through puberty is completely lost and needed an actual emotionally mature and intellectually developed parent to guide them away from their harmful fixations and skewed understanding of biological processes, a role you sadly failed to provide. The fact that you think I somehow don't think your child "has the same right to live" as anyone else again shows how lost you are.
Explain what specific standards “trans” people are measuring themselves against to determine that there is a "mismatch" - THEY are the ones with a regressively sexist idea of what it means to be a boy/girl or man/woman and that is the issue causing all the problems - their own misunderstanding and severely limited perspective/sexist misunderstanding of what sexist stereotypes/"gender norms" actually entail - they are not rules, they are not real boundaries, they are regressive ideas and generalisations - no one needs to live up to any such nonsense or feel comfortable with those stereotypes to be a boy/girl/man/woman - all those terms represent, and all they should represent, is sex and stage of maturity - by creating this whole "gender identity" nonsense they create an unnecessary distorted framework which needlessly causes distress. Again, since you apparently understand this issue through and through; how are males or females "supposed to" think or feel, want to dress like or act? You must be able to provide specific standards for each sex for what you are contending to make any sense whatsoever. If there is no correct way of being male or female, then how can there be a "mismatch" between what they are and how they feel?
NO ONE shares some exact "experience" of being a man or a woman, that is why we define a woman as an adult FEMALE, they are all of the same sex, that is what defines them. "Man" or "woman" are not some moral judgement or evaluation of how masculine or feminine they feel or present, it's simply about having a term to describe any adult human male and any adult human female. This obsession that the "trans" community has with redefining the terms to reflect how they feel etc. is totally pointless. There are no people who truly feel 100% comfortable all of the time, the idea of labelling people "cis" or "trans" is completely unnecessary, there is no "cis" experience and there is no "trans" experience, people are individuals, and as a whole the community fails to come up with any coherent explanation to define their redefinition of "woman" because you cannot come up with a definition that caters to every possibility. That is why the terms "man" and "woman" being rooted in physical reality is the only thing that makes sense, if there are no clear parameters for a definition then it cannot function as a definition. If anyone can identify as a grablar, and the only definition of being a grablar, is feeling like identifying as one, then you haven't defined grablar as anything at all. This is why it is also an obsession with creating more and more boxes. The terms "man" and "woman" encompass every possible personality, within physical boundaries, any man or woman is free to act, think, look, behave however they want, that they as individuals are labelled as men or women is purely about the physical - saying a man is an adult human male, and a woman an adult human female does not restrict anyone's self-expression, not wanting to acknowledge one's physical reality is a fool's errand, the sex someone is doesn't change based on how anyone feels or dresses - so it is the "trans" side that 100% is creating this false narrative that acknowledging a person's sex is somehow restrictive, they are the side saying men or women behave like this or that. I mean if they weren't doing that, then they would agree that the umbrella terms based on sex, man and woman, were perfectly fine - but they don't! They say no no, if someone doesn't FEEL like the sex they are, they can't be it, though they cannot explain what "feeling cis" even really means, because NO ONE shares the exact same experiences emotionally. What "they" are trying to do is swap a definition that has a physical basis, for a definition that is entirely rooted in feelings and often in validating sexist stereotypes associated with either sex. This "woman is a social construct" thing IS the part that validates and perpetuates sexist stereotypes - woman isn't a social construct in that sense, it is a word society has chosen yes, but to describe a PHYSICAL state of being, not anyone's emotional states or where they fall on some spectrum of masculinity or femininity. There is a fundamental misunderstanding here of what the definition of man and woman means. The notion that people need to live up to sexist stereotypes of what "real men" or "real women" are, is complete fantasy. The fact that many people act as if sexist stereotypes were valid ways of measuring "real men" or real women" is a problem with the individual and their sexist bias, not with the terms themselves, as the terms themselves have none of the expectational baggage that people who internalise sexist stereotypes associate with them.
Wow; incredibly well written and well thought and 100% rooted in REALITY. Refreshing. I hope we will return to science based sanity in the next few years and will look back on this in absolute shame for letting the lunatics run the asylum.
What a out the experience of intersex people. What about people who do not fit the gendered binary? How can we talk about simple physical truths when sex itself in it's most physical conceptualization is not entirely binary? If it actually was the case as you've described, then on what grounds coulp physical attributes dictate societal expectations and social positions? Even if the question was as simple and one dimensional as you've described it still would not make a compelling case for such argument.
@@clarkbowler157 Why are you using the outdated by consensus (Chicago Consensus) and wildly misleading term "intersex" when the correct terminology is Disorders of Sexual Development? Everyone with a DSD is still either male or female just like everyone else, in fact many of the conditions are completely sex-specific, only ever affecting one particular sex. There are no "in-betweens", no one is "slightly more female" etc. Sex is not a spectrum, you just haven't "educated yourself" on the matter. 99% of people claiming to be "trans" do not have a DSD anyway, so it is completely IRRELEVANT to the discussion.
@@ambientjohnny "Disorders of sexual development". Here we can discuss the formulations of bodies and states of bodies. Can a certain morphology of body be disordered, how and influenced by what cultural factors would such a framing ensue? We have to think critically about the things we learn and the things we read. We have to ask ourselves about formulations and ways of formulating situations. So what you're saying is that the definitive sex characteristic is chromosomal? Or should we look at other indicators and explore the complexity of the situation we're trying to describe?
@@clarkbowler157 Do you actually believe, that the sex of every single human cannot be objectively verified? Male, or female, there are no other options. Disorders of development do not make anyone less of the sex they are, or a bit of the other one etc. Sex is determined by anatomy geared towards the facilitation of either large or small gametes, since it is complex whole, some details being altered through defects, aging, accidents, surgery etc. does nothing to change what sex a body is.
Claiming to be "trans" really has nothing at all in common with homosexuality. A person's sexuality is not a "gender identity", it is a physical fact, same-sex attraction, and the rights gay people fought for were nothing like what "trans" people are demanding - gay people were never demanding to be recognised by law as another sex than they were, they were not demanding access to spaces reserved for the opposite sex, nor were they demanding others to change a single thing about their behaviour for them, neither sex had to give up any rights or protections in the name of gay rights.
Claiming to be "trans" is not a sexuality. Being gay is a sexuality. Further, "trans" ideology is at times extremely homophobic, as evidenced by a significant amount of people trying to redefine same-sex attraction as "gender attraction", and the phenomenon of males denying their own homosexuality under the "trans" banner, by claiming to "transition gender" into "women" and thus reframe their same-sex attraction to other males as "not gay" because they are now claiming to be "women attracted to men" - AND, the attempted erasure of lesbian reality by males claiming to be "lesbian" by "transitioning to a woman" and being attracted to females - they are not gay, they are males attracted to females, they are straight, yet trying to redefine same-sex attraction as "same-gender" attraction, which tons of lesbians are appalled by, yet their concerns get shouted down as "transphobic"
'Gays wanted their sexuality to be protected, instead of just leaving the cis straights alone.' 'cis hetero ppl just want to use the bathroom without being worried about being raped by another gay person. That's why we need to ban gay ppl from bathrooms.' What if someone said that? You benefit from trans ppl fighting for your rights, but you want to deny their rights to exist, be safe and have an equal participation in society. Look at the mirror and see how pathetic you are being. Be better.
How can a mother's grief at giving birth to a boy or a girl and having that boy or girl cut off their body parts to line up with some delusion of wanting to be the other gender after embibing pornography and a contagion be wrong or authoritarian?.. God will judge you and woe betide to those who hurt one of these little ones. God is a consuming fire .
To the sycophants this isn't real. These persons don't exist. Now they are "phantasms" and parents are alt-right extremists. Notice how brave this loser is, comes out of a hole to talk to people who walk in her shoes. Gee how brave.
"Who's Afraid of Gender?" Worst book I have ever read. Complete gobbledegook. This is not the writing of a genuine academic. I have manually calculated that she uses "scare quotes" 3.1 times on average for every page of text, on individual words and some phrases, and these are inconsistently applied. Why does she do that? For what purpose? Also try this: What does the following on p230 mean? "Its localist appeal to anti-imperialist sentiment is an appropriation of a Left critique, but surely not one." That is verbatim. From the preceding sentences the "Its" might be referring to opposition to gender, English or objection to multilingualism or something else. How would any reader know? Like so much of this book it is convoluted and non-sensical rubbish. And, here is another, same page: "In a multilingual epistemology, there are no foreign languages since every language sounds foreign from within another language; or maybe every language is foreign, which means there are no languages that are foreign." If I had written something as silly, as incomprehensible, as that in my PhD it would not have been passed - in fact the draft would not even have got by my supervisor. The book is a great example of the dubious linguistic contortions that underpin the distortion of reality - and that distortion permeates trans world.
The idea is that if it's near-impossible to make sense of it, it must be very complex and sophisticated and therefore Butler must be some sort of genius.
The funny thing is, one reviewer described 'Who's Afraid of Gender?', rather cattily, as 'the first book Butler has written with actual readers in mind'
Most post-modernist writing is garbage. In Butler's case you need a garbage truck to carry the volume of bad ideas. It's idea laundering, there is no a academic credability to a discipline ending in "studies. These are a continuation of a Marxist agenda which people with luxury beliefs like to propogate. Thank you to Rob Henderson for finally defining the box to pit these academic elitist into.
