A response to trans critics | Peter Tatchell, Bobbi Pickard
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 30 มิ.ย. 2023
- Peter Tatchell and Bobbi Pickard respond to common objections raised by trans critics. How can we bridge the public divide on this fiery issue? This was "In conversation with Peter Tatchell and Bobbi Pickard." To hear Peter Tatchell outline his vision for a fair, successful and accountable economy, head to: iai.tv/video/economic-democra...
#TransRights #Activism #PublicDebate
The debate around trans identity in recent years has been a fiery one. And it doesn't seem to be dissipating anytime soon. Join legendary activist and outspoken free-speech defender Peter Tatchell and trans rights campaigner Bobbi Pickard as they tackle the public divide on this fiery issue and show us how to move forward.
The Institute of Art and Ideas features videos and articles from cutting edge thinkers discussing the ideas that are shaping the world, from metaphysics to string theory, technology to democracy, aesthetics to genetics. Subscribe today! iai.tv/subscribe?Y...
For debates and talks: iai.tv
For articles: iai.tv/articles
For courses: iai.tv/iai-academy/courses
📌 Thank you for watching "In conversation with Peter Tatchell and Bobbi Pickard"! If you'd like to learn more about Peter Tatchell's life's work in activism, don't miss this insightful interview: th-cam.com/video/smXpnXaBVuI/w-d-xo.html
Make sure to subscribe to our channel and turn on notifications to stay updated with our latest videos.
Hi,
28:40 : We all want to give happyness to everyone. But for children and teenagers, happyness may not be potential irreversible lifelong health damages. Maybe they'll change their mind before they're adults. Children and teenagers (and even young adults) have time. Puberty is about questions, and also sexual questions. Questions are by definition not a No Way Back road.
The pity number this MAN pulled no longer works. If he feels threatened by other men in places intended for men, it's not a problem that you can simply pass on to women. You cannot expect women to allow all men who imagine they are women into their places just because they imagine they are threatened by other men and in the same breath demand that women should ignore their instincts !
What is her bad faith argument?
Kathleen Stock has done nothing but put her views to public scrutiny. Within the first few minutes we can see the bad faith in this argument
What is her bad faith argument?
@@MarinaUganda That they are not going to debate the points made by Kathleen Stock, but rather villainize her.
True, I couldn't agree more. I think they lied when they said that they couldn't find a gender critical person to debate. Come on, gender critical feminists are the wnats demanding debate.@@Schmuck
To suggest that Kathleen Stock is afraid to face public scrutiny is highly disingenuous
Perhaps Cathleen Stock??
She's done nothing but face public scrutiny with absolute dignity
Very contrived
🤣I know, if only she would speak her mind and put her career on the line
@@memyselfandi2506 indeed, I don't even know who she is because she's said absolutely nothing on the matter, I believe she wrote a book that is entirely empty
'No debate' has been a 'trans' mantra. What is Peter Tatchell talking about?
They always lie.
8:00 Peter says it's _"outrageous to restrict people on an assumption of what they might do",_ yet that is how we run society, that is literally why we have separate spaces for females that males are not welcome in. Allowing women to have their own spaces is not a punishment for males, as Peter asserts, it is to keep women safe.
hit the nail on the head
If I could name a law that isn't based on "what people might do" I would
Yes, just like having gay bars was not to keep straights out but to give gay men a chance to hook up. God I miss those days.
@@benfisher1376 absolutely, they were places where you knew you could approach people whereas in a straight bar there was a potentially high cost for doing that.
@RenegadeContext So annoying to be chatting to a nice guy, and then, he just tells you "I'm straight btw" 🙄
Kathleen Stock doesn't 'demonise and vilify' transpeople. I've read 'Material Girls'. That is not the purpose of the book.
Exactly.
The 'battle cry' of the 70's 'Biology is not Destiny' did not refer to anything but the biological difference between the sexes and to male dominance over and oppression of female members of society. It was not a denial of the biological difference between males (xy) and females (xx).
The Trans issue is highlighted, not because trans people are a danger to women in female spaces, but because it is creating a fundamental change in modern society. However, as Peter says, trans-women have been going into female spaces for many years and have been accepted by the vast majority of people in the West (in particular) for many years. The issue of men who want to present as women is not the issue. Modern Western Society has accepted many liberating movements since the sixties; women's rights, gay rights, and so on and is generally much more accepting of our differences. However, the Trans movement seems to have hi-jacked this post-war sense of liberation and freedom to be oneself.
I am delighted Bobbi has found peace and is enjoying life. Nobody should be denied such inner peace.
However, the talk has evaded serious concerns such as;
* Children at the earliest of ages being told that their problems; whether they be mental issues, identity issues, feelings of being a boy/girl and so on...can be resolved by re-identifying, receiving identity therapy, by taking hormone medication, by taking hormone blockers, by opting for surgical remedies...
* Consent being ignored
* Pressure in schools and the workplace to use different language terms
* Trans-women taking part in female activities such as female sports...
* Women and men feeling uncertain / unhappy about allowing young children to go into public toilets alone, into unisex toilets alone...
These and many other issues are of great concern to mothers and fathers, brothers and sisters ... and were not discussed.
The discussion of these issues are not in any way an attempt to demonize trans-people. They are legitimate concerns and must be debated at the highest levels.
Sir you are dillusional
She does however patronise and minimise the experiences of trans people.
She talks about health services with limited experience and understanding of the services and the culture, generally they operate in.
Some of the issues in the Tavistock clinic for example are issues in healthcare delivery and are not unique to the Tavistock clinic.
