techinically, male seahorses, fertilize the female eggs, when the female transfers them during mating to the male, to keep them safe scientists arent sure why this happens, is this to help females produce more eggs to mate, is that males have a higher chance of keeping them safe, thus its best reproductive stradegy. but the male/female hold their reproductive cells, the male carries the fertilized only post mating. so even seahorses still have sex roles, the difference is their guy is stuck with kids...
HA freedom toons! Real life proves you wrong again. Trying to compare genders to sinks and toilets. Well guess, what? You lost buddy. Because I do crap in the sink when my toilet is broken. And you cant stop me. *Puts on joker makeup*
Aristotle is a great example that being smart on one thing, doesn't make you smart on all things. A.k.a. greta thunberg is an idiot who knows nothing about nuclear energy. A.k.a. Just because you have a Ph.D., doesn't make your opinion about communism more valid.
mankind 20 years ago: Finally figures out that equal opportunity for both genders makes us prosper mankind now: "Scrap that I want racism and sexism again"
What sucks is they all understand it perfectly. To a man, they all know what they're saying is hogwash. They're just trying to cash in on the cultural wave (both monetarily and in their social circles).
Modern Comedy="Am I smarter than a 5th Grader?", absolutely not, plus I'll apologize for that time I may have once been close to being smarter than a 5th Grader.
Just a thought: Seahorses are not an exception. The female lays eggs, the male fertilises them. The only "oddity" in the species is that the male holds the fertilised eggs in a specialised pouch (not a uterus). The eggs are similar to bird eggs (oviparity) in that they are incubated, as opposed to bound directly to the mother's body (viviparity).
A lot of bird species the male builds the nest so that that female has a place to lay eggs. Sounds like the Seahorse just does a version of that, but rather than build the nest it has one built in.
"Some people are infertile and dont fit into the definition on impregnating or being impregnated" Some cars don't work and don't fit the definition of a vehicle that transports you from one place to another by road... doesn't mean it is now a helicopter.
The “spectrum” Jon shows actually debunks his own premise. People think they’re non-binary or really the other gender, because they don’t fit into a very specific box of “man” or “woman”. As Jon pointed out- you can be a man and not be a “manly-man”, or you can be a woman without being a “girly-girl”. Thus, there are only 2 genders, but every person is an individual with different personalities.
Exactly...it's like saying a husky is a dog and a Poodle isn't because Huskies shed and have fur and poodles have hair that continually grows and neither look too much alike. I wonder if Jon would say one isn't a dog because there is variation in the category of "dog". I really would have thought Stewart would have taken the Maher approach and fought back against the insane leftist wokisms, but he embraces so many of them it's really sad, because he was legit funny on the daily show.
True story. I knew a guy who pissed in a 5 gal bucket until full, then dumped it down my brother's kitchen sink. They had a personal feud going on over I don't know what. Once my brother found out he ripped out his kitchen - sink, counters and base cabinets - and replaced it all. Talk about getting pissy. Any rate that's what I was thinking when the Debunkers said that.
@@kibathemechanic4967 What’s all the more sad is when you realize that the line immediately after that in the movie is that one woman after hearing them say that she turns to Schwarzenegger’s character and teasingly tells him “You’ve taught them the basics I see!” she says with a smile. That scene would NEVER be allowed today. Isn’t that sad to think about? Because that is what Post-Liberalism does... IT KILLS COMEDY because it kills the human spirit and everything natural.
For me the part that made me laugh the loudest was when Jon says, "Shitty and reductive jokes are my brand!" And the debunkers very poignantly said NOTHING.
The only reason the audience laughs is because after delivering some trope or non sequitur, he mugs for the camera to signal that people need to laugh now. Very reminiscent of Bill Maher and his trained seal audience that laughs when he flaps his hands.
@@twocents7509 so not only do the dems need dead people to vote for them to get elected, they also need the recordings of dead people to laugh for them to seem funny.
I still love that you picked the word "Troglodyte" in your opening, since one of the definitions of Troglodyte is "Someone who lives in a cave" and what is a bunker but an artificial cave? So the Debunkers are quite literally Troglodytes themselves. I'm assuming that's not an accident.
Cats can be dogs because some dogs (e.g., chihuahuas) are small, like cats, and sometimes dogs like fish and/or milk. Artificially dividing dogs and cats into a binary category structure doesn't make sense because Great Danes are big, Poodles often have fancy grooming, and Dochunds look like little wieners and cats also come in many varieties, so obviously you can't distinguish between them, so really, it all boils down to if the animal identifies as a cat, a dog, or something else altogether. Come on everyone, don't deny science with your arbitrary attempts to impose socially constructed categories on things!
Yeah, unfortunately Seamus still doesn’t understand evolutionary biology. Population mechanics and genetics over time indicate that the sexes are indeed real and fundamental to continued genetic lines in multicellular sexual organism. This “you can change your gender“ nonsense is counter to everything we know in evolutionary biology. We are not amphibians, and even with amphibians, certain conditions have to be met for that to become necessary. No “deformities“ required. There are also no mutations that switch the sexes of humans. Natural mutations are also not always negative as Seamus implies. Everything else about the video was spot on.
@@highpriestofgavinalmightyh1304 I commented on the humor and political commentary. Not the scientific accuracy or alleged lack thereof. I have nothing to discuss with you. Notice how you made essentially the same comment 3 times and you've no likes on any of those comments including the one you're backpacking on my comment. That should say enough to you.