It's so pathetic to listen to the modern oppressionist that spin colonialism and dominance through the western lens. They pretend to dislike a western liberal democracy and what it has become but in reality it is what funds for their luxury beliefs. Next time maybe open your eyes and explain what China or perhaps Russia. Turn back time and look at oppression and colonization through the eye of people conquered as part of the Sahelian empire as well as those enslaved as part of the Oyo Empire; they accumulated their wealth and power by feeding the demand of the trans-atlantic slave trade.
To be so smart, and yet so misguided. It would be fine if she just kept it to herself, but she is doing great harm to youthful minds and their future adult lives. Pure evil.
I've been involved in Science and I cannot understand how people like Butler are taken seriously. I'm an Atheist not because I fear God, but because I find the entire religious ideology ridiculous. Not because I'm leftwing or rightwing, but because the idea of a loving God is irrational. The same is true with gender ideology for me. The idea that human existence exists outside the body, in a gendered spirit that inhabits a body to become human, is ridiculous. One does not need to be leftwing or rightwing to think rationally.
I love this. First of all, fear of God is an sign of you being a true believer. You'd be a Christian if you feared God and live in the west. Likely a typo, but I'm a bit autistic. Why I love your comment, is that you say "The idea that human existence exists outside the body..." while being an online avatar perfectly exhibiting the concrete reality of us existing well beyond our bodies. That is lovely. I see your blind spot. I like that. Now does it make you believe in God, no. Does it make Judith correct, no. But we mostly exists beyond our bodies. Work, family, friends not our bodies. The very moment we do, we get introduced to a friend called depression. People take her seriously because they are on her team. Its incredibly rare for anyone to seek the turth, and actually change their mind on anything.
@@tulisotilas "First of all, fear of God is an sign of you being a true believer. You'd be a Christian if you feared God and live in the west. Likely a typo, but I'm a bit autistic." What I said is that I don't believe in a living God, like many believers do. But not believing doesn't make me phobic, just non-believer. With Gender, the same thing. I think Gender Ideology is a fantasy and I don't believe it, but no phobia involved. I don't fear Gender, as Butler claims. I just find the ideas ridiculous. "But we mostly exists beyond our bodies." We exist because of our bodies. Without our bodies this conversation would not happen. Religions create an existence outside the body, in part, because of shame associated with the body. Creating a life outside the body seems to relieve the shame. Gender confused people try doing the same thing, trying to escape the shame of the body. " Its incredibly rare for anyone to seek the truth, and actually change their mind on anything." I would say the same thing to you. Seek the truth, which is rooted in your body
That is not a very accurate description. Do you think cultural realities are to be empirically tested or are discovered through examination of concepts and political analysis?
@@clarkbowler157 "Do you think cultural realities are to be empirically tested or are discovered through examination of concepts and political analysis?" I'm not sure which "description" was inaccurate and I'm not sure what you are asking in your question. All I know that the body is at the centre of our human experience and that I don't accept ideologies that try to create existence outside the body. That's what religions do.
@@viejolincanada *I was asking whether scientific methods are the right tools for cultural inquiry. I don't see how somebody changing their identity points towards an existence outside the body. Can you elaborate?
Imagine turning something so basic as reproduction into this enormous academic puzzle and then spending your entire working life tinkering with it aimlessly.
All these "biology is destiny" people in the comments section baffles me. Literally everything on a birth certificate can change throughout your life but somehow the sex assigned at birth is not allowed to change. Such a ridiculous hill to die on when people just want to live their lives in their own terms.
Explain what specific standards “trans” people are measuring themselves against to determine that there is a "mismatch" - THEY are the ones with a regressively sexist idea of what it means to be a boy/girl or man/woman and that is the issue causing all the problems - their own misunderstanding and severely limited perspective/sexist misunderstanding of what sexist stereotypes/"gender norms" actually entail - they are not rules, they are not real boundaries, they are regressive ideas and generalisations - no one needs to live up to any such nonsense or feel comfortable with those stereotypes to be a boy/girl/man/woman - all those terms represent, and all they should represent, is sex and stage of maturity - by creating this whole "gender identity" nonsense they create an unnecessary distorted framework which needlessly causes distress. Again, since you apparently understand this issue through and through; how are males or females "supposed to" think or feel, want to dress like or act? You must be able to provide specific standards for each sex for what you are contending to make any sense whatsoever. If there is no correct way of being male or female, then how can there be a "mismatch" between what they are and how they feel?
No one is "assigned" a sex at birth, lol. It is observed, and based on science. Please resist biophobic ideology and join us in the post-Enlightenment world.
2:10-6:22 Full context for a clip floating in X. Q: Does Butler teach or seduce people into Pdf-file stuff? A: We teach that stuff, yes. If people want to get into it. (She uses these words, but with context this is not her an admission. The context is broader at that time.). Then she blames the chrurch (without specifying the denomination, or a religion) for blaming her and being a confessing pdf-file themselves. So rather than denying the action bluntly, she shifts the blame to the Catholic church (assumed), without specifying her being innocent or whoch church it is. She likely does not think she is causing pdf-file victims. She likely assumes the common position of pdf/A format being a bad and immoral file format. If we were to take words only at face value, then there would be concerns.
@@surlypiratewench1969 hundreds Young ppl cut off parts of ther body because somebody lie them that this end they mind problems and they could change gender. Then they very often make suicide when reality hits them.
@@surlypiratewench1969 Here's just some of the harm: for starters, the names of 50 people (and there are many more) who have been fired, cancelled, were forced to resign, had to close their businesses, had contracts canecelled or were de-platformed because they would not succumb to the the pronoun idiocy forced on them in the workplace or because they stated the truth that men cannot become women and vice versa; they include teachers, artists, academics, journalists, entertainers and other occupations: M.K. Fain, Kaeley Triller, Sasha White, Kathleen Stock, Maya Forstater, Graham Linehan, Jillian Spencer, Roz Adams, Jo Phoenix, Allison Bailey, David Mackereth, Sheila Jeffreys, Maria Jose Binetti, Eugenia Rodrigues, Jessica Miranda, Priscila Cunha, Kathleen Lowrey, Laura Lecuona, Rachel Rosario Sánchez, Laura Tanner, Julie Szego, Pearl Moon, James Dreyfus, Rachel Meade, Selina Todd, Jenni Murray, Leo Kearse, Hugh Sheridan, Linda Bellos, Simon Fanshawe, Lindsay Ellison, Sall Grover, Colin Wright, Andrew Gold, Louise Distras, Natalie Bird, Sonya Douglas, Claudia Clare, Roisin Murphy, Peter Vlaming, Mary Harrington, Linzi Smith, Elizabeth Weiss, John Parks, Kevin Lister, “Max” - teacher in NSW, Jessica Tapia and Enoch Burke. They lost their livelihoods. There also are now thousands of detransitioners who were duped as minors by the propagnda of transgenderism and now have irrevocable physical damage because of it e.g. mastectomies and sterility. Young women are self-excluding from sports, especially contact sports, because they don't want to be put at risk of being tackled by much larger opponents who are men claiming to be women. And that is just some of the harm.
@@surlypiratewench1969 Here are 50 people who have been fired/had to close their businesses, otherwise lost their livelihoods because they refused to go along with the ideas and imposed speech of trans ideology M.K. Fain, Kaeley Triller, Sasha White, Kathleen Stock, Maya Forstater, Graham Linehan, Jillian Spencer, Roz Adams, Jo Phoenix, Allison Bailey, David Mackereth, Sheila Jeffreys, Maria Jose Binetti, Eugenia Rodrigues, Jessica Miranda, Priscila Cunha, Kathleen Lowrey, Laura Lecuona, Rachel Rosario Sánchez, Laura Tanner, Julie Szego, Pearl Moon, James Dreyfus, Rachel Meade, Selina Todd, Jenni Murray, Leo Kearse, Hugh Sheridan, Linda Bellos, Simon Fanshawe, Lindsay Ellison, Sall Grover, Colin Wright, Andrew Gold, Louise Distras, Natalie Bird, Sonya Douglas, Claudia Clare, Roisin Murphy, Peter Vlaming, Mary Harrington, Linzi Smith, Elizabeth Weiss, John Parks, Kevin Lister, “Max” - teacher in NSW, Jessica Tapia, James Orwin and Enoch Burke. The categories include: academics, acting, artist, biologists, counsellor, lawyer, local government worker, NGO worker, DV worker, retail, media, medicine, MS volunteer worker of 60 years’ service, music industry, scientists, social worker, sports coach, teachers, PhD researchers, publishing industry, writers. Countries include: Australia, Argentina, Brazil, Ireland, Canada, Mexico, NZ, U.K. and U.S. There's some harm for you.
Can someone show me where to watch when the author is talking about what book is about? Oh and I use sex, I understand sex. Gender is the word people use, who are afraid to use the word sex.
You know, they tried to fix it; turns out they are STILL women. Joking aside. I agree. This needs to be widely spread so people will understand the level of nonsense this whole thing comes from.