I think she asks important questions but sadly does it in a condescending, patronising way that does herself, service providers and most importantly trans people a massive disservice.
@@badishoody3961'dillusional' - ooh, a neologism! 🤭
@@debbieshrubb1222I totally disagree.
Have finished watching this - Peter Tatchell should be ashamed with his misleading, obfuscating and disingenuous sophistry. All intended to mislead.
Since when does being feminine require long hair, makeup, and dresses? It seems these are only parts of a stereotype. It seems like a type of sexism.
It doesn't require that, but bigots nevertheless use these kinds of things to pick their targets, such as targeting short-haired women in restrooms.
That's why Tatchell and others NEVER EVER say what they believe creates the 'gender identity' woman. How can a male have a 'gender identity' of 'woman'? Scratch that just a little and the horrendous sexism becomes clear.....what goes unsaid is likes pink, likes cuddles, likes being pretty.🤦♀️
@@Apostate1970That’s only because people are on guard thanks to troons wanting access.
@@transwomenaremale yes, that's right. We are talking about bigots like yourself.
@@Apostate1970, citations! Women wear their hair short since the 1920s!
Wanting my 12 year old daughter to have privacy from men in a public bathroom is not misogyny. The fact my daughter, completely on her own, has decided not to use public restrooms with more than one stall is a shame.
The fact that you've so badly described the actual situation, including by using misgendering, tells us all we need to know: that you're a bigot teaching your daughter your hate.
Its very cultural. There a lots of nations where there is just one restroom. I have used a public toilet in Italy that was "mens" where there was a female custodian in the room at the time (expecting a tip by the way) for keeping the room clean.
Agree. And by the same token I would certainly not feel comfortable as a 67 year old man taking out my penis to pee in the same space as a 12 year old girl. The reasons why are so evident that I fail to understand how anyone could argue it would be appropriate.
@@sgregg5257 Women are much safer when men are excluded from spaces where women are in a state of undress or distress such as toilets, changing rooms, hospital wards, prisons, refuges etc.
the word "lots" is doing some heavy lifting there. Why do you lie so blatantly? @@sgregg5257
Cannot believe that they couldn't find a GC feminist to debate this. I could name a dozen who would have been happy to do it, so I'm going to call BS on Peter's claim. And we can all see the violence and hate speech that comes from the gender ideologue side, so don't give us that "both sides" BS.
I'll send this video to sex matters and see if they were considered or asked
they didn't want a GC feminist there... obviously
Yet, I see first hand the amount of abuse my trans friends get. So don't give us this BS that it's the trans side doing most of the abuse. Because it isn't. If you spoke to trans people in real life you'd see that.
@@d818581dd I understand that social media hypes this, but we have all seen the absolute wave of abuse directed at GC women. Hatred of women looks to be intrinsic to gender ideology. Take a look at TERF is a slur, or listen to "listen to trans people". Please stop trying to pretend that there's a good side and a bad side. I've witnessed huge amounts of violent threats on the TRA side.
I do not believe that no gender critical person would debate this person - who did they ask? I can think of many who have previously debated trans people and many others who regularly say they would like the opportunity.
I've emailed sex matters to see if they were contacted
Very hypocritical of Peter to say Kathleen Stock refuses to face public scrutiny considering he chickened out of debating with her in public twice.
I don't for a second believe the simplistic "we asked trans critical people to come and debate but no one would" - I want to know who was asked, by whom, how far before the event, what conditions or ground rules were proposed, etc. We know that informed, logical debate on this subject generally favors the "gender critical" (not 'those who demonize trans people' - a little inflammatory there), and that most are chomping at the bit for a fairly-moderated opportunity to do just that.
The trans community always gets a call urging their debater to pull out so as not to "legitimize" the debate.
Each critic mentions repeatedly that they have difficulty getting the other side to appear in debates.
Helen Joyce, Kathleen Stock and Julie Bindel, for example, as well as the LGB Alliance, are constantly willing to debate. Stonewall and their allies are not. Tatchell - to be fair - is often seen debating on TV, even though he often lies about his opponents' views or is hopelessly defending an irrational viewpoint of his own.
Women like Kathleen Stock, Helen Joyce and many more have invited debate in fact, they advocate it. No one has responded. Do not spread the misinformation that women do not want to debate this with Peter or Bobbi.
And cis is not a thing btw. The noun women is taken no matter what she looks like, how she dresses or who she chooses to have sex with. Niether of these men understand that sex is at the root of women's oppression. Mansplaning womens liberation isn't helpful Peter!
Oh these men DO understand. They are simply sexist trolls.
I've listened to all the trans critics and they universally point out that they often speak alone because the trans debater always pulls out at the last minute. There apparently is a feeling in the trans community that debating their critics "gives a platform and legitimacy" to the critics, thus they refuse to debate.
Excuse for knowing you will lose the debate.
@@randellbrown7072
The 'battle cry' of the 70's 'Biology is not Destiny' did not refer to anything but the biological difference between the sexes and to male dominance over and oppression of female members of society. It was not a denial of the biological difference between males (xy) and females (xx).
The Trans issue is highlighted, not because trans people are a danger to women in female spaces, but because it is creating a fundamental change in modern society. However, as Peter says, trans-women have been going into female spaces for many years and have been accepted by the vast majority of people in the West (in particular) for many years. The issue of men who want to present as women is not the issue. Modern Western Society has accepted many liberating movements since the sixties; women's rights, gay rights, and so on and is generally much more accepting of our differences. However, the Trans movement seems to have hi-jacked this post-war sense of liberation and freedom to be oneself.
I am delighted Bobbi has found peace and is enjoying life. Nobody should be denied such inner peace.