@@KingCesarV I’m not backpedaling, though. It’s not an alleged lack of scientific understanding on Seamus’ part. It’s just a general lack of understanding of a specific field of science. Why would the accuracy of what I say be judged by the number of likes I receive? That’s an argument by consensus/appeal to popularity. Being remotely scientifically literate only helps in the fight against “gender nonconformist/sex is a social construct“ leftist lunatics.
A for female, B for male their logic if A==true & B==true then a=b=false because if you have a bit of male and a bit of female, then you obviously aren't eitehr, rather than draw the fucking obvious inference they are a bit of both right? what a load of shit
Also, I'd like to point out that at least 2 names on each side were straight-up derogatory, meaning that even if you ARE a person who follows the gender identity line, they are terms that no person would willingly apply to themselves. For clarification, the 4 I'm speaking of are-soy boy, girly man, cat lady, and bimbo. Can you imagine someone 'coming out' and saying that they are one of those options, instead a man or a woman?
@@adamloga3788 All of those are less degrading than calling yourself “clown-self”, “doll-self”, “cat-person”, or “it”, and yet all of the above are accepted in the lgbt community
"If you can't explain it to a child, then you don't understand it at all." "But what about explaining things to a progressive?" "I think that's best left up to the children to explain."
I doubt it. Jon Stewart lost his sense of humor when he signed a contract with the devil. He’s nothing but a traitorous asshole, hellbent on destroying the country that gave him the opportunity to become so insanely rich.
I remember a bit from "what is a woman" "What is a woman?" "Well a woman is somebody who identifies as a woman" "So what are they identifying as?" "A WOMAN!" "Do you know what circular reasoning is? (Edit I'm gender fluid now 💀) (Edit2. I'm trans. Yummers)
People 100'000 years ago: "We are sexist, but at least our reasoning isn't circular" People 10'000 years ago: "We are sexist, but at least our reasoning isn't circular" People 1'000 years ago: "We are sexist, but at least our reasoning isn't circular" People today: "We are sexist AND our reasoning is circular and absolutely terrible"
Circular definition. Its when you use the term to describe what the term is. But the term itself isn't a definition and therefore he failed to define what a woman is.
It's not that hard. The could have said "Somebody who identifies as an adult human female.", but they don't even understand the issue enough to correctly describe their own ideology.
@@harrythej9683 Right that's exactly what I was thinking, like it's so easy to come up with a definition of woman that fits into the idea of gender identity but they legit can't do it
A "gotcha question" is one where it doesn't matter what the core content of your answer is, because the question is phrased in such a way that it will have your answer be twisted around to slam you. "Have you stopped beating your wife every night?" is a transparent gotcha question: it presumes the conclusion that the asker wants, and answering simply "yes" or "no" implicitly admits you at least used to beat your wife on a nightly basis. More subtle ones, such as "what books do you read?" or "do you read books?" either have no answer that won't get ridiculed, or will have the question taken out and the answer held up as "Defensive" or the like. "I read mostly sci-fi and fantasy," will be held up as evidence you're a pie-in-the-sky dreamer with no idea about reality; "I read political treatises on serious, relevant subjects" will be held up as you being a liar and/or a disconnected intellectual who thinks you're better than everyone else. "Do you read books?" is even more subtle, but if the answer is "yes," the fact that the question was asked will either be omitted and the answer reported as, "Candidate defensively claims he reads books! He knows he's unfit for the job, and is trying to sound smart!" If the answer is "no," it won't matter what you do do to get informed, "Candidate admits he doesn't read books! What a low-brow moron!" will be the headline. The reason "What is a woman?" isn't a gotcha question is because, if the people being asked can answer it, their answer nukes the questioner's alleged premise (unless it supports it). The reason the trans-activists consider it a "gotcha" question is simply because they know their entire activist agenda is built on falsehood, lies, and inconsistency.
the trick is to loudly proclaim that candy bars are the root of all evil and if we exterminate their entire race, all our problems will magically solve themselves.
Intellectual doesn’t equal educated. Intellectual means someone in the pursuit of knowledge. Educated means someone who was able to survive the suffering of college
Completely based answer. I tell people that a trans woman would encounter 0 issues in public if she didn't get naked in front of others and is passable. Apparently, like everything else, conformity is transphobic.
The debunkers have always been my favorite comic. Consistently knocking it out of the park. Honestly though, without Matt Walsh's presence in this issue, i dont know if it would recieve the attention it does from the right.
Many people were paying attention to this issue before they ever heard of Matt Walsh. Praise and honour to him for making the documentary, but most people who cared about the issue have neither the skills nor the financial backing to make a documentary. Nor is it right vs left. I've always been centre-left (mutual aid is necessary but the government has no business telling people what to think). There is room for disagreement among sane people about where to draw the line in issues about regulation, taxation, and foreign policy. *This* issue is sane (of all political persuasions) vs insane.
@@richardokeefe7410 I am in total agreement of what you commented! Exactly. We can come up with logical, and sane, solutions, if the politicians will recognize this is a growing problem that doesn't need to become bigger. I'm just glad people are talking about it like it's really happening. I have a friend that doesn't believe it, and she is not hetrosexual, and she doesn't believe it because I don't personally know anyone that it's happening to. All you have to do is see the history of these surgeries, or watch the many videos of people who have detransitioned. They are rightly sad and angry that others facilitated transitions which they wouldn't have chosen given some time to think about it. How upsetting. Parents and doctors fast tracking these situations are not doing them any favors... Life shattering decisions which cannot be "reversed" as is claimed. Parents are a kids protection against harm. Doctors swear an oath not to harm. If kids were qualified to make such decisions then we would let them drive, vote, drink and smoke if they chose to, and others things that some adults aren't even mature enough to decide for themselves at age of 20.its heart breaking to see a kid who has detransitioned say they wish thier parents had done something besides just affirming this, because now they know it was not the case with them. It's odd that medical people would not take into account puberty being a confusing and awkward time with many growing young adults and at least put off any actions until after this has occurred. It's irresponsible of a society to accept and implement such things with less debate than we have had for any other modern medical procedure, and also the ease with which this group has their "rights" laid out for them is incentive to join(I think the gay community would be unhappy since they've had to battle for the ground they have gained and for all the unneeded attention trans have brought them by tacking their letter onto the end of theirs).