I am not a bigot. I am a leftie liberal and I know bs when I read it. "Who's Afraid of Gender?" Worst book I have ever read. Complete gobbledegook. This is not the writing of a genuine academic. I have manually calculated that she uses "scare quotes" 3.1 times on average for every page of text, on individual words and some phrases, and these are inconsistently applied. Why does she do that? For what purpose? Also try this: What does the following on p230 mean? "Its localist appeal to anti-imperialist sentiment is an appropriation of a Left critique, but surely not one." That is verbatim. From the preceding sentences the "Its" might be referring to opposition to gender, English or objection to multilingualism or something else. How would any reader know? Like so much of this book it is convoluted and non-sensical rubbish. And, here is another, same page: "In a multilingual epistemology, there are no foreign languages since every language sounds foreign from within another language; or maybe every language is foreign, which means there are no languages that are foreign." If I had written something as silly, as incomprehensible, as that in my PhD it would not have been passed - in fact the draft would not even have got by my supervisor. The book is a great example of the dubious linguistic contortions that underpin the distortion of reality - and that distortion permeates trans world.
Sex exists without being "assigned". This is the height of arrogance. It is pure white privileged racism to say sex is assigned. Maybe it is assigned in Butler's mental silo. It ignores the many hundreds of thousands, maybe millions, born each year in remote indigenous communities across the world, or home births, or in impoverished circumstancs, or when individual women give birth alone either by choice or as cultural custom when there are no professionals around to "assign" anything so that the person has to "live with that assignment". We get the body we are born with. It is rot to project birth "assignment" onto all people. It is "phantasmatic".
After reading all these comments, a few things become clear. It is clear that many of these arguments disregard Butler’s use of Austin’s work on utterances, specifically performative utterances. This is foundational and if you can’t challenge this aspect of the thinking, you are not challenging the thinking. It’s clear that people don’t understand that this thesis is not about social construction per se, as Butler’s work is not sociological. Sociology is peripherally relevant but not directly. In addition, regarding sex one could argue that biology is a social construct. They would be correct. Every bit of categorization is named and organized within a mutable social framework. That includes the scientific method, which privileges the repeatable and critiques of methodology. It hasn’t always been that way and to be honest there is no way to suggest whether that method or a previous method that is not a predicate. So to suggest there’s two sexes according to science is fallacious. Why organize humans into genital categories based on procreative duties? Why not finger length? Or fingerprint shape? Or skull density? It’s purely arbitrary, in a sense. It is also clear, that people conflate biological sex and gender and use that to dismiss Butler’s point. There is a big difference in being and becoming. The performative has little to do with categories of human existence. I’d go further and ask, why care about biology/sex at all when it comes to identity, or anything else. It’s also clear and somewhat interesting how many claim trans-ness is misogynistic or homophobic. I’m not clear on how one could erect such an argument in a way that the structure is not a house of cards, but good one for trying. Finally, it’s also clear that their are a lot of people who seem smart but say dumb things purely based on bias or uniformed opinion or ignorance.
Explain what specific standards “trans” people are measuring themselves against to determine that there is a "mismatch" - THEY are the ones with a regressively sexist idea of what it means to be a boy/girl or man/woman and that is the issue causing all the problems - their own misunderstanding and severely limited perspective/sexist misunderstanding of what sexist stereotypes/"gender norms" actually entail - they are not rules, they are not real boundaries, they are regressive ideas and generalisations - no one needs to live up to any such nonsense or feel comfortable with those stereotypes to be a boy/girl/man/woman - all those terms represent, and all they should represent, is sex and stage of maturity - by creating this whole "gender identity" nonsense they create an unnecessary distorted framework which needlessly causes distress. How are males or females "supposed to" think or feel, want to dress like or act? You must be able to provide specific standards for each sex for what you are contending to make any sense whatsoever. If there is no correct way of being male or female, then how can there be a "mismatch" between what they are and how they feel?
1000%! Half this debate could be avoided if we just understood the bases for peoples’ work BEFORE forming a conclusion. I really hope some person with an open mind comes here willing to learn and be challenged by new perspectives.
Thank you for this sharing this with the PW audience at large. There is so much to consider that arises from this candid and brave conversation between Butler and Halberstam. I read Butler's work during my years as PhD student and the ideas are increasingly relevant in our multi-dimensional era. We welcome these diverse paths of radical thought. What a gift to be able to explore these ideas with strong thinkers to lead the dialogue. Butler remains a pioneering outspoken badass, damn right! Cheers to this!
"Who's Afraid of Gender?" Worst book I have ever read. Complete gobbledegook. This is not the writing of a genuine academic. I have manually calculated that she uses "scare quotes" 3.1 times for every page of text, on individual words and some phrases, and these are inconsistently applied. Why does she do that? For what purpose? Also try this: What does the following on p230 mean? "Its localist appeal to anti-imperialist sentiment is an appropriation of a Left critique, but surely not one." That is verbatim. From the preceding sentences the "Its" might be referring to oposition to gender, English or objection to multilingualism or something else. How would any reader know? Like so much of this book it is convoluted and non-sensical rubbish. And, here is another, same page: "In a multilingual epistemology, there are no foreign languages since every language sounds foreign from within another language; or maybe every language is foreign, which means there are no languages that are foreign." If I had written something as silly, as incomprehensible, as that in my PhD it would not have been passed - in fact the draft would not even have got by my supervisor. It is no wonder that in 1999 she was given an award for "worst sentence" written that year. Google it. The book is a great example of the dubious linguistic contortions that underpin the distortion of reality - and that distortion permeates trans world.
They scoff and call the rest of us "Far right Christians" (I'm so far from that its not funny) when SHE insists that there is no such thing as sexual dichroism and denies basic biological evolutionary reality, and you thinks she's "candid and brave"? You've been successfully brainwashed into a cult.
@@281992pdr The second quote makes perfect sense. Essentially they are saying that in a theory of learning coming from multiple languages, there is no foreign language. To be foreign is relative because it is defined by what culture (or language) you yourself come from. For example: I speak English, so I think Chinese is a foreign language, but it is not foreign to a native Chinese speaker. That Chinese speaker would see English as foreign just the same. So because every language can be considered foreign, no languages are because the description breaks down. Edit: I haven't read their book yet, but it's coming in the mail and, based on your quotes, I'm very excited for it :)
@@lucascampbell8521 Why are you using incorrect grammar? Butler is one person - singular. She was awarded in 1999 the worst sentence written by an academic. She truly earnt it. Look it up. Her book - there is only one of her, and her book is also singular - is gobbledegook. She also uses in her book the term "seeks" in its past present and future tenses on average one every 1.8 pages. Why, ffs? At the starts she says a few times "I hope". Genuine academics writ with prupose and clarity. She does not. She also always writes of Black people with a capital B and brown people with a lower case b. I can only presume this is some kind of virtue signalling. Or just racism.
This is an insult to LGB people. Same-sex attraction is biologically based and is not the same as the categories in the TQIA2SCDEFHJKMNOPRUVWXYZ movement.
Some people don't understand how butler is using her basic terms. This is not our common understanding from every day language
From my observation, a lot of the worry centers around:
1a) Children and adolescents making life-altering decisions about hormone therapy and major surgeries-say, to sterilize themselves before they have reached sexual maturity, or without fully understanding what kind of life-long choice they're making. The book argues that regret is infrequent, but the voices of detransitioners are loud and growing (though from what I understand the trans community is loath to show them any support). Their experiences with gender-affirming care are also worth hearing and reckoning with, aren't they? (I noticed that the word "detransition" was not used in the book, which I found an odd omission.) What is the author's position on access of minors to life-altering medical intervention? (Assuming we agree that legal protection for minors (tattoos, etc.) is a good feature of our society.)
1b) Connected to this is the fact of adolescents being forcibly removed from their parents by the state if the parent raises objections to the gender-affirming intervention. Does the author ratify the state's role to confiscate children from parents in such a case? (I don't think one can understand the fear that gender ideology wants to break apart the family unless one faces cases like this head-on.)
2) Rights regarding women's gyms and sports, for the biological facts of difference in size, strength, endurance, bone-density, etc., to be honored in terms of bathroom privacy, playfield safety, and fair competition. Of course there is great natural variance of physique and aptitude among bodies, but Title IX laws acknowledge the physical differences between men and women for a reason. Does the author believe that trans women should participate in women's sport? With some level of hormone therapy that modifies testosterone levels, or also without any medical transitioning? This issue is also one that will increasingly galvanize the 'common folk', as they see their daughter's opportunities taken by trans women.
I submit these questions as a cultural observer. The speaker's cause would be much helped along if they took these specific worries more seriously.
Very inciteful, and very well said. Thank you @tmlavenz
Gender is anatomical biological fact. There's only two lmao
@tmlavenz as far as I'm aware, the answers to your questions are:
1a) Butler fully supports unrestricted and unconditional access by minors to full medical transition at all ages. As soon as a child is able to articulate a desire to transition, they should be able to do so, regardless of parental objections.
1b) any and all parental objections should be met with the fullest criminal punishment the state can impose, and removal from the home should be one of the first, if not the first, response to parental objections. Butler does not believe in parental rights over children at all.
2) Butler believes that trans women are fully women, and must immediately be given full access to all women's facilities, institutions, and events, especially women's bathroms and sports, from the moment they begin the transition process.
@@robinpage2730 she's a looney toon lmao 🤣. She's batshit
What kind of childhood trauma Butler went thorugh? She generalizes from her own disastrous childhood. Some of us had a great childhood!