However, the talk has evaded serious concerns such as;
* Children at the earliest of ages being told that their problems; whether they be mental issues, identity issues, feelings of being a boy/girl and so on...can be resolved by re-identifying, receiving identity therapy, by taking hormone medication, by taking hormone blockers, by opting for surgical remedies...
* Consent being ignored
* Pressure in schools and the workplace to use different language terms
* Trans-women taking part in female activities such as female sports...
* Women and men feeling uncertain / unhappy about allowing young children to go into public toilets alone, into unisex toilets alone...
These and many other issues are of great concern to mothers and fathers, brothers and sisters ... and were not discussed.
The discussion of these issues are not in any way an attempt to demonize trans-people. They are legitimate concerns and must be debated at the highest levels.
Far safer to pretend you have taken a moral stand by pulling out than having your position analysed, exposed and deconstructed in public.
@@hmsealey3243 yup
More like they know they can't argue against logic and reason. A good debater will obliterate their views.
Nothing about what Kathleen Stock said in her iai interview “vilified” or “demonized” trans people. Unfortunately an intro like that was enough for me to move on to another video.
Shame for someone so open-minded
I take your point, but also feel that Peter Tatchell is worth listening to, especially as he appears to base his argument on rational foundations, and not just sloganising or name calling.
Watch it again with someone who is more attuned to the transphobic dog whispers. It's not hard to see though. You can also just Wikipedia her or see my comment on that video. IAI has chosen to be a hate group.
Watch it again with someone who is more attuned to the transphobic dog whispers. It's not hard to see though. You can also just Wikipedia her or see my comment on that video. IAI has chosen to be a hate group.
@@Apostate1970 I did not get to watch the entire video (only the beginning, TBH), but I did note that Tatchell drew a distinction between (biological) women and trans women, and wondered how that went down with Bobbi Pickard (about whom I know nothing, as you implied in your response).
If you listen to Kathleen Stock you would know she does NOT demonize trans people. She calls for dialogue and reason and has stated repeatedly that trans people are deserving of kindness and acceptance and freedom from fear of violence with legal protections that all human beings have a right to. In the first minute you get it wrong Mr Tatchell
Peter the whole world has seen how trans do “debate”, such as when KJK organises Let Women Speak.
Angry and violent men and pro trans supporters will not let women speak.
Please explain why this is?
The irony of two biological men debating women’s rights.
This.
Couple of straw-man points: gender neutral toilets at festivals are single private cubicles; trans women are not the problem and never have been, the problem is men who exploit the category of trans for their own nefarious ends. The point is, when you abolish sex categories it is wide open to exploitation by nefarious men. Let's be real, violence against women is overwhelmingly made by men which is why women in general need to be protected against men whilst on vulnerable and intimate spaces like prisons or changing rooms.
Women's rights are sex based rights, if you do away with sex based categories it will also affect on those sex based rights. Women have never excluded or demonised trans women until there was a reason to. This is not a knee jerk reaction this is a reaction to the progressive narrative and political stance that any man can identify as a woman at any time based on a feeling.
Yes, but trans activists want to have it both ways. They shout: "Trans women are women!" But suddenly when one commits a violent and/or sexual crime they're back to being "nefarious men", and yet, there are still activists who will argue that such men should be housed in the women's prison estate. There is no coherence or consistency here at all.
Desisters and detransitioners are treated no better -- they're ostracised and told that they were never trans in the first place.
These people can't have it both ways.
@@lewreed1871 I do feel that trans people and trans activists have to be marked as distinct groups of people... they are not one and the same. There is unfortunately a 'trans trend' that many people have jumped on and made their cause, fighting for something they don't really understand and actively harming trans people in the process.
the idea that cis men are claiming to be trans as a way to target women is based on zero evidence. even then, if you divide bathrooms by sex, those predatory cis men can just claim they’re trans men if they want access to female spaces. your “solution” of segregating by sex does nothing to solve your hypothetical problem about dangerous cis men while actively putting trans people in harms way.
@@abcxyz2927 How so? Can you elaborate further? What point did I make that was 'stepping over the picket line', to use your analogy?
@@abcxyz2927 who tf would pay for that? it’d be more honest if you to say “i want trans people banned from public bathrooms”. don’t get why you’re trying to pick the “politically correct” way to be anti-trans
Peter Tatchell, sounding reasonable and respectable... while shading the truth almost every step of the way. Virtually nobody in the comments section was persuaded by his talk.
I find him very strange. Especially when he talks about lowering the age of consent etc
Most people brainwashed by conservative values and religious bigotry. Too dull to understand diversity even exists.
@benfisher1376
Sexually advanced children and teens exist. They are not victims. They are more inclined to be bashed and bullied, if LGBT. Wake up.
He always shades his Truth. Presents himself excellently. But dont have to look too far to find his views unacceptable. He finds ti totally normal and acceptable for an older man to have a sexual relationship with a 7 year old and quotes such instances in cutlures and history. Greek LOve and also defended and argued about convicted paedophiles to be trusted and be allowed to work with young and vulnerable people again. He is very questionable and very dodgy
@@juneknight8512
At least he defends justice and human rights unlike the joker Douglas Murray!!!
My argument is simple. I do not want my 12 year old daughter to be forced to share a restroom with a man, whether they are law abiding or not. What is outrageous is forcing this upon my family. This videos ratio of 3-1 down voting shows your opinion is the minority.
You're so hate-filled that you're spamming this thread with variations of the same misgendering, transphobic comment. IAI is ok with it though because they're a hate group.