When you really get a grasp on how these late night shows are made it really shows you how insidious they are. Every segment follows the same format: Present some "argumentation" and "facts" for about 10 seconds, then quickly follow up with a snarky quip (either in a non-sequitur or an absurd metaphor) before any rational processing of the preceding argument can take place in the mind of the viewer. Further telling is that the only beats in the show's pacing only exist to highlight the studio audience's approving laughter or applause. The end result is not to deliver information, but to literally teach the viewers on a subconscious level to mentally associate derisive laughter with any person or opinion at odds with the narrative's take on a chosen issue. I can't take credit for that, it was a psychologist who outlined the process.
There's a straw man that gets built and destroyed somewhere in there too. Then they accuse the other side of ridiculous hyperbole of "things that never happen", then proceed to defend how it's a good thing that those things that never happen are happening.
i have a pet peeve with with complex/complicated, that are treated as synonymous... the hell they aren't Just because many factors could contribute to determining an outcome, does not automatically mean there are therefor there are X times as many possible final outcomes in a binary category, that can't be, and just because something has complexity, does not mean it is complicated you could add complexity to something to prevent or reduce potential complications, or to overcomplicate it, or whatever in between. you could rerarrange certain parts and not really increase complexity, but as a result make things complicated because the design is inferior. it's hard to make things with very little complexity all that complicated, but that's about as far as their direct relationship goes. let's say you're attaching a permanent lock to a bicycle, you now slightly increased the complexity of the setup, but was it complicated to screw the 4 bolts on, or to use the locking mechanism or key? does it make the bike more complicated to operate? not when it's unlocked lol now if you were to lose the keys with bike locked, that would certainly make things bit complicated in trying to use the bike for its intended purpose. but if the bike instead got stolen because it didn't have a lock.... well, that would make things even more complicated in pursuit of using the bike, yes, that's a hypothetical preventative type of approach, but that's the thing with complications, you kind of want to try to avoid most of them when you can ;) a complication is a problem/hurdle to overcome by definition , complexity is many parts making up a sum. the sum "A+B-C-D+E = F" is accumulated from 5 values, simple arithmetic add and sub, nothing complicated about that, but there's complexity to the amount of values though, you can't really simplify this equation because all 5 variables need to be there, that's complex complicated is tackling hard to conquer matter like finding a mathematical formula, then providing all the mathematical evidence to prove your theory, complex could just mean adding up 100 numbers, that would does not require any type of advanced problem solving, reverse engineering, or pattern recognition. importing database tables of 100 individual data points, complex analyzing all those 100 data points, creating a system to determine which ones are relevant, and the how and why to weighing the individual metric scores to create aggegrate metrics, yeah probably a bit complicated to actually come up with the equations. and there's no logic reason whatsoever to start claiming that: when F = 7 but B = 2, then F is magically somehow not 7, when all 5 numbers clearly add up to 7 for F, because B was not 1... that's ridiculous.... B plays a role in determining the outcome of F, F has no say over B without B, B is required to even define F. and the problematic circular endless inheritance of solving for F then solving B using F to then solve F using B, that's not what this equation ever suggested --- Also, yes about the binary, example: 1 - goldfish 2 - not goldfish See, one gets to freely set 2 categories :) Does that mean that every goldfish is the same sex, size, age, shade of orange, and atoms count? Does that mean all of them alive or dead? No inference can be drawn Realistically, it would be a preposterous assumption that every goldfish would exactly be the same. It's even more preposterous to assume or infer that some of the specimens in category 1 are therefor not goldfish This exercise clearly shows that they must be goldfish if they're not not goldfish I could either take a piss or a dump or vomit in the fish bowl, doesn't change anything about the fact they're technically still goldfish even if they're dark deep brown and fucken ded Lol now anyone try to argue that everything in category 2 must be made up of all identical things because the categorization is binary... that's bollocks, there's plenty of things that are non-goldfish, bollocks are amongst those.
In regards to infertility- if a toilet is broken and unable to perform the function that defines it as a toilet- it would still be clear to anyone upon examination what it was intended to do. Lack of function doesn't obscure what that function was clearly designed to be.
anyone who's walked into a paint aisle can tell you there are different kinds of red, but you'd be hard pressed to find somebody who could say, with a straight face, that red is just the same as green.
@@llIlIlllII All these years, it was just a social construct. In fact, it's kind of bigoted to talk about things in colored terms. I guess the only real solution is to abolish the rainbow. y'know, since it's only a harmful social construct and all.
@@chronicguardian9684 That just means their perception is flawed. Unless they are ignorant to that fact they'd know to just ask someone else which was green and which was red. You correct ignorance with education, not justification.
Here's the thing, if you actually thought about the whole Trans thing, it doesn't even work as a concept. 1. To even make the claim that you are a blank (man or women, pick one) in a blank's (the other one) body, you have to acknowledge that the first thing is something that exist and has distinguishing qualities that differentiate it self from everything else that exists other then it's own kind. 2. If you claim you are an exception to the rule, you both need to acknowledge that "the rule" exists in the first place and explain why you are a new exception to the rule and don't fall under a previous one.