That's not childhood trauma it's faulty wiring
Exactly. I had a childhood so bad it gave me PTSD. For real; diagnosed. But I try my best to feel *relief and joy* when I hear other people talk about having grown up with great childhoods. One like mine *should* be abnormal and rare. Even if I never know what that feels like, I can be happy for those other people. Instead of being so self-centered and bitter that I make myself believe they're lying and that all parents are bad.
@@AlexReynard "Exactly. I had a childhood so bad it gave me PTSD. "
You have the right attitude.
There's a "stigma" (shame) about needing psychotherapy which is affecting gender-confused people. They are rejecting it in favour of their religion.
@@viejolincanada Exactly; don't help me accept who I was truly born as. No, transform my body by removing totally healthy reproductive organs, change my name and metaphorically KILL my old male/female version of my self ie "Dead-Naming". Its absurd. Does this not sound like some kind of barbaric ritual you would find in an extant pre-agricultural tribe in fucking South America like 500 years ago!?
"A new long-term study from Germany suggests that the majority of young people diagnosed with gender identity disorders do not continue to identify as such over time. The study examined insurance data over five years, revealing that more than half of young people aged 5-24 across every age subgroup diagnosed with "gender identity disorder" no longer had the diagnosis after five years. Specifically, the desistance rate was 72.7% in 15- to 19-year-old females and 50.3% in 20- to 24-year-old males. Among the whole group of 5- to 24-year-olds, only about 36.4% of those diagnosed in 2017 still had the diagnosis five years later, indicating that more than 63% desisted.
One of the strengths of this study is its comprehensive collection of outpatient billing data for all legally insured persons in Germany, providing a large and representative sample. Additionally, the long observation period from 2013 to 2022 offers valuable insights into long-term trends and changes in diagnosis rates."
So after receiving care most identify that they do not in fact need to transition, whereas those whose symptoms persist do transition. What exactly are you identifying as wrong here? This sounds like medical care working as intended.
@@dominic9983 I thought it was innate and unchanging?
@@ambientjohnny Trans identity as immutable is not a position taken by most queer theorists. (I’m guessing you’ve read nothing so we’ll not pursue that). But even if this was the case, we could assume that after sufficient care, those who desisted likely discovered they weren’t in fact trans. Nothing about this is related to an unchanging identity.
@@dominic9983 Assuming I've read nothing. Hahahaha. I've read everything I've been able to access over at least 5 years buddy and have had literally hundreds of conversations with "trans" people. Willing to bet I have more experience actually talking to people than you do.
The overwhelming majority of people on the "trans" side are adamant about it not being a choice, and that any sort of therapy is cruel and akin to "conversion therapy", completely rejecting that it has anything to do with mental health. How could anyone discover they aren't really "trans" if it is innate from birth like the majority claim?
Are you out there pushing back against all the insane rejection of exploratory therapy which is rampant among the "trans" demographic?
@@dominic9983 What exactly do you say about the proposition that detransitioners give the lie to the assertion that persistence to transition is evidence that medical "care" is working? Plainly it cannot be relied upon. However, when it is intended to make money by "affirming" someone's delusion then yes, as part of the growing trans industry, it is working on that score.
Fascinating, but Ivory Tower at it's finest. Try to form a manifesto, a party, and build a society on the idea of disidentification. We need a flag, a word with a distinct meaning, and a set of binary rules for that to work. But, you can try it. Good luck.
While Butler and Halberson work hard to disassociate themselves from sex they look so uncomfortable as they twist around trying to do it. They really seem to be putting an anchor around unattractive women everywhere. BiG QUESTION: what is their "sexuality"? I dont care about their identity - identity is what you do. But they are drawn to what sexually? Oh, yes: women. Not feminine or necessarily masculine women JUST ANY woman that isn't a biological man. These two are so blantly "performative" in their effort to demonstrate their non-comforming, and I mean performative in the way the word is defined NOT as the deep thinker Butler spins it, these two would submit to a trans-woman if for no other reason than to prove the purity of their theory and being. This is after all just how commited to the cause of gender based feminism that they are.
Brave as fuk
so many incels in the comments. they have found so many ways of saying how they hate and dont talk to women, it shows 😭
Nephilim shit
the giants from the bible.....??!??
Woodchipper. Feet first.
Lol...I am trying to figure out where you come down on this issue
Who’s afraid of heterosexual instinct?
This woman
@@TheOmnitom heterophobia
Anyone watch the video or did they come here with a script from their favorite pundits and talking heads?
This comment section is actually so cancerous
No, it's actually encouraging given the the extent to which transgenderism is undermining the sex-based rights and interests of women, gay people, children, parents, desisters and people with disabilities. Try engaging with the other side and you might learn something.
Listening to it talk about sex assignment is stomach turning. I guess biology escapes Butler. If there is confusion (because of Intersex) sort it out. Male and female is pretty straightforward. We can even figure it out before birth and someone CONFIRMS sex at birth.
the incels came in full force with this one
@@NatilynnP-t4n Is that what it is? Hum, the dysfunction is putting children on a path to a sex change. What is the outcome of that?
Has she every addressed "transitioning children" and the rise on transgenderism fuelled by her "deep thoughts"
Wow this comment section is hateful and insecure😅
Not really. It actually evinces a surprisingly level of literateness in this discourse and contests Butler in robust ways she doesn't seem capable of contending with. At least, her book doesn't.
🤡🤡🤡🤡
Gender is biological anatomical fact. Men pp ladies vv. That's scientific fact. You just can't handle the truth.
As someone has pointed out, isn't it "funny" how Butler looks exactly like Lysenko...
I was thinking Robert Durst.
@@paulawade1446 Boooooooobbb!
She more closely resembles George Soros.
Two female dudes talking about how people are aggressing ideas of females being dudes
Lord have mercy.
Butler is a misogynist, being a woman is so distasteful to her.
And here you are🤔
Damn I just wanted to watch some Judith Butler where are all these transphobes in the comments coming from
Define "woman gender". What does it mean to "feel like a woman" for a male?
If you are interested in trans, no matter what side, YT proposes videos about trans, no matter from what side. The other way around it works also, I often leave comments to anti-trans videos.
@@miriamlana833Do people like, search up their name and watch these videos though? That's kind of crazy that a philosophy person has this much press that people do that and comment on videos with a few thousand views.
Transphobe is a slur used to deride someone who states what science shows us and that is that sex is real, binary and not on any kind of continuum or spectrum. The slur is also used to shut down any rational discussion by someone stating that the confected use of non-grammatical pronouns should not be forced on anyone - as it is and people have been fired from their jobs for not kowtowing to the idiocy. @horleckshelmos8472 try reading some Judith Butler - phantasmatic!
I wonder what a woman is for a woman. What are basic properties for being a "woman". Tell me , what is a woman
When I attempt to post on here with science based rebuttals of the preference that trans is - and it is nothing more - my comments are not allowed. Phantasmatic.
I don't understand why it is so difficult to accept that males and females can behave in all sorts of ways and have all sorts of characteristics. But that doesn't mean your sex is just a guess or a social construct.
She's a troll. That's all gender ideology is.
World is easier to cope with, if you just use box everything into categories. Boxes which allow no variance. Then fit yourself in one of those boxes and life is so simple.
Not in my boxes? Enemy. In my boxes? A friend.
Imagine having to consider every person you meet as an variable and complex human being? Horrible waste of energy (Brain chemistry, no joke).
Okay a joke: To reduce emissions, the Green party has banned treating people as individuals.
It really seems like pseudo intellectual babble - the social sciences don’t have the same stringent requirements as the natural sciences - instead they can point to each other as evidence “this person is smart and writes in an intellectual way - therefore it is correct”
Meanwhile someone like Einstein and his theory of relativity- they did two huge expeditions across the planet to get evidence for relativity
Because: a) Queer is a political stance; b) in defiance of all that is normal. It was created to oppose normativity, which (no joke) is a codeword for Capitalism. The aim of Queer is to destabilize the nuclear family by attacking gender, so that the nuclear family no longer remains as the means of production for the Capitalist order; i.e. to end that which reproduces children who are raised to form Capitalist families, and so on. The final end goal is getting rid of Capitalism through violent Revolution and replacing it with Equity (Marxism). That's what this is all about. All the marbles.
Moore Anna Jones Linda Hall George
Not in agreement what Butler is saying, but thank you for uploading this and leaving the comments open!
A review of Butler's work by Abigail Favale: "Any reader with passing knowledge of the perspectives Butler disputes will recognize her accounts as caricatures. Admittedly, I am not the reader she has in mind. In fact, her book seems to preclude the possibility that someone like me could exist: a Catholic feminist well versed in gender and trans theory who has engaged thoughtfully with those ideas and has some good-faith objections. Her ideal reader is someone who is primed to accept her sweeping statements without checking the footnotes, whose anxieties will be stoked by her hyperbolic portrayal....Her opening jab at Pope Francis, for example, cites not a magisterial text, or even one of his infamous airplane interviews, but a clickbait piece from The Daily Beast. Even when she engages with scholarly, peer-reviewed content, she retains a narrow field of vision. Her primary references exemplifying the Catholic perspective, for example, are articles with title phrases like “the Vatican’s anathematization of gender” and “the Vatican’s War on ‘gender ideology’”-fair-minded accounts of the Catholic viewpoint, I’m sure....On one of the rare occasions when Butler cites a primary source from outside the echo chamber, she blatantly misrepresents what the source actually states." www.firstthings.com/article/2024/08/judith-butlers-sophistry
Quote from the desc: "Now, in Who’s Afraid of Gender? (2024), Butler returns to the topic that made their name, to illuminate how “anti-gender ideology movements” have become central to reactionary politics and rising authoritarianism worldwide."