Oh look, another man that is hostile towards a minority group. Men repeating the same mistakes ad nauseum. you can mansplain about trans people all you want. They are here to stay.
A woman, is an adult human female, it is not an "identity" or a feeling, dress, attitude etc., that whole line of thinking is regressive in the extreme. Claiming there is some "essence" to "womanhood" that also males can access, but the reality is that women do not have to look or act any certain way, or act out some ludicrously sexist idea of the “social role of a woman”, all females who reach adulthood are women regardless of how they feel or look, and the one thing they ALL have in common, the one experience they ALL share, is that they are FEMALE, they do not have to "identify" as anything, they physically ARE women because they are female.
Why should MALES be allowed access to SINGLE-SEX spaces reserved for FEMALES based on their "gender identity"? If sex and gender are separate, then a male announcing his "gender identity" is "trans woman" does nothing to change their sex, they are still MALE - so why should they be afforded rights reserved for the opposite SEX? The movement is regressively sexist, and misogynistic.
Why do you believe females do not deserve any spaces free of males? What is hateful about upholding female sex-based rights that were fought long and hard for?
Believing sexist stereotypes define men and women, instead of their biological sex, is unquestionably sexist to the core, because you are saying men and women are not actually free to behave however they want but need to conform to these sexist stereotypes in order to be men or women - if you say no they don't have to act any sort of way as a man or woman, and being a man or woman has nothing to do with biology - then what are you describing by calling someone a man or woman? If you think it doesn't describe biology, and doesn't describe anything about their looks or behaviour, then what on earth are you basing defining anyone as a man or woman on??? Why would a man need to become a "trans woman" in order to be their "authentic selves", why can't they just be a very feminine man and dress/act however they want?
If trans ideology isn't sexist, then why would a man ever need to "transition" if either sex is completely free to act however they want? How can you claim to be opposing sexism when the whole basis for anyone feeling the need to transition, literally is sexism?
How is gender identity" any different from what sexist stereotypes a person feels drawn to? Or simply their PERSONALITY? And, if sex and gender are separate, then why should "transitioning gender" allow MALES into FEMALE-ONLY spaces, they never changed, nor can they change, their sex. How is removing the rights of females to single-sex spaces progressive? How is centering male feelings over female rights "feminist"?
Well stated.
You didn't listen to the talk, did you?
@@jonstewart464oh yes they did as I have but you still fail to see the inconsistency in the trans arguments and what is worse you fail to see the outcome for society which Peter so aptly demonstrates every time he sprouts his RUBBISH!
@@jonstewart464 You didnt listen to the argument against the video, did you?
@@thisiswhatilike54 Yes, plus I've heard it at least 100 times before. It doesn't respond to what the speaker in the video says, instead it presents an inaccurate, uneducated view of what trans people say about themselves.
I don't believe for a second that the major personalities in opposition to the delusion that sex is not binary were contacted and refused to debate the issue. Trans liberation is misogynist when males try to claim the spaces reserved for females. No one wants to abuse or reject people living their lives as they desire, as long as they don't harm others (an expectation of every person regardless of how they chose to live their lives). We will not change the language to appease anyone. The gender spectrum is masculine to feminine, and many of the affects are socially constructed, but sex is not. There is and has to be a strict male-female divide in sports because of the biological differences between the sexes. These differences are not socially constructed. There will never be equal outcomes by population in any endeavor because of biological differences. This does not mean that any achievement is beyond any individual, but even on an individual level sex will be determinative of possibilities. Individuals are not being excluded "because they are trans." They are being excluded because they are male, regardless of their subjective appreciation that they are women. No "trans man" individuals are being excluded from male spaces, and for very good reasons. Focus on that issue.
A voice of reason.
Good luck in the world with that Point of View.
@@ChrissiXIt’s one the vast majority of people seem to share actuality.
This is such a complex and confusing issue. I’m a gay male, so I like to think that I’m empathetic towards minorities who struggle for social justice etc etc. However, I’m also a scientist, and I like to see empirical evidence. Finally, I’m now approaching 60 years old, and I’ve reached a point where I try to be open to how others feel, and to realise that if I’m not an expert on something then my opinion isn’t worth much. I watched this video with interest, and I found what was said compelling. If also listened to the “other side” and heard much that sounds very sensible. I’m left in a quandary. I feel both sides have a right to express their stance, but I would like to see both face real scrutiny. Surely much of the disagreement could be resolved by research and statistics, and yet so much of both arguments seem to rely on a few examples and a lot of appealing to the emotions. This is no way to conduct a public debate. When the law on male homosexuality in the UK was reviewed in the 1960s, public opinion was very much against reform. For most people (particularly straight men, who made up most of the MPs in the House of Commons and in the Lords) the idea of homosexuality was repugnant. And yet those MPs reviewed the scientific evidence and heard testimony from experts and the law was changed. However, the popular press continued to stir up homophobia. Even we’ll into the 1980s I remember people like Kenny Everett and George Micheal being vilified and smeared by the press. In time public opinion changed. I feel that on the issue of transgender rights that we are in the early stages of a similar process. Social and legal change takes time. While we wait to see what the outcome will be, we should remember that there are human lives being affected, and we should come to the process with dignity and compassion. I was always taught that if you lose your temper then you’ve lost the argument.
Imagine being part of a movement mostly made up of reactionary men, including Islamists, far-right Christians and Nazis, while most cis women are directly opposed to you, and having the audacity to call other people misogynists. Absolutely delusional.
How does anyone still take Tatchell seriously. He’s changed his take on this subject at every turn & is now spouting talking points that only a year ago he was decrying as beyond the pale & abhorrent ie biology is real. He’s only interested in promoting one thing: Brand Tatchell. 😂
Because, like many commentators now, he's making a nice living from all this.