Frankly I love this series. Its one of those "its funny cause its true" moments. The fact that a single question about a single, tiny, immutable piece of reality just upends an entire narrative. These people forget that reality has it's day. They will die, reality will go on. Their remains will be found hundreds, maybe thousands of years later, and will be identified as what they truly were, not what they wished they were. They will identify women as women, men as men. Down to the bone structure, DNA, and chromosomes. There is nothing the left can do about it, and that brings me peace.
And yet I saw a clip, I think from the Young American Foundation, in which an actual professor of anthropology states, without the slightest bit of irony, that you cannot identify the gender of a skeleton. The left seems to almost always and immediately fall back on the fallacy of expertise/experts. Just because some college was stupid enough to hand this nutjob a degree, doesn't actually mean he knows anything. Skeletons are identifiable based on gender and several racial distinctions. Forensic investigators do this every single day to help solve crimes. Because it works and is verifiably true.
I love the fact that Jon says without realizing it that the dumber you are: the more female you are. Also the fact that tomboys are the least female of the women is another take of Jon's
So glad you covered this! I watched this segment and felt absolute confusion and shock. How anyone could watch this terrible excuse for "points" and "ideas" was like watching those shitty Disney movie where a character is so clearly evil, but nobody seems to notice. It felt like being in a bizarre dream.
Writers don't need IQ. They haven't needed that in Hollywood or the MSM for decades. They either just need to be related to the correct people or check certain diverse boxes. Actual talent was never a prerequisite.
@@matthewphelps5136 It's a reference. There's an episode of the debunkers in which it's hinted that their IQs aren't actually that high. You really need to check it out. It's incredibly funny.
Well, alot of mma people keep buckets next to them when they sleep, hydration is a huge part of training and so is sleep. Buy yeah, the sink thing is kinda gross (f it retained the smell though he probably needs it cleaned anyway, think about like rinsing eggs or beef broth, if it just hung out on there the sink already probably reeked. But still, why not just use a toilet?)
I will never understand how we went from accepting people even if they don't fit the stereotypical social traits of their gender to invalidating the persons identity by suggesting they are an 'other' if they don't fit strict guidelines for what 'real' men and women are. Then you have to be some other gender or the opposite gender. Why can't we just have masculine women and feminine men? I'll judge them all the same anyway, regardless of what they call themselves because that's just how I am.
I just teach my son the basic simple truths of life and then lovingly show him how absurd this stuff is when he's mature enough to handle it. I also show him how this ideology leads to confusion and hurts ppls lives. We just raise him the same way we were raised and then point out the absurdity of it.
Homeschool, and don’t expose them to this idiocy before they have a foundation of good values and can think for themselves. I’m not a parent, but that’s how I grew up.
Hilarious that one of his funniest “bits” is how Chicago pizza isn’t pizza. But apparently he believes that a man or woman can identify as anything they want.
Great animation Seamus!!! There are so many people I’d love to share this with, but it is less than a month before Thanksgiving, and it has become awkward enough. Keep up the good work and props for the great dunking on Jon “I do as I’m told” Stewart.
Nice new intro, team! Looks and sounds fantastic, love the Ambience music, and tittle card animation! Keep up the awesome work, Freedom Toons, and you as well shamus! (Just don’t know how much you guys, have expended ) On points explanations and jokes as always, guys. Dynamite writing and editing. Would love a cut off all the jokes that didn’t make it some time, or just the board room meeting goig over what to use..
"Ariostotle, what makes a woman a deformity?" Aristotle answers by explaining the differences between women and men. "Coverture Law, how can you tell which spouse loses all rights when becoming wed?" Coverture Law looks puzzled at the unspoken assumptions, but if it accepts them for the argument, it proceeds to explain that it's the woman, and how you can tell which one is the woman. "Leviticus, how do you know to set this person's value at 30 shekles?" Leviticus tells you that it's because she's a woman, and can tell you how to identify this fact. Show a woke person two people and ask which one is the more oppressed by Coverture Law, and that woke person will be able to identify that it's the woman, and will either have to dodge the question or answer that there was no confusion at the time over whether the law applied to this person or not.
The best argument against this nonsense was an accident. A “mother” (I put that in parentheses because the lady gave birth to the child in question but is not acting as a caring parental figure) is in a video talking to her 4 year old boy. She asks the boy if he is a boy or a girl. The boy insists he is a girl. To which the mother is ecstatic. Yay, he’s a girl. Then the mother asks how old “she” is. The boy says seven. Mom corrects “her” and says you are 4. The boy states again that he is seven. This repeats for some time. The end result is simple. If we have to accept that a 4 year old boy says he’s a girl, why do we not accept that a 4 year old is 7?????
@@Ronnie.Raymond Are you suggesting that one concept is more valid than another? If time is a concept that cannot be altered by our feelings, why is gender alterable? If the science of male and female is subject to our whims, why not time? I’ll wait for a serious response.
You can totally tell that at very least on a subconscious level he knows he's lying, and it pains him. He's not funny anymore because he's lying. He lost his talent because he's a coward who has been bullied into saying what he knows to be untrue. The only big laugh he's gotten in recent years was when he found the courage to speak the truth one time. That should have been all he needed to realize the only thing wrong with him now is that for something to be funny it has to ring true. And like I said... coward.