In other words, gender ideology movements have become the goad in Capitalist society's vitals that provokes the reaction that tends towards authoritarian fortification. Folks, this is the desired development: causing authoritarianism to rise up, and finally the rebel response. Once Capitalism is gone, Equity (Marxism) would be ushered in.
There is no private property in Equity. None. Land, intellectual, biological, children, individual rights, NONE.
What is called “identity” is the self-illusion of the actor. Every identity is a failure. Emancipatory politics begins with the loss of identity.
Items bounced
thank you for this interview. judith is my icon
Sad.
Pitiful
Butler is a luxury belief holding anarchist.
She is perfect! Perfectly clueless
@@markrussell3428fact
Read the Cass report, Judith Butler.
Ah yes the Cass report. The thing that'd been heavily debunked already as ignoring a large number trans studies.
@Acebell72 "Debunked" is doing some heavy lifting there, sparky. A number of studies were rejected for being of Low or Very Low quality. That means that the studies were badly designed, had no controls, lost too many subjects to follow-up etc. Using these poor studies to determine how to treat disturbed children is the opposite of medicine and the opposite of caring for those children.
'Debunked'... by Erin Reed, Alejandra Caraballo, Katy Montgomerie, India Willoughby, Zooey Zephyr, Jessie Gender, Abigail Thorn, and Chase Strangio, no doubt! 0:12 @Acebell72
@@kardra9714 I'd love to see India Willoughby debunking anything. India is a moron
@@XKenny77in fact they aren't low low quality, they're just not the abstract gold standard. As many peer reviewed analyses have pointed out, the reason there aren't any "gold standard" studies is because they would be UNETHICAL to perform. Double blind studies, the "gold standard," are not applicable in every circumstance. In a double blind, one group gets the meds and one group doesn't. The reason this is unethical is because of the high rates of unalive ideation and attempts in the people being studied. In one attempt at a double blind, the gender non-conforming youth in the control group getting the placebo figured it out because their puberty blockers weren't blocking their puberty and left the study. It is well known that a large set of smaller or not quite good standard studies can produce gold results in the aggregate. Not that I expect this, or anything, to convince you.
World will understand Judith in 50 years, right now so much hatred
Explain what specific standards “trans” people are measuring themselves against to determine that there is a "mismatch" - THEY are the ones with a regressively sexist idea of what it means to be a boy/girl or man/woman and that is the issue causing all the problems - their own misunderstanding and severely limited perspective/sexist misunderstanding of what sexist stereotypes/"gender norms" actually entail - they are not rules, they are not real boundaries, they are regressive ideas and generalisations - no one needs to live up to any such nonsense or feel comfortable with those stereotypes to be a boy/girl/man/woman - all those terms represent, and all they should represent, is sex and stage of maturity - by creating this whole "gender identity" nonsense they create an unnecessary distorted framework which needlessly causes distress.
Again, since you apparently understand this issue through and through; how are males or females "supposed to" think or feel, want to dress like or act? You must be able to provide specific standards for each sex for what you are contending to make any sense whatsoever. If there is no correct way of being male or female, then how can there be a "mismatch" between what they are and how they feel?
How can you know what it feels like to be a man if you have never been a man? It’s ludicrous
They are unhappy with some facet of their existence... Then, are told that if they were the other sex, their problems would disappear. Well, we all know thats a crock, but to them, the silver bullet solution is attractive. They can demand to be celebrated for their insanity, or else you are evil...
Also, how can you know what it feels like to be a man if your concept of man is so theoretical that anyone can claim to be a man? How do female trans activists first say that a man is anyone who says they are a man regardless of their anatomy and then turn around and say "I require surgery to live authentically as a man"? If man is just this academic concept that doesn't refer back to anything concrete in the material world, how do women know they want to be men?
Unless you are transgender maybe you shouldn’t be ludicrous and act as if you know how they feel.
@@osmaeliasjfc
@@osmaelias But you how it feels to be an idiot and bigot champ,
I don't believe in gender ideology and am uncomfortable with too much identity politics, but I am still a leftist. I find Judith Butler's description of the left alienating. I can't find common ground with irrational extremists like her, but I am still not a moderate. She has strange fantasies about who her detractors are. She is not in reality.
That's the black and white perspective you get in extremity, in an over-reliance on the left-hemisphere perspective which cannot see things in context. What the modern "left" is sadly unaware of, is enantiodromia, that when you take a position to a far enough extreme, it becomes like its opposite, becomes like the thing it started off as an opposite to. So the "progressive left" has become authoritarian.
Gender is biological anatomical fact. Men have pp. Ladies have vv.
It's a good thing these people are actually a very tiny minority in the real world. Too much influence though. But we'll prevail.
Yabbut why're they kicking our ass? The assessment, just looking around, is they wield an inordinate amount of power.
What are you talking about?
“These people “? It’s got to hurt to carry that much fear and bigotry around you poor thing🙄
@@MrGummbumstop it. You know that’s not true
@@surlypiratewench1969 Thanks ! it's always a pleasure to disagree with self righteous silly people.Oh, and it doesn't hurt at all. Do you have tattoos, piercings and blue hair ? You know, in order to show how open minded you are... Ha ha ha...
Please, dear channel, leave the comment section open!
No one can be "born in the wrong body", our brains ARE our body just as much as any other part of it. We are the sex we are, regardless of what our personal relationship is with the sexist stereotypes in society. "Trans" ideology, is regressive and sexist, as there is no "correct way" of being a boy or girl, man or woman, all those terms do is indicate sex and stage of maturity - decoupling sex and gender and trying to make gender into this ludicrous concoction of personality and sexist stereotypes is beyond regressive - it actively harms people who buy into it - the idea that there is something wrong with a kid's body that needs to be chemically altered because they believe living up to sexist stereotypes is some real measure of whether they are a boy or a girl (and man or woman for adults obviously), is insanity.
I have asked hundreds of "activists" and "allies" to explain what they are, or what they perceive “trans” people are, measuring themselves against to determine that they have a need to transition - NOT ONE person has been able to articulate what that is - not one person is able to distance themselves sufficiently to realise that THEY are the ones with a regressively sexist idea of what it means to be a boy/girl or man/woman and that that is the issue causing all the problems - their own misunderstanding and severely limited perspective/sexist misunderstanding of what sexist stereotypes/"gender norms" actually entail - they are not rules, they are not real boundaries, they are regressive ideas and generalisations - no one needs to live up to any such utter nonsense or feel comfortable with those stereotypes to be a boy/girl/man/woman - all those terms represent, and all they should represent, is sex and stage of maturity - by creating this whole "gender identity" nonsense, THAT IS WHAT CAUSES ALL THE DISTRESS, THIS FABRICATION OF A FRAMEWORK WHICH DISTORTS REALITY.
No one in the movement has been able to explain or articulate what this supposed "womanly essence" or "manly essence" is that they feel/know/need to transition in order to represent etc. actually is - yet you all actively believe in it and push for it to be accepted. Sometimes activists try to slither out of this fact, by claiming they don’t believe in any “essence”. This is pure semantics and sophistry, they will always fall back on claiming there is indeed “something” that can “make a male a woman” that they then can’t even define when pressed… How exactly that is nothing like an essence is anyone’s guess.
Chuck Norris was trapped in a woman's body, but then he was born. He's been perfectly fine ever since.
@@TrafficusMaximus 😄
Excellent, and true
What a steaming pile of well articulated bullshit. Number one, you’re not talking to anyone transgender. Second you need to learn the difference between sex, identify and gender. Third please stfu about “ideology” it’s not.
Let me give you some knowledge, that you’ll ignore.
I have an adopted/bonus son who is transgender.
I , with terror in my heart, let him start the talk therapy at 17. Two years later, he went on hormones. My husband and I lived in fear. You never want your child to suffer life in constant abuse.
Three shots in and his change started to appear and it manifested itself as pure joy. He went from a very introverted unhappy person who had entertained suicide
to a person confident and happy.
I ask a lot of questions so of course I asked how he felt before-“ Mom my body felt stuck in the horror of puberty,all the time”.
These people aren’t hurting anyone just leave them alone. My son is an artist and a gentle soul. He has the same right to live just as you.
@@surlypiratewench1969 You don't understand the meaning of the word "ideology". If you have a system of beliefs, that is an ideology. Are you trying to argue that "trans" advocates do not have differing beliefs and claims about reality? So what exactly is the disagreement about?. Try educating yourself before making a fool of yourself next time.
I've been actively engaging with people on the "trans" side for over 5 years, the claim that I have no experience with "trans" people is pure nonsense. My understanding of their position, multiple positions since there are several different viewpoints, comes from direct engagement.