We need more Tatchells. He is the sanest human on this page. Bigotry abounds.
@@leonharrison800 🤣🤣🤣
@@danceswithgoths
Stop the ignorance. We need more Peter Tatchells across Britain and globally. Wake up.
@@leonharrison800 join the LGB Alliance
Peter says in the first part we need to talk and discuss these things Calmly and around 17 minutes into the debate the accuses the people who disagree of being misogynists and far right well racist interesting
Please--of course trans people have rights--but don't say girls' and womens' fears have "no basis in fact." And if you feel that people are saying women's rights should have dominance, maybe it's because some 50% of the population are women, and also that the oppression of women come from all sides, including from trans activists.
Why lie? Kathleen Strock does not demonize trans women. I watched her debate a trans woman. I’ve seen other people debate trans women, men, activists, and allies. There are videos here on TH-cam. Strock is not anti trans. She believes like I do that trans women are not women. They’re men living as women. And they deserve respect and dignity. She believes I like believe there are spaces that should be only for biological woman.
The lady says she expected to see a female in the mirror, which I understand (and so does anyone who heard the term gender dysphoria). The problem for other people isn't trans people existing and doing well. The problem is fairness in sports, cancel culture (people losing jobs), children being experimented on, idiotic celebrities demanding to be called whatever pronoun the feel like, and constant gaslighting of reason and facts. The guy with the clipboard didn't even mention any of these, so I don't know what he achieved here really.
And the ability of women and girls to assert sex-based boundaries in the small number of instances where biological sex can be extremely relevant, like medical care, therapy, home help, incarceration, changing rooms and sports. To deny women and girls that right is oppressive and abusive and it will never be okay. Gender Identity is a distinctly different issue to gay rights. People are significantly and seriously harmed when the complexity of the issues involved are ignored.
What you just said sounded like a Nazi saying, 'the problem isn't Jews existing and doing well', then followed by the conspiracy theories and noxious notions Nazis believe about Jewish people. You obviously do think trans people doing well is an issue, otherwise you wouldn't believe the fascist conspiracy theory that kids are being 'experimented on', so maybe don't pretend otherwise. At least have the courage to be honest about your convictions.
Absolutely!
For me, it is people who were boern male who want to be in female spaces like prison cells or rape crisis centres. In California, there are condoms distributed in some female prisons because of the number of "trans women" in the general population. Inmates feel that they are given a trans cellmate as a punishment for being bolshy with the prison guards. Nightmare.
'The lady' is a man.
Deserving of respect, and maybe on a day to day basis, in trivial interactions, the polite thing to do is play along (I'm undecided on that).
But when it's pertinent, such as here, one shouldn't obfuscate.
He is a gender dysphoric man.
I don't agree with much of anything Peter or Bobbi says. But I am very very glad this video is up and available to watch AND you kept the comments open. Peter there are MANY feminists who would engage in debate and public discussion with you and transpeople. Why did Kathleen have her own session? Tell the truth.
What an outpouring of upside down, self-serving drivel from Tatchell. Who does he think he's kidding?
Well. I thought the talks by both people were excellent. My understanding of the issues have progressed. Thank you for the video.🌱
@@berniv7375 There is no understanding to be gleaned from the nonsense in this video. It's ideology mixed up with fabrications and straight up lies. If your understanding was zero before you watched this, it's now in negative figures. It's garbage.
One of the most powerful talks I heard this week was Trans: teen trend or social contagion. A psychologist, Dr Helen Joyce, Katie Went and more! I highly recommend this talk.
Just because a man thinks he is a woman doesn't mean the rest of us have to go along with his delusion
Fact: You've walked by many trans women in your life and have never noticed.
@@annasjamz5341 Fact, they would are not "trans women" they are men dressed like women, ie drag queens
This delusion should also not be more important than my 12 year old daughter's right to privacy from men in a public bathrooms.
@@annasjamz5341 I seriously doubt that but i'd be interested to hear how you came to that conclusion and especially what you've seen/read that "proved" it as factual
@@annasjamz5341 odd that my reply was deleted ...."you noticed" ....was it you who reported it because it showed that *you* proves your own argument wrong?
The world should not conform to extreme fringe personality compulsions.
Peter made a point that trans people have been using female spaces for many years and have had no issues. Suddenly it’s an issue. Perhaps, that’s because of the trans movement? Men identifying as female with male body parts are not transgenders. This is why there’s an issue.
You don't get to gatekeep who is and isn't trans. Also, no one's been policing who gets to use women's spaces on the basis of genitalia.
Its untrue that it "hasn't been a problem" simply because no one reported it.
@@Gingerblaze There hasn't been a problem, unless you're a bigoted prick.
@@davidparry5310 David, open your door to the public and let men in your house to use your bathroom with your wife/partner/mother/sister/daughters, let those men get naked in your home infront of all the Females in your family. This will then resolve the issue for all other Females and you will get exactly what you are asking for 👍 you sexist 🤡
I don;t know what he saw when he looked in the mirror, but I still see a man, looking now.
I do not believe for one second that any of the major players would refuse to debate these two on the issues. The attempt to shut down speech on this issue is exclusively on the pro gender identity side. “No debate” is literally one of their slogans. I’ve lost count of the instances where they’ve refused to turn up to a discussion when they know a gender critical person like Helen Joyce or Kathleen Stock or Julie Bindel would be appearing, The pro gender identity activists protest the ability of gender identity critics to speak on this issue at all.