In college we learned about that boy who had his penis burned off in a botched circumcision, and him and his twin brother were referred to Dr. Money who did sex change operations, did hormone replacement therapy and sexually abused them, and both boys grew up to commit suicide. We learned from this lesson that it was a bad thing that should not be done, a lesson that we now forget about. But then I got to thinking recently, what are the odds of such a freak accident on one boy of a set of identical twins. And I realized that it was totally on purpose. These doctors must have been friends of Dr. Money and he said "Hey, next time you get a set of twin boys, cut off one of their penis's and I'll take it from there." An involuntary experiment that they got roped into.
My doctor mentioned this story to me a couple years ago, and added that he, along with many others in the medical field, were pretty sure it wasn't an accident.
Not sure how it could be an accident. I believe the boy was castrated during the circumcision. It happened in Winnipeg. It was probably seen as an opportunity by Money after he heard about it or was approached. I don't think it was something he himself planned. After he got hold of them, he put his sick plans into effect. Terrible story.
Funny how what always gets left out of any mention of coverture law is that the reason women had different or no legal standing in some cases was because her husband was legally responsible for almost everything she did. And, because of that, there was no point in her having legal standing. Her having a legal standing would interfere in her husband's social and legally enforced responsibilities to her. So many people try to make it out like it women's accountablity to men was oppression of women by leaving out men's reciprocal obligations to women.
Figured I'd let you know, I received the notification for this earlier, but when I checked it a few minutes ago the notification was gone and it wasn't in my recommendations. I had to search your channel to find it.
And to think, 20 years ago when my cousin was very young and just learning about God, he asked me what would happen to humans if they turned away from God. I guess I wasn't very imaginative at the time because what we are living through now is SO MUCH WORSE than what I described to that young boy in his bed.
It's because you were too good to comprehend how bad most people could be... because you hadn't seen war or any real tribulation yet. It's going to get... much tougher soon.
@@republicofkoreaball4349 Well in some places you are allowed to peacefully practice your religion, and in some places it causes a public disturbance. So who knows, really, what a God is?
"A sink is different from a toilet. 'But toilets come in all different shapes and sizes', you say. Indeed, they do, but these variations are no excuse for you to take a sh*t in the sink." -A brilliant intellectual
The problem is that "Gender" has multiple definitions, and the Left keeps trying to jump between "different arbitrary categories of humans" and "sexes".
Compare news coverage from diverse sources around the world on a transparent platform driven by data. Try Ground News today: ground.news/freedomtoons
Can we get a Matt Walsh cartoon?
Does it work in other countries or USA only?
techinically, male seahorses, fertilize the female eggs, when the female transfers them during mating to the male, to keep them safe
scientists arent sure why this happens, is this to help females produce more eggs to mate, is that males have a higher chance of keeping them safe, thus its best reproductive stradegy. but the male/female hold their reproductive cells, the male carries the fertilized only post mating. so even seahorses still have sex roles, the difference is their guy is stuck with kids...
HA freedom toons! Real life proves you wrong again. Trying to compare genders to sinks and toilets. Well guess, what? You lost buddy. Because I do crap in the sink when my toilet is broken. And you cant stop me. *Puts on joker makeup*
Aristotle is a great example that being smart on one thing, doesn't make you smart on all things.
A.k.a. greta thunberg is an idiot who knows nothing about nuclear energy.
A.k.a. Just because you have a Ph.D., doesn't make your opinion about communism more valid.
"We are in a new dawn of gender and sex complexity."
Yes, things tend to appear complex when you don't understand them.
"It's too complex for me to understand, so i'm going to replace it with my own idea that (only) I can understand"
Jon Stewart. He would sell his grandma if it would make him popular...I'm sorry, grandPerson Jon. What a dbag.
mankind 20 years ago: Finally figures out that equal opportunity for both genders makes us prosper
mankind now: "Scrap that I want racism and sexism again"
@@creativitysubs9935 nice!
What sucks is they all understand it perfectly. To a man, they all know what they're saying is hogwash. They're just trying to cash in on the cultural wave (both monetarily and in their social circles).
Modern Comedy="Am I smarter than a 5th Grader?", absolutely not, plus I'll apologize for that time I may have once been close to being smarter than a 5th Grader.
Well atleast 5th graders do math...
Insult to 5th graders btw...
"If you cannot define what a woman is, you are definitely not smarter than a 5th grader." -- Jeff Foxworthy, probably.
Underrated comment
@E Van Jon Stewart is about as funny as he is Scottish.
@E Van Would you shut up about jews being bad. You're making us look dumb.
Just a thought: Seahorses are not an exception. The female lays eggs, the male fertilises them. The only "oddity" in the species is that the male holds the fertilised eggs in a specialised pouch (not a uterus). The eggs are similar to bird eggs (oviparity) in that they are incubated, as opposed to bound directly to the mother's body (viviparity).
ssshhhhh.. that sounds like science!
anything science related must be approved by tv journalists.
Regardless, humans ain't seahorses.
Still doesn’t matter. Humans aren’t seahorses. Really the argument ends even before explaining any of this, but you’re right nonetheless 😜
A lot of bird species the male builds the nest so that that female has a place to lay eggs. Sounds like the Seahorse just does a version of that, but rather than build the nest it has one built in.
@@jackbits6397 well, the male bird has to. Women cant be carpenters.😏
Just kidding, so dont kill me.
"Some people are infertile and dont fit into the definition on impregnating or being impregnated"
Some cars don't work and don't fit the definition of a vehicle that transports you from one place to another by road... doesn't mean it is now a helicopter.
@@Stillonyx Depends if the propeller is on the top or the front.