You should have provided the kid the opportunity to go to exploratory therapy instead, or Jungian analysis, to actually delve into the root of their problems, instead of setting them up for a life of drug use and chemical castration in the long run. Brains do not stop developing until the age of 25, a 17-year old cannot possibly comprehend the long-term consequences of what they opted into, the level of emotional immaturity at that age... well, too bad you as parents couldn't be more mature yourselves, or have more understanding of human psychology and development. Puberty is a natural process each human goes through in order to fully develop, a child claiming it is a horror to go through puberty is completely lost and needed an actual emotionally mature and intellectually developed parent to guide them away from their harmful fixations and skewed understanding of biological processes, a role you sadly failed to provide.
The fact that you think I somehow don't think your child "has the same right to live" as anyone else again shows how lost you are.
Butler is 100% correct in everything they say. Sad to see so many anti-science, anti-trans ideologues in the comment section.
Explain what specific standards “trans” people are measuring themselves against to determine that there is a "mismatch" - THEY are the ones with a regressively sexist idea of what it means to be a boy/girl or man/woman and that is the issue causing all the problems - their own misunderstanding and severely limited perspective/sexist misunderstanding of what sexist stereotypes/"gender norms" actually entail - they are not rules, they are not real boundaries, they are regressive ideas and generalisations - no one needs to live up to any such nonsense or feel comfortable with those stereotypes to be a boy/girl/man/woman - all those terms represent, and all they should represent, is sex and stage of maturity - by creating this whole "gender identity" nonsense they create an unnecessary distorted framework which needlessly causes distress.
Again, since you apparently understand this issue through and through; how are males or females "supposed to" think or feel, want to dress like or act? You must be able to provide specific standards for each sex for what you are contending to make any sense whatsoever. If there is no correct way of being male or female, then how can there be a "mismatch" between what they are and how they feel?
NO ONE shares some exact "experience" of being a man or a woman, that is why we define a woman as an adult FEMALE, they are all of the same sex, that is what defines them. "Man" or "woman" are not some moral judgement or evaluation of how masculine or feminine they feel or present, it's simply about having a term to describe any adult human male and any adult human female.
This obsession that the "trans" community has with redefining the terms to reflect how they feel etc. is totally pointless. There are no people who truly feel 100% comfortable all of the time, the idea of labelling people "cis" or "trans" is completely unnecessary, there is no "cis" experience and there is no "trans" experience, people are individuals, and as a whole the community fails to come up with any coherent explanation to define their redefinition of "woman" because you cannot come up with a definition that caters to every possibility. That is why the terms "man" and "woman" being rooted in physical reality is the only thing that makes sense, if there are no clear parameters for a definition then it cannot function as a definition. If anyone can identify as a grablar, and the only definition of being a grablar, is feeling like identifying as one, then you haven't defined grablar as anything at all. This is why it is also an obsession with creating more and more boxes.
The terms "man" and "woman" encompass every possible personality, within physical boundaries, any man or woman is free to act, think, look, behave however they want, that they as individuals are labelled as men or women is purely about the physical - saying a man is an adult human male, and a woman an adult human female does not restrict anyone's self-expression, not wanting to acknowledge one's physical reality is a fool's errand, the sex someone is doesn't change based on how anyone feels or dresses - so it is the "trans" side that 100% is creating this false narrative that acknowledging a person's sex is somehow restrictive, they are the side saying men or women behave like this or that. I mean if they weren't doing that, then they would agree that the umbrella terms based on sex, man and woman, were perfectly fine - but they don't! They say no no, if someone doesn't FEEL like the sex they are, they can't be it, though they cannot explain what "feeling cis" even really means, because NO ONE shares the exact same experiences emotionally. What "they" are trying to do is swap a definition that has a physical basis, for a definition that is entirely rooted in feelings and often in validating sexist stereotypes associated with either sex.
This "woman is a social construct" thing IS the part that validates and perpetuates sexist stereotypes - woman isn't a social construct in that sense, it is a word society has chosen yes, but to describe a PHYSICAL state of being, not anyone's emotional states or where they fall on some spectrum of masculinity or femininity. There is a fundamental misunderstanding here of what the definition of man and woman means. The notion that people need to live up to sexist stereotypes of what "real men" or "real women" are, is complete fantasy. The fact that many people act as if sexist stereotypes were valid ways of measuring "real men" or real women" is a problem with the individual and their sexist bias, not with the terms themselves, as the terms themselves have none of the expectational baggage that people who internalise sexist stereotypes associate with them.
Wow; incredibly well written and well thought and 100% rooted in REALITY. Refreshing. I hope we will return to science based sanity in the next few years and will look back on this in absolute shame for letting the lunatics run the asylum.
What a out the experience of intersex people. What about people who do not fit the gendered binary? How can we talk about simple physical truths when sex itself in it's most physical conceptualization is not entirely binary?
If it actually was the case as you've described, then on what grounds coulp physical attributes dictate societal expectations and social positions?
Even if the question was as simple and one dimensional as you've described it still would not make a compelling case for such argument.
@@clarkbowler157 Why are you using the outdated by consensus (Chicago Consensus) and wildly misleading term "intersex" when the correct terminology is Disorders of Sexual Development? Everyone with a DSD is still either male or female just like everyone else, in fact many of the conditions are completely sex-specific, only ever affecting one particular sex.
There are no "in-betweens", no one is "slightly more female" etc. Sex is not a spectrum, you just haven't "educated yourself" on the matter. 99% of people claiming to be "trans" do not have a DSD anyway, so it is completely IRRELEVANT to the discussion.
@@ambientjohnny "Disorders of sexual development".
Here we can discuss the formulations of bodies and states of bodies. Can a certain morphology of body be disordered, how and influenced by what cultural factors would such a framing ensue?
We have to think critically about the things we learn and the things we read. We have to ask ourselves about formulations and ways of formulating situations.
So what you're saying is that the definitive sex characteristic is chromosomal? Or should we look at other indicators and explore the complexity of the situation we're trying to describe?
@@clarkbowler157 Do you actually believe, that the sex of every single human cannot be objectively verified? Male, or female, there are no other options. Disorders of development do not make anyone less of the sex they are, or a bit of the other one etc. Sex is determined by anatomy geared towards the facilitation of either large or small gametes, since it is complex whole, some details being altered through defects, aging, accidents, surgery etc. does nothing to change what sex a body is.
Claiming to be "trans" really has nothing at all in common with homosexuality. A person's sexuality is not a "gender identity", it is a physical fact, same-sex attraction, and the rights gay people fought for were nothing like what "trans" people are demanding - gay people were never demanding to be recognised by law as another sex than they were, they were not demanding access to spaces reserved for the opposite sex, nor were they demanding others to change a single thing about their behaviour for them, neither sex had to give up any rights or protections in the name of gay rights.
Claiming to be "trans" is not a sexuality. Being gay is a sexuality.
Further, "trans" ideology is at times extremely homophobic, as evidenced by a significant amount of people trying to redefine same-sex attraction as "gender attraction", and the phenomenon of males denying their own homosexuality under the "trans" banner, by claiming to "transition gender" into "women" and thus reframe their same-sex attraction to other males as "not gay" because they are now claiming to be "women attracted to men" - AND, the attempted erasure of lesbian reality by males claiming to be "lesbian" by "transitioning to a woman" and being attracted to females - they are not gay, they are males attracted to females, they are straight, yet trying to redefine same-sex attraction as "same-gender" attraction, which tons of lesbians are appalled by, yet their concerns get shouted down as "transphobic"
And brought to court for trying to keep their spaces lesbian only
'Gays wanted their sexuality to be protected, instead of just leaving the cis straights alone.' 'cis hetero ppl just want to use the bathroom without being worried about being raped by another gay person. That's why we need to ban gay ppl from bathrooms.' What if someone said that? You benefit from trans ppl fighting for your rights, but you want to deny their rights to exist, be safe and have an equal participation in society. Look at the mirror and see how pathetic you are being. Be better.
@@mikasa_sucasa How are males "not allowed to exist" by being told they can't access female-only spaces and activities?
How can a mother's grief at giving birth to a boy or a girl and having that boy or girl cut off their body parts to line up with some delusion of wanting to be the other gender after embibing pornography and a contagion be wrong or authoritarian?.. God will judge you and woe betide to those who hurt one of these little ones. God is a consuming fire .
To the sycophants this isn't real. These persons don't exist. Now they are "phantasms" and parents are alt-right extremists. Notice how brave this loser is, comes out of a hole to talk to people who walk in her shoes. Gee how brave.
Idiocracy and hilarity combined. It's metariffic!
comments proving that judith never fails to filter the midwits
Lol, she's peak midwit, bud.
This crap is dangerous for kids. There needs to be a warning
demons are real
they are standing still
You are making the world that I want to be in. Thank you both. x
🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡
I saw some similar thoughts written in sh!t on the wall of an insane asylum
Go away
Fact lmao
@@surlypiratewench1969🤡🤡🤡
Gender is binary, is biological anatomical fact 100%
@@TheOmnitom your douchebaggery has no limits does it?