There's no debate about racism these days, is there? I mean, it's not a good thing, not something to promote. That's the meaning of "no debate." The issue of discrimination based on race is settled.
@@numbersix8919 I was referring to the use of the slogan by gender identity activists specifically. Race is completely irrelevant to the issues i'm raising.
@@DangerJim-vq5uh If you mean toilets, everyone agrees: man no go in to women's toilet. There is no controversy.
@@numbersix8919 Yes, man go in to women's toilet. See Eddie Izzard. Man also go in women's prisons, rape shelters, hospital wards, saunas and spas, and sports. There is controversy.
@numbersix8919 I think the point is these sports leagues and toilets were not made for men. They were in mind of what women wanted excluded. And it looks like women are still not sure who they want excluded from their sports and toilets but it seems like calling oneself woman is not the bar
Bobbi speaks of everyone deserving to 'flourish'.
At whose expense?
In what circumstances?
To allow someone’s rights doesn’t mean you have to exclude other peoples rights.
Gender identity is real ? Good luck proving that one
Is "gender identity" in the room with us right now?
imagine thinking you only like the things you like because you have a penis lmao.
Someone with long hair vs someone with short hair is visible, no?@@TempikuHow bout shaved legs vs hairy legs? Those are all visible signs of gender identity.
I'm just so embarrassed by Peter Tatchell. 1:31 Kathleen Stock has asked for debate for years- if you knew she was speaking Peter, why didn't you have the guts to be there? Why is it her fault you didn't show up? Then comes a large appeal to authority- Peter also wrote those choice words about kids having sex with adults- I can't. 2:59 please provide evidence. On one side of the debate women have been raped in prison by men who identify as women. This has happened in the UK, and the US. What's happened on the other side of the debate? What's the intimidation that's happened? No receipts. 3:10 he just said we have to challenge people but bigotry is not the way to go- he JUST put down Kathleen stock not two minutes ago. Genuinely Peter, which threats of rape and violence are these? There aren't any in Kathleen Stock's book, nor in Hannah Barnes' Book, nor in Abigail Schreier's book, nor countless others. Conversely, Andrea Long Chu won a Pulitzer for saying that the barest essentials of femaleness were " an open mouth, an expectant a**hole, blank, blank eyes." 4:32 if you respect biological fact Peter then why can't women have same sex spaces? If sex is legitimate as you claim, then surely women wishing to have their protected characteristic of sex protected under British law should be upheld, i.e by not being imprisoned with males, and having access to same sex intimate care. 5:29 Peter just said that people are oppressed for their gender non-conformity, not just for their biological sex and then defined gender non conformity as not conforming to the expectations that go with one's biological sex. Yes Peter, Sex is the thing being oppressed in both of those. "Trans Critics seem to me to uphold a strict male female divide, rather than overcome those barriers and divisions." Yes Peter, there IS a strict divide between people on the basis of their SEX, and that is what is being up held, they are saying men aren't women, NOT that men aren't allowed to be effeminate, or that girls can't be butch, but that men and woman are different sexes, and due to the physical advantages held by men, women need same sex spaces, same sex sports etc. TRANS on the other hand makes people think if they are gender nonconforming then they're in the wrong sex class.
Thank you for this thorough rebuttle. Much appreciated.
They really couldn't find someone to debate??? This is meaningless.
16:30 : Victimhood. And the sadly classical closing of a possible debate concerning the controversy. That's what Kathleen Stock also talked about.
The lies right out the gate about Kathleen Stock ! She was ready to debate Peter HE pulled out.
09:35 : The difference _today_ it that apparently if I or _anybody_ says "The next ten minutes I'll feel/be a women", then I, _anybody_ , can enter women safe spaces. Isn't that issue obvious for everyone?
Peter, what a complete betrayal of gay rights you have commited, you should be ashamed of yourself.
Usual straw-manning of Kathleen Stock. She does not 'demonise and vilify' trans people. And never has.
But if a man just has to put on lippy and earing to make him a women that is 100% reverting to gender stereotypes as is giving a little kid the idea that if he plays with dolls a likes to wear dresses then they are a girl! NO! clothing has no gender and there are many things about gender that are socially constructed but there is also biological differences thay are extraordinary important. Mainly male violence!
You’ve clearly not watched and listened to the video.
Yes, Tatchells attempt to equate rates of female violence with male violence and specifically violence committed by males who identify as trans, was straight up deceptive.
16%of male non trans identifying prison population are incarcerated for violent sexual crime against women and children compared to 56% of the trans identified male prisoners. This cohort is actually at higher risk of harming women and children than the general non trans identifying male prisoner population. (Uk prison data, 2019)
No scientific studies presented.
28:40 : We all want to give happyness to everyone. But for children and teenagers, happyness may not be potential irreversible lifelong health damages. Maybe they'll change their mind before they're adults. Children and teenagers (and even young adults) have time. Puberty is about questions, and also sexual questions. Questions are by definition not a No Way Back road.
The 'battle cry' of the 70's 'Biology is not Destiny' did not refer to anything but the biological difference between the sexes and to male dominance over and oppression of female members of society. It was not a denial of the biological difference between males (xy) and females (xx).
The Trans issue is highlighted, not because trans people are a danger to women in female spaces, but because it is creating a fundamental change in modern society. However, as Peter says, trans-women have been going into female spaces for many years and have been accepted by the vast majority of people in the West (in particular) for many years. The issue of men who want to present as women is not the issue. Modern Western Society has accepted many liberating movements since the sixties; women's rights, gay rights, and so on and is generally much more accepting of our differences. However, the Trans movement seems to have hi-jacked this post-war sense of liberation and freedom to be oneself.