@@Stillonyx
I'd say a helicopter has 2 propellers
What about gay people?
@@peterroberts4415
What about them?
Does a woman being gay suddenly become biologically incapable of becoming pregnant?
@@screenname8267Bro 💀
The “spectrum” Jon shows actually debunks his own premise. People think they’re non-binary or really the other gender, because they don’t fit into a very specific box of “man” or “woman”. As Jon pointed out- you can be a man and not be a “manly-man”, or you can be a woman without being a “girly-girl”. Thus, there are only 2 genders, but every person is an individual with different personalities.
Jon Stewart denies his own hate-speech and says "I'm just an entertainer."
Don't flatter yourself, Liebowitz.
The display even shows a clear division in the 2 sides.
Yeah. These people think gender is another word for personality.
Exactly...it's like saying a husky is a dog and a Poodle isn't because Huskies shed and have fur and poodles have hair that continually grows and neither look too much alike. I wonder if Jon would say one isn't a dog because there is variation in the category of "dog". I really would have thought Stewart would have taken the Maher approach and fought back against the insane leftist wokisms, but he embraces so many of them it's really sad, because he was legit funny on the daily show.
Stop mixing up gender with sex please
woah... are... the debunkers becoming a once per month thing, or something?
About time...
I hope so
Let's hope!
Lol
That would be awesome
Oh My God. "that variation isn't an excuse for you to take a shit in the sink." That is THE BEST comparison I have ever heard.
True story. I knew a guy who pissed in a 5 gal bucket until full, then dumped it down my brother's kitchen sink. They had a personal feud going on over I don't know what. Once my brother found out he ripped out his kitchen - sink, counters and base cabinets - and replaced it all. Talk about getting pissy. Any rate that's what I was thinking when the Debunkers said that.
@@rtyria It was probably about a girl.
It's always about a girl.
I laughed out loud at that and now my coworkers are looking at me funny.
@@NarwahlGaming It wouldn't surprise me in the least.
3:39 - 3:49
A broken toilet is still not a sink.
I like how the gender spectrum visual aid was still neatly divided into the male half and the female half 😂🤣😅
"Some ideas are so stupid only an intellectual would believe them" - attributed to Mark Twain
There is something about highly educated people being unable to reason clearly from point A to conclusion B.
@@rtyria The difference between the intelligent and the wise.
Twain was ahead of his time.
You speak the truth Spaceman Spiff.
.... Ummm that was Orwell lol...
Just another example of people on the right creating their own realities lool
Feels like having to explain things we learned in kindergarden to adults
Gotta love public school.
"Boys have a penis, girls have a vagina."
-Boy Genius Prodigy from Kindergarten Cop
Which is what the adult who still believes in santa Claus would tell other adults who understand that it is fake...
@@kibathemechanic4967
What’s all the more sad is when you realize that the line immediately after that in the movie is that one woman after hearing them say that she turns to Schwarzenegger’s character and teasingly tells him “You’ve taught them the basics I see!” she says with a smile. That scene would NEVER be allowed today. Isn’t that sad to think about? Because that is what Post-Liberalism does... IT KILLS COMEDY because it kills the human spirit and everything natural.
For me the part that made me laugh the loudest was when Jon says, "Shitty and reductive jokes are my brand!" And the debunkers very poignantly said NOTHING.
I'd laugh at that but it's so poignant and true that I feel my laughter would dishonor it. 😂👍
the one thing he said which was fact! no need to debunk!
The only reason the audience laughs is because after delivering some trope or non sequitur, he mugs for the camera to signal that people need to laugh now. Very reminiscent of Bill Maher and his trained seal audience that laughs when he flaps his hands.
@@freethebirds3578 nah, that’s just a laugh track. No one actually laughs at his jokes.
@@twocents7509 so not only do the dems need dead people to vote for them to get elected, they also need the recordings of dead people to laugh for them to seem funny.
I still love that you picked the word "Troglodyte" in your opening, since one of the definitions of Troglodyte is "Someone who lives in a cave" and what is a bunker but an artificial cave?
So the Debunkers are quite literally Troglodytes themselves. I'm assuming that's not an accident.
@content_enjoyer4458 poTAYto, PoTAHto...it's underground and enclosed. a Bunker is just an artificial cave.
The sink/toilet analogy was spot on. Bravo, gentlemen.
Cats can be dogs because some dogs (e.g., chihuahuas) are small, like cats, and sometimes dogs like fish and/or milk. Artificially dividing dogs and cats into a binary category structure doesn't make sense because Great Danes are big, Poodles often have fancy grooming, and Dochunds look like little wieners and cats also come in many varieties, so obviously you can't distinguish between them, so really, it all boils down to if the animal identifies as a cat, a dog, or something else altogether. Come on everyone, don't deny science with your arbitrary attempts to impose socially constructed categories on things!
This is brilliant
You know, I may be animalist, but at least i'm not animalist and irrational.
Good Point
Obviously you’ve never heard of corgis.
-please don’t shoot me is joke-
My cat identifies as a freeloader.
Debunkers is peak political commentary as well as humor. Thank you for this gift to humanity Seamus
Yeah, unfortunately Seamus still doesn’t understand evolutionary biology. Population mechanics and genetics over time indicate that the sexes are indeed real and fundamental to continued genetic lines in multicellular sexual organism. This “you can change your gender“ nonsense is counter to everything we know in evolutionary biology. We are not amphibians, and even with amphibians, certain conditions have to be met for that to become necessary.
No “deformities“ required. There are also no mutations that switch the sexes of humans. Natural mutations are also not always negative as Seamus implies.