"Who's Afraid of Gender?" Worst book I have ever read. Complete gobbledegook. This is not the writing of a genuine academic. I have manually calculated that she uses "scare quotes" 3.1 times on average for every page of text, on individual words and some phrases, and these are inconsistently applied. Why does she do that? For what purpose? Also try this: What does the following on p230 mean? "Its localist appeal to anti-imperialist sentiment is an appropriation of a Left critique, but surely not one." That is verbatim. From the preceding sentences the "Its" might be referring to opposition to gender, English or objection to multilingualism or something else. How would any reader know? Like so much of this book it is convoluted and non-sensical rubbish. And, here is another, same page: "In a multilingual epistemology, there are no foreign languages since every language sounds foreign from within another language; or maybe every language is foreign, which means there are no languages that are foreign." If I had written something as silly, as incomprehensible, as that in my PhD it would not have been passed - in fact the draft would not even have got by my supervisor. The book is a great example of the dubious linguistic contortions that underpin the distortion of reality - and that distortion permeates trans world.
The idea is that if it's near-impossible to make sense of it, it must be very complex and sophisticated and therefore Butler must be some sort of genius.
The funny thing is, one reviewer described 'Who's Afraid of Gender?', rather cattily, as 'the first book Butler has written with actual readers in mind'
@@kardra9714 It has been said before about Butler's works, but it is worth repeating: "Writing this bad is trying to hide something."
Most post-modernist writing is garbage. In Butler's case you need a garbage truck to carry the volume of bad ideas. It's idea laundering, there is no a academic credability to a discipline ending in "studies. These are a continuation of a Marxist agenda which people with luxury beliefs like to propogate. Thank you to Rob Henderson for finally defining the box to pit these academic elitist into.
It's so pathetic to listen to the modern oppressionist that spin colonialism and dominance through the western lens. They pretend to dislike a western liberal democracy and what it has become but in reality it is what funds for their luxury beliefs. Next time maybe open your eyes and explain what China or perhaps Russia. Turn back time and look at oppression and colonization through the eye of people conquered as part of the Sahelian empire as well as those enslaved as part of the Oyo Empire; they accumulated their wealth and power by feeding the demand of the trans-atlantic slave trade.
To be so smart, and yet so misguided. It would be fine if she just kept it to herself, but she is doing great harm to youthful minds and their future adult lives. Pure evil.
Feminity is chaos
I've been involved in Science and I cannot understand how people like Butler are taken seriously.
I'm an Atheist not because I fear God, but because I find the entire religious ideology ridiculous. Not because I'm leftwing or rightwing, but because the idea of a loving God is irrational.
The same is true with gender ideology for me. The idea that human existence exists outside the body, in a gendered spirit that inhabits a body to become human, is ridiculous. One does not need to be leftwing or rightwing to think rationally.
I love this.
First of all, fear of God is an sign of you being a true believer. You'd be a Christian if you feared God and live in the west. Likely a typo, but I'm a bit autistic.
Why I love your comment, is that you say "The idea that human existence exists outside the body..." while being an online avatar perfectly exhibiting the concrete reality of us existing well beyond our bodies. That is lovely. I see your blind spot. I like that.
Now does it make you believe in God, no. Does it make Judith correct, no. But we mostly exists beyond our bodies. Work, family, friends not our bodies. The very moment we do, we get introduced to a friend called depression.
People take her seriously because they are on her team. Its incredibly rare for anyone to seek the turth, and actually change their mind on anything.
@@tulisotilas "First of all, fear of God is an sign of you being a true believer. You'd be a Christian if you feared God and live in the west. Likely a typo, but I'm a bit autistic."
What I said is that I don't believe in a living God, like many believers do. But not believing doesn't make me phobic, just non-believer. With Gender, the same thing. I think Gender Ideology is a fantasy and I don't believe it, but no phobia involved. I don't fear Gender, as Butler claims. I just find the ideas ridiculous.
"But we mostly exists beyond our bodies."
We exist because of our bodies. Without our bodies this conversation would not happen.
Religions create an existence outside the body, in part, because of shame associated with the body. Creating a life outside the body seems to relieve the shame. Gender confused people try doing the same thing, trying to escape the shame of the body.
" Its incredibly rare for anyone to seek the truth, and actually change their mind on anything."
I would say the same thing to you. Seek the truth, which is rooted in your body
That is not a very accurate description. Do you think cultural realities are to be empirically tested or are discovered through examination of concepts and political analysis?
@@clarkbowler157 "Do you think cultural realities are to be empirically tested or are discovered through examination of concepts and political analysis?"
I'm not sure which "description" was inaccurate and I'm not sure what you are asking in your question.
All I know that the body is at the centre of our human experience and that I don't accept ideologies that try to create existence outside the body. That's what religions do.
@@viejolincanada *I was asking whether scientific methods are the right tools for cultural inquiry.
I don't see how somebody changing their identity points towards an existence outside the body.
Can you elaborate?
Imagine turning something so basic as reproduction into this enormous academic puzzle and then spending your entire working life tinkering with it aimlessly.
Well put.
brilliant .....enlightening 💌
All these "biology is destiny" people in the comments section baffles me. Literally everything on a birth certificate can change throughout your life but somehow the sex assigned at birth is not allowed to change. Such a ridiculous hill to die on when people just want to live their lives in their own terms.
Explain what specific standards “trans” people are measuring themselves against to determine that there is a "mismatch" - THEY are the ones with a regressively sexist idea of what it means to be a boy/girl or man/woman and that is the issue causing all the problems - their own misunderstanding and severely limited perspective/sexist misunderstanding of what sexist stereotypes/"gender norms" actually entail - they are not rules, they are not real boundaries, they are regressive ideas and generalisations - no one needs to live up to any such nonsense or feel comfortable with those stereotypes to be a boy/girl/man/woman - all those terms represent, and all they should represent, is sex and stage of maturity - by creating this whole "gender identity" nonsense they create an unnecessary distorted framework which needlessly causes distress.
Again, since you apparently understand this issue through and through; how are males or females "supposed to" think or feel, want to dress like or act? You must be able to provide specific standards for each sex for what you are contending to make any sense whatsoever. If there is no correct way of being male or female, then how can there be a "mismatch" between what they are and how they feel?
No one is "assigned" a sex at birth, lol. It is observed, and based on science. Please resist biophobic ideology and join us in the post-Enlightenment world.
❤❤❤❤ so good to hear ya. I appreciate you!
2:10-6:22
Full context for a clip floating in X.
Q: Does Butler teach or seduce people into Pdf-file stuff?
A: We teach that stuff, yes. If people want to get into it. (She uses these words, but with context this is not her an admission. The context is broader at that time.). Then she blames the chrurch (without specifying the denomination, or a religion) for blaming her and being a confessing pdf-file themselves.
So rather than denying the action bluntly, she shifts the blame to the Catholic church (assumed), without specifying her being innocent or whoch church it is. She likely does not think she is causing pdf-file victims. She likely assumes the common position of pdf/A format being a bad and immoral file format.
If we were to take words only at face value, then there would be concerns.
The amount of harm these people have caused to society is difficult to estimate. However, we know that it is huge.
Name the harm besides hurting your delicate ideas of society
@@surlypiratewench1969 hundreds Young ppl cut off parts of ther body because somebody lie them that this end they mind problems and they could change gender. Then they very often make suicide when reality hits them.
@@surlypiratewench1969 Here's just some of the harm: for starters, the names of 50 people (and there are many more) who have been fired, cancelled, were forced to resign, had to close their businesses, had contracts canecelled or were de-platformed because they would not succumb to the the pronoun idiocy forced on them in the workplace or because they stated the truth that men cannot become women and vice versa; they include teachers, artists, academics, journalists, entertainers and other occupations: M.K. Fain, Kaeley Triller, Sasha White, Kathleen Stock, Maya Forstater, Graham Linehan, Jillian Spencer, Roz Adams, Jo Phoenix, Allison Bailey, David Mackereth, Sheila Jeffreys, Maria Jose Binetti, Eugenia Rodrigues, Jessica Miranda, Priscila Cunha, Kathleen Lowrey, Laura Lecuona, Rachel Rosario Sánchez, Laura Tanner, Julie Szego, Pearl Moon, James Dreyfus, Rachel Meade, Selina Todd, Jenni Murray, Leo Kearse, Hugh Sheridan, Linda Bellos, Simon Fanshawe, Lindsay Ellison, Sall Grover, Colin Wright, Andrew Gold, Louise Distras, Natalie Bird, Sonya Douglas, Claudia Clare, Roisin Murphy, Peter Vlaming, Mary Harrington, Linzi Smith, Elizabeth Weiss, John Parks, Kevin Lister, “Max” - teacher in NSW, Jessica Tapia and Enoch Burke. They lost their livelihoods. There also are now thousands of detransitioners who were duped as minors by the propagnda of transgenderism and now have irrevocable physical damage because of it e.g. mastectomies and sterility. Young women are self-excluding from sports, especially contact sports, because they don't want to be put at risk of being tackled by much larger opponents who are men claiming to be women. And that is just some of the harm.
cry harder
@@surlypiratewench1969 Here are 50 people who have been fired/had to close their businesses, otherwise lost their livelihoods because they refused to go along with the ideas and imposed speech of trans ideology M.K. Fain, Kaeley Triller, Sasha White, Kathleen Stock, Maya Forstater, Graham Linehan, Jillian Spencer, Roz Adams, Jo Phoenix, Allison Bailey, David Mackereth, Sheila Jeffreys, Maria Jose Binetti, Eugenia Rodrigues, Jessica Miranda, Priscila Cunha, Kathleen Lowrey, Laura Lecuona, Rachel Rosario Sánchez, Laura Tanner, Julie Szego, Pearl Moon, James Dreyfus, Rachel Meade, Selina Todd, Jenni Murray, Leo Kearse, Hugh Sheridan, Linda Bellos, Simon Fanshawe, Lindsay Ellison, Sall Grover, Colin Wright, Andrew Gold, Louise Distras, Natalie Bird, Sonya Douglas, Claudia Clare, Roisin Murphy, Peter Vlaming, Mary Harrington, Linzi Smith, Elizabeth Weiss, John Parks, Kevin Lister, “Max” - teacher in NSW, Jessica Tapia, James Orwin and Enoch Burke. The categories include: academics, acting, artist, biologists, counsellor, lawyer, local government worker, NGO worker, DV worker, retail, media, medicine, MS volunteer worker of 60 years’ service, music industry, scientists, social worker, sports coach, teachers, PhD researchers, publishing industry, writers. Countries include: Australia, Argentina, Brazil, Ireland, Canada, Mexico, NZ, U.K. and U.S. There's some harm for you.