I am delighted Bobbi has found peace and is enjoying life. Nobody should be denied such inner peace.
However, the talk has evaded serious concerns such as;
* Children at the earliest of ages being told that their problems; whether they be mental issues, identity issues, feelings of being a boy/girl and so on...can be resolved by re-identifying, receiving identity therapy, by taking hormone medication, by taking hormone blockers, by opting for surgical remedies...
* Consent being ignored
* Pressure in schools and the workplace to use different language terms
* Trans-women taking part in female activities such as female sports...
* Women and men feeling uncertain / unhappy about allowing young children to go into public toilets alone, into unisex toilets alone...
These and many other issues are of great concern to mothers and fathers, brothers and sisters ... and were not discussed.
The discussion of these issues are not in any way an attempt to demonize trans-people. They are legitimate concerns and must be debated at the highest levels.
Absolutely 💯 % correct
So a women cannot have a beard, but can have a pines? 🤔
That was the one thing he said that made me wonder if he got his notes mixed up. It's such a completely absurd thing to say
No 'trans' critic was prepared to debate you? That's such obvious BS. 😂
21:30 "Cis-gendered" is not a scientific term.
Correct. 'Cisgender' is.
"Cis-sexual" would likely be a better scientific nomenclature. Still, "Cis-gender," is not helpful since it promote a gender binary that activists have been fighting against for decades
"Cis" is a term used in chemisty, not to refer to human beings.
@@Gingerblaze It's also used in physical geography.
It's also completely irrelevant as Women = Female and Man =Male.
And there is no need to create any form of subcategory for anyone who exists in the reality of who and what we are.
It's basically a nonsense term used by gaslighting narcissistic nutters.
16:00 : "There are bigger issues for women, so let's not pay attention to what we'll call a "lesser issue" for women and children caused by transactivism and transaffirmation" : is that the message here ?
It's funny isn't it, that we are supposed to believe two men deciding what women's issues are rather than listen to actual women warning of the consequences of this dangerous misogynistic and homophobic ideology.
The message is very, very clearly.......
Don't worry your pretty little head about it (it's inconvenient for me,)
Bloody Hell, Tatchell lies from the very first sentance. I guarantee you Helen Joyce, Alice Sullivan, Jo Phoenix, Maya Forstater, Kathleen Stock et all would have all, ALL said yes to such a propositon to debate trans issues. Lies Lies Lies from Tatchell. How can what ever he says after such a huge lie be taken seriously. Incredible.
Yes, Tatchells attempt to equate rates of female violence with male violence and specifically violence committed by males who identify as trans, was straight up deceptive.
16%of male non trans identifying prison population are incarcerated for violent sexual crime against women and children compared to 56% of the trans identified male prisoners. This cohort is actually at higher risk of harming women and children than the general non trans identifying male prisoner population. (Uk prison data, 2019)
Here's my response to trans critics:
"Keep up the good work!"
Dr Kathleen Stock doesn’t ‘demonise’ trans though.
Tatchell seems continuously confused as to what the plural of "woman" is, it's WOMEN. The amount of times he said "woman", where "women" would have been the correct term, was shocking.
I have noticed this recently. So many people are pronouncing both words as the singular woman in the UK, nz and North America. Fecking strange
@@bkilg2509 Just gone and watched a different segment with Tatchell on a talk show and he was doing the same thing there.... baffling.
Quite a bit of obfuscating in the first part. Much more interesting to hear Pickard's experience before and after transitioning
So islamophobia is a fiction??
My God.. Almost every other sentence is illogical.
11:45 : Daily, women around the world generally suffer violence from men. All the issue is there. Isn't saying the opposite a dishonesty ?
theres no sich thing as gender a;; there is are stereotypical male & female traits
From what I can tell (which may well be limited) the whole issue is about trans women wanting to be called & legally recognised as 'women'. - people have always been categorised in terms of their biological sex, not how they perceive themselves in terms of gender, or what their sexual preference is. I, like many people am perfectly fine about peoples right to dress how they want, call themselves what ever name they want, have sex with who they want, but the idea that a man can just become a woman and be classed the same as a biological woman because of how he views himself is absurd. - But happy to try and understand the trans side of it. But I just can't get the thinking.
Because its thinking based on accepting regressive sexist stereotypes of what makes someone a man or a woman and NOT based in how both actually already are.
I think for me, in the past if people have felt ambivalent about their gender/sexed bodies they have usually had to express that covertly (other than through performing arts perhaps) ; I think as a society we implicitly "know" that not all men are manly or woman are womanly.
We use words like "butch" or "effeminate" indicating that how people express themselves is not restricted to a binary.
I think in the coming decades science will discover more about this complexity.
We've learned as a society that reductive views are rarely accurate views.
Until we understand more I feel like we need to concentrate on listening and creating safe spaces for all.
You see no contradiction because you have no respect for sex based women spaces.
04:09 : A man who'll sexually transition is _not_ a woman : thank you.
1:28 likewise buddy, no trans advocate will debate Helen Joyce, so either no one is really reaching out to each other, or it's simply a smoke show
Interesting that he uses anecdotes or "I have heard" statements frequently to make his arguments, but he says that they should never be used by someone arguing against trans ideology. I do appreciate that he says that biology is a thing, and that women and trans-women are different --that will earn him the wrath of trans activists.
As a woman, if I were to be attacked by another woman, I’d have a ‘fighting chance’. If I was to be attacked by a ‘trans’ woman (a man), then, I’ve had it. Peter Tatchell completely ignores this fact.