Everything else about the video was spot on.
@@highpriestofgavinalmightyh1304 proofread if you're going to be all "I'm smarter than funny cartoon man"
@@KingCesarV I did. What would you like to discuss?
@@highpriestofgavinalmightyh1304 I commented on the humor and political commentary. Not the scientific accuracy or alleged lack thereof. I have nothing to discuss with you. Notice how you made essentially the same comment 3 times and you've no likes on any of those comments including the one you're backpacking on my comment. That should say enough to you.
@@KingCesarV I’m not backpedaling, though. It’s not an alleged lack of scientific understanding on Seamus’ part. It’s just a general lack of understanding of a specific field of science.
Why would the accuracy of what I say be judged by the number of likes I receive?
That’s an argument by consensus/appeal to popularity.
Being remotely scientifically literate only helps in the fight against “gender nonconformist/sex is a social construct“ leftist lunatics.
I noticed that even with all those super non-binary terms, he was very easily able to definitively put each one on one side or the other. Weird.
For real, almost like variation can exist within a singular category without negating the category
A for female, B for male
their logic
if A==true & B==true then a=b=false
because if you have a bit of male and a bit of female, then you obviously aren't eitehr, rather than draw the fucking obvious inference they are a bit of both right?
what a load of shit
Also, I'd like to point out that at least 2 names on each side were straight-up derogatory, meaning that even if you ARE a person who follows the gender identity line, they are terms that no person would willingly apply to themselves. For clarification, the 4 I'm speaking of are-soy boy, girly man, cat lady, and bimbo. Can you imagine someone 'coming out' and saying that they are one of those options, instead a man or a woman?
@@adamloga3788 All of those are less degrading than calling yourself “clown-self”, “doll-self”, “cat-person”, or “it”, and yet all of the above are accepted in the lgbt community
@@amihere383 ...please tell me that that's a joke...
Poor Jon Stewart. I think he's realizing he didn't ask enough for his soul.
"just because all toilets come in different shapes and sizes doesnt mean you can shit in the sink" fucking lmao
"If you can't explain it to a child, then you don't understand it at all."
"But what about explaining things to a progressive?"
"I think that's best left up to the children to explain."
It was great working with you again, FreedomToons! As always, fantastic animation and humor (even Jon Stewart would enjoy the comedy).
I've just installed your App - good luck with it - it sounds promising.
Been using and recommending it for over a year, subscribed to pro... Surprised to see it advertised here but cool... I think.
I doubt it. Jon Stewart lost his sense of humor when he signed a contract with the devil. He’s nothing but a traitorous asshole, hellbent on destroying the country that gave him the opportunity to become so insanely rich.
Except the he doesn't know what comedy is.
If only Jon knew…
I remember a bit from "what is a woman"
"What is a woman?"
"Well a woman is somebody who identifies as a woman"
"So what are they identifying as?"
"A WOMAN!"
"Do you know what circular reasoning is?
(Edit I'm gender fluid now 💀)
(Edit2. I'm trans. Yummers)
People 100'000 years ago: "We are sexist, but at least our reasoning isn't circular"
People 10'000 years ago: "We are sexist, but at least our reasoning isn't circular"
People 1'000 years ago: "We are sexist, but at least our reasoning isn't circular"
People today: "We are sexist AND our reasoning is circular and absolutely terrible"
Circular definition. Its when you use the term to describe what the term is. But the term itself isn't a definition and therefore he failed to define what a woman is.
It's not that hard. The could have said "Somebody who identifies as an adult human female.", but they don't even understand the issue enough to correctly describe their own ideology.
@@harrythej9683 Right that's exactly what I was thinking, like it's so easy to come up with a definition of woman that fits into the idea of gender identity but they legit can't do it
@@harrythej9683 What is a female?
The Left is where humor goes to die.
How old are you
@@bro94ee Old enough to know what's funny 😁 That's why I'm here
The left is where common sense go to die
Humor and morality both go to die
@@bro94ee keep it to yourself perv.
I've discovered that Jon Stewart's style of humor doesn't work when he's saying things that are completely insane.
"Boy's have a p...; girl's have a v...!" - Little boy - Kindergarten Cop
Sounds simple to me! 🤔🙄🤣
A "gotcha question" is one where it doesn't matter what the core content of your answer is, because the question is phrased in such a way that it will have your answer be twisted around to slam you.
"Have you stopped beating your wife every night?" is a transparent gotcha question: it presumes the conclusion that the asker wants, and answering simply "yes" or "no" implicitly admits you at least used to beat your wife on a nightly basis.
More subtle ones, such as "what books do you read?" or "do you read books?" either have no answer that won't get ridiculed, or will have the question taken out and the answer held up as "Defensive" or the like. "I read mostly sci-fi and fantasy," will be held up as evidence you're a pie-in-the-sky dreamer with no idea about reality; "I read political treatises on serious, relevant subjects" will be held up as you being a liar and/or a disconnected intellectual who thinks you're better than everyone else. "Do you read books?" is even more subtle, but if the answer is "yes," the fact that the question was asked will either be omitted and the answer reported as, "Candidate defensively claims he reads books! He knows he's unfit for the job, and is trying to sound smart!" If the answer is "no," it won't matter what you do do to get informed, "Candidate admits he doesn't read books! What a low-brow moron!" will be the headline.
The reason "What is a woman?" isn't a gotcha question is because, if the people being asked can answer it, their answer nukes the questioner's alleged premise (unless it supports it). The reason the trans-activists consider it a "gotcha" question is simply because they know their entire activist agenda is built on falsehood, lies, and inconsistency.