LGB without the TQ+
Vile
Would make it better for us gays
@@surlypiratewench1969🎉🤡
Can someone show me where to watch when the author is talking about what book is about? Oh and I use sex, I understand sex. Gender is the word people use, who are afraid to use the word sex.
This is a problem that needs to be fixed.
You know, they tried to fix it; turns out they are STILL women. Joking aside. I agree. This needs to be widely spread so people will understand the level of nonsense this whole thing comes from.
Oh please share your wise problem solving skills and tell us what to do
@@surlypiratewench1969🤡🤡🤡🤡
Wow, these Chat GPT's talking to each other hallucinate most of the time still; Engineers still need to tweak the bugs out I guess.
I know Butler didn't actually read any gender critical feminism for her book, but you could. Might learn something.
Thank you Judith Butler. Stay strong, ignore the bigots.
I am not a bigot. I am a leftie liberal and I know bs when I read it. "Who's Afraid of Gender?" Worst book I have ever read. Complete gobbledegook. This is not the writing of a genuine academic. I have manually calculated that she uses "scare quotes" 3.1 times on average for every page of text, on individual words and some phrases, and these are inconsistently applied. Why does she do that? For what purpose? Also try this: What does the following on p230 mean? "Its localist appeal to anti-imperialist sentiment is an appropriation of a Left critique, but surely not one." That is verbatim. From the preceding sentences the "Its" might be referring to opposition to gender, English or objection to multilingualism or something else. How would any reader know? Like so much of this book it is convoluted and non-sensical rubbish. And, here is another, same page: "In a multilingual epistemology, there are no foreign languages since every language sounds foreign from within another language; or maybe every language is foreign, which means there are no languages that are foreign." If I had written something as silly, as incomprehensible, as that in my PhD it would not have been passed - in fact the draft would not even have got by my supervisor. The book is a great example of the dubious linguistic contortions that underpin the distortion of reality - and that distortion permeates trans world.
@@281992pdrI’m a leftist too, and I agree with you 100%
You're the bigots. Gender is anatomical biological fact lmao. Men pp ladies vv
Two great minds of our times ❤
🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡
29:08
I like the point made here, the book kind of gets academic on this point and its not as concise, but this is very well said.
Sex exists without being "assigned". This is the height of arrogance. It is pure white privileged racism to say sex is assigned. Maybe it is assigned in Butler's mental silo. It ignores the many hundreds of thousands, maybe millions, born each year in remote indigenous communities across the world, or home births, or in impoverished circumstancs, or when individual women give birth alone either by choice or as cultural custom when there are no professionals around to "assign" anything so that the person has to "live with that assignment". We get the body we are born with. It is rot to project birth "assignment" onto all people. It is "phantasmatic".
After reading all these comments, a few things become clear. It is clear that many of these arguments disregard Butler’s use of Austin’s work on utterances, specifically performative utterances. This is foundational and if you can’t challenge this aspect of the thinking, you are not challenging the thinking. It’s clear that people don’t understand that this thesis is not about social construction per se, as Butler’s work is not sociological. Sociology is peripherally relevant but not directly. In addition, regarding sex one could argue that biology is a social construct. They would be correct. Every bit of categorization is named and organized within a mutable social framework. That includes the scientific method, which privileges the repeatable and critiques of methodology. It hasn’t always been that way and to be honest there is no way to suggest whether that method or a previous method that is not a predicate. So to suggest there’s two sexes according to science is fallacious. Why organize humans into genital categories based on procreative duties? Why not finger length? Or fingerprint shape? Or skull density? It’s purely arbitrary, in a sense. It is also clear, that people conflate biological sex and gender and use that to dismiss Butler’s point. There is a big difference in being and becoming. The performative has little to do with categories of human existence. I’d go further and ask, why care about biology/sex at all when it comes to identity, or anything else. It’s also clear and somewhat interesting how many claim trans-ness is misogynistic or homophobic. I’m not clear on how one could erect such an argument in a way that the structure is not a house of cards, but good one for trying. Finally, it’s also clear that their are a lot of people who seem smart but say dumb things purely based on bias or uniformed opinion or ignorance.
you comment just saves my feeling after reading those nonsense things here 🥹
Explain what specific standards “trans” people are measuring themselves against to determine that there is a "mismatch" - THEY are the ones with a regressively sexist idea of what it means to be a boy/girl or man/woman and that is the issue causing all the problems - their own misunderstanding and severely limited perspective/sexist misunderstanding of what sexist stereotypes/"gender norms" actually entail - they are not rules, they are not real boundaries, they are regressive ideas and generalisations - no one needs to live up to any such nonsense or feel comfortable with those stereotypes to be a boy/girl/man/woman - all those terms represent, and all they should represent, is sex and stage of maturity - by creating this whole "gender identity" nonsense they create an unnecessary distorted framework which needlessly causes distress.
How are males or females "supposed to" think or feel, want to dress like or act? You must be able to provide specific standards for each sex for what you are contending to make any sense whatsoever. If there is no correct way of being male or female, then how can there be a "mismatch" between what they are and how they feel?
1000%! Half this debate could be avoided if we just understood the bases for peoples’ work BEFORE forming a conclusion.
I really hope some person with an open mind comes here willing to learn and be challenged by new perspectives.
Stories of intellect
Thank you for this sharing this with the PW audience at large. There is so much to consider that arises from this candid and brave conversation between Butler and Halberstam. I read Butler's work during my years as PhD student and the ideas are increasingly relevant in our multi-dimensional era. We welcome these diverse paths of radical thought. What a gift to be able to explore these ideas with strong thinkers to lead the dialogue. Butler remains a pioneering outspoken badass, damn right! Cheers to this!
"Who's Afraid of Gender?" Worst book I have ever read. Complete gobbledegook. This is not the writing of a genuine academic. I have manually calculated that she uses "scare quotes" 3.1 times for every page of text, on individual words and some phrases, and these are inconsistently applied. Why does she do that? For what purpose? Also try this: What does the following on p230 mean? "Its localist appeal to anti-imperialist sentiment is an appropriation of a Left critique, but surely not one." That is verbatim. From the preceding sentences the "Its" might be referring to oposition to gender, English or objection to multilingualism or something else. How would any reader know? Like so much of this book it is convoluted and non-sensical rubbish. And, here is another, same page: "In a multilingual epistemology, there are no foreign languages since every language sounds foreign from within another language; or maybe every language is foreign, which means there are no languages that are foreign." If I had written something as silly, as incomprehensible, as that in my PhD it would not have been passed - in fact the draft would not even have got by my supervisor. It is no wonder that in 1999 she was given an award for "worst sentence" written that year. Google it. The book is a great example of the dubious linguistic contortions that underpin the distortion of reality - and that distortion permeates trans world.
@@281992pdr what was the worst sentence she was awarded for? Given the two you quoted there I'm excited to read the one was awarded for
They scoff and call the rest of us "Far right Christians" (I'm so far from that its not funny) when SHE insists that there is no such thing as sexual dichroism and denies basic biological evolutionary reality, and you thinks she's "candid and brave"? You've been successfully brainwashed into a cult.
@@281992pdr The second quote makes perfect sense. Essentially they are saying that in a theory of learning coming from multiple languages, there is no foreign language. To be foreign is relative because it is defined by what culture (or language) you yourself come from. For example: I speak English, so I think Chinese is a foreign language, but it is not foreign to a native Chinese speaker. That Chinese speaker would see English as foreign just the same. So because every language can be considered foreign, no languages are because the description breaks down.
Edit: I haven't read their book yet, but it's coming in the mail and, based on your quotes, I'm very excited for it :)
@@lucascampbell8521 Why are you using incorrect grammar? Butler is one person - singular. She was awarded in 1999 the worst sentence written by an academic. She truly earnt it. Look it up. Her book - there is only one of her, and her book is also singular - is gobbledegook. She also uses in her book the term "seeks" in its past present and future tenses on average one every 1.8 pages. Why, ffs? At the starts she says a few times "I hope". Genuine academics writ with prupose and clarity. She does not. She also always writes of Black people with a capital B and brown people with a lower case b. I can only presume this is some kind of virtue signalling. Or just racism.
Lovely
This is an insult to LGB people. Same-sex attraction is biologically based and is not the same as the categories in the TQIA2SCDEFHJKMNOPRUVWXYZ movement.