Why is Tatchell so enthusiastic for men to invade women's spaces?
Lies, lies, and more lies.
Who did you ask on the gender critical side to debate you, Peter?
Lol, Peter the mad lad did it, he actually debated Helen Joyce and he was absolutely obliterated. Hahaha, it was beautiful to see
How does one agree with women's rights and trans gender rights when we are seeing women being pushed out of their positions in athletics by trans people.
Exactly.
mostly by getting out of your online hatred bubble
@@burgermind802 And how is "getting out of our online hatred bubble" helping those women being pushed out of their positions in athletics by trans people, exactly?
@@burgermind802that didn't really address the problem did it?
The number of trans athletes in High School: 5. The number of trans athletes in College: 101. The total number of trans athletes in all of school sports in the USA = 106. The number of female athletes in US college sports alone = 229,060
Two men telling lies.
14:25 : Comparing transsexuality with islam? Really? That point is so irrelevant in the controversy. There are obviously too much differences between the background of transsexuality and the background of islam. So what's the point here ?
Its interesting that concerns raised are about trans women and not trans men as far as I can see.
I wonder why that is.
Mental derrangements are real.
Re. Sexual assult in prisons (?)against women "In many cases its biological women..." i think that statement needs some stats.
0:07 for a doctor to affirm his absolute delusions instead of making him be ok with his actually body is absurd and dystopic
I am certainly pro-trans but these debaters of the trans and lhbtq+ topic are very irritating. The guy in this video, every sentence he speaks is just irritating. Not because I disagree, but just the way they talk. The irrationality, the sensitivity, the wishful thinking. In many cases, those who who are pro-trans or lhbtq+ are just as worden as the opponents. I'm even referring to academics.
me me me me me me me meeeeeeeee bloody narcisists
The pronouns they never want to change are: “I”, “me “ and “my”
Did you ask Peter Boghossian, Dr. Debra Soh or Helen Joyce to debate?
If we deny that part of this is a flawed social idea then youre ignorning an untold number of teenagers, kids, and primarily people with mental illness or autism that are confused by these ideas and think they are a different sex because of these stereotypes.
If you dont genuinely have body dysphoria and want to remove parts of your body i think this discussion deserves a real debate.
Also is this asserting that we can scan for the female and male brain with accuracy?
If Kathleen Stock has refused to share a platform with Tatchell it may be because of his views on peed0filia!
Kathleen Stock is not a transphobe. Peter Tatchell says biological sex and gender identity are both ‘real’. But they are ‘real’ in quite different ways. To conflate the way in which they are ‘real’ is to make a fundamental methodological error.
I don’t have an opinion about whether trans women should have the right to enter spaces previously the preserve of biological women. As a biological male i think i should leave that to women to figure out. I advise Peter Tatchell to adopt the same policy.
I lasted until Tatchelll started yarking on about "trans critics" going unchallenged and being unwilling to have their views open to scrutiny. Disingenuous garbage as always.
Still don’t know what the definition of trans. Seems to be everybody or anybody who Self IDs
Fella’s a liar.
There are plenty of people willing to discuss and debate him.
Why is my post removed...this is ridiculous...
I don't believe for a minute no GC feminist was willing to debate.
This two make some serviceable points, but I suspect are arguing in a vacuum and I rather doubt their statistics. I could only endure 2/3 through, as it seemed rather tautological and not making contact with the true hot-stove items (transitioning children, destroying women's sports, indoctrinating kids in the schools, or the real ratio of trans : non-trans violence).
Some of these points are certainly grantable, but there is a motte-and-bailey here that acts IMHO like the plaintive points they are making are what has aroused the ire of 90% of thinking people everywhere. Whereas the trans ideology is in fact extremely aggressive, promulgated all over the place -- and the explosion in 12-year-olds thus identifying is quite alarming.
It should be obvious but needs continual restating that "gender norms" per se are necessary in raising a civilization, which does not mean anyone should permit harassment or bullying of a non-conforming person. Indeed, gender norms of the staunchest conservative type are actually what much of the trans ideology secretly subscribes...
Its not even a secret! Its heralded everywhere including in this presentation.
This first guy show his hand when he differentiates between "biological women" and "trans". Oops.
07:33 : Sometimes/Often it requires. So, what do we do now ?
Straight off the bat, Tatchell misses out the essential definition....what is the meaning of 'woman' such that it applies to both males and females? This idealogy (just like CRT), weak to begin with, is hopelessly anachronistic. He speaks of the 'expectation' of 'women'....knowing that by saying some males are 'women' he is by default locking what it means to be a 'woman' into wretched steritypes. And what are these stereotypes? Tatchell and others will not say because they know it exposes how ludicrous their position is. On the risk posed by males who identify as women to women, versus the risk posed by women to other women.....he is absolutely off the page wrong. Statisticd from HMPP show that the % of the trans prison population who are incarcerated for sex offences is 50-60%. For women? 3%. Tatchell goes on to tell women what they should consider priority issues. Hmmm. I wonder what makes him feel so differently than a woman does about what women should priotitise? I suppose he isnt a woman who is being told, by men, to rescind the scant protection they enjoy, to serve men's desire to access their spaces. Finally, Tatchell makes a very, very disturbing statement near the start. He says that no one should be excluded from a space on the basis of what they COULD do. Well, think about that in relation to other public pronouncements he has made.....
LGB without the tqia+
No.
Stunning and brave propaganda.
Thanks for your anecdotes… you know they’re not DATA right?
My only worry is the medical treatment of youngsters who have gender dysphoria. I agree with Peter, but he did not mention that.
Talk about disingenuous.