"What is a woman" is basically a human/replicant test from Blade Runner.
Well said.
Basically, their entire political stance relies on their being no consistent definition of woman other than what a person says it means.
Jon Stewart's shilling really has me reevaluating enjoying his humor when I was much younger during his heyday...
The "we just figured out that men can be women because we're progressive" argument is a level of cringe I didnt think was possible.
Yea…
He always has been, he just shilled for a different crowd back then.
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." -Vladimir Lenin
he is only worth thirty shekels, so he must be a woman.
My candy bar identifies as a salad, so I’m just gonna eat candy all the time. My teeth will not rot out of my mouth, because salads are healthy!!
the trick is to loudly proclaim that candy bars are the root of all evil and if we exterminate their entire race, all our problems will magically solve themselves.
You're onto something there. Should consider releasing a brand of candy bars called Salad.
Welcome to the Body Positivity Movement.
@@keystrix3704 genius
"A woman is only a woman, but a good cigar is a smoke!"
Rudyard Kipling
A woman is also a lady
The line about viewing a common sense question as a 'gotcha question' was brilliant. 😂
"Am I out of touch?"
"No, it's everyone else that is wrong"
"Should I really support the new current thing?"
"Yes, it's definitely not a fad this time!"
We need to rid ourselves of intellectuals and put smart people in charge.
something somewhere about people who are learned but not wise. Wonder what that was about.
How about nobody living far away tells us what to do?
These people are not at all "intellectuals". They are amplified stupid.
Intellectual doesn’t equal educated. Intellectual means someone in the pursuit of knowledge. Educated means someone who was able to survive the suffering of college
You're mistaken. You need experienced people, or at least open minded people.
My 8 year old daughter said the other day she didn’t get how people are confused about this. She said, “I just look at them.” Haha
Congratulations on having an 8-year-old with better reasoning skills than a depressing number of adults today.
Completely based answer. I tell people that a trans woman would encounter 0 issues in public if she didn't get naked in front of others and is passable. Apparently, like everything else, conformity is transphobic.
@@ZeusBrown better reasoning skills than Jon Stewart that's for sure.
Are you lying? This story sounds a little too convenient.
@@christianmendozatapia295 Don’t have kids? They haven’t learned how to be good liars yet.
"I'm a _brilliant_ intellectual...."
Never get tired of that!
The crapping in a sink explanation was EPIC 😄🙏❤️❤️❤️
The debunkers have always been my favorite comic. Consistently knocking it out of the park.
Honestly though, without Matt Walsh's presence in this issue, i dont know if it would recieve the attention it does from the right.
Matt Walsh moved this conversation to the forefront all of a sudden and that's a good thing because it was moving way too slow!
@Forward1776 Ben is a trump hating neocon, Matt’s a no go and Candice Owens wouldn’t be any better then Matt.
Many people were paying attention to this issue before they ever heard of Matt Walsh. Praise and honour to him for making the documentary, but most people who cared about the issue have neither the skills nor the financial backing to make a documentary. Nor is it right vs left. I've always been centre-left (mutual aid is necessary but the government has no business telling people what to think). There is room for disagreement among sane people about where to draw the line in issues about regulation, taxation, and foreign policy. *This* issue is sane (of all political persuasions) vs insane.
@Forward1776 The problem with sane people is that they know their own limitations. I don't think any of those people *want* to be President.
@@richardokeefe7410 I am in total agreement of what you commented! Exactly. We can come up with logical, and sane, solutions, if the politicians will recognize this is a growing problem that doesn't need to become bigger. I'm just glad people are talking about it like it's really happening. I have a friend that doesn't believe it, and she is not hetrosexual, and she doesn't believe it because I don't personally know anyone that it's happening to. All you have to do is see the history of these surgeries, or watch the many videos of people who have detransitioned. They are rightly sad and angry that others facilitated transitions which they wouldn't have chosen given some time to think about it. How upsetting. Parents and doctors fast tracking these situations are not doing them any favors... Life shattering decisions which cannot be "reversed" as is claimed. Parents are a kids protection against harm. Doctors swear an oath not to harm. If kids were qualified to make such decisions then we would let them drive, vote, drink and smoke if they chose to, and others things that some adults aren't even mature enough to decide for themselves at age of 20.its heart breaking to see a kid who has detransitioned say they wish thier parents had done something besides just affirming this, because now they know it was not the case with them. It's odd that medical people would not take into account puberty being a confusing and awkward time with many growing young adults and at least put off any actions until after this has occurred. It's irresponsible of a society to accept and implement such things with less debate than we have had for any other modern medical procedure, and also the ease with which this group has their "rights" laid out for them is incentive to join(I think the gay community would be unhappy since they've had to battle for the ground they have gained and for all the unneeded attention trans have brought them by tacking their letter onto the end of theirs).
When you really get a grasp on how these late night shows are made it really shows you how insidious they are.
Every segment follows the same format: Present some "argumentation" and "facts" for about 10 seconds, then quickly follow up with a snarky quip (either in a non-sequitur or an absurd metaphor) before any rational processing of the preceding argument can take place in the mind of the viewer. Further telling is that the only beats in the show's pacing only exist to highlight the studio audience's approving laughter or applause.
The end result is not to deliver information, but to literally teach the viewers on a subconscious level to mentally associate derisive laughter with any person or opinion at odds with the narrative's take on a chosen issue.
I can't take credit for that, it was a psychologist who outlined the process.
There's a straw man that gets built and destroyed somewhere in there too. Then they accuse the other side of ridiculous hyperbole of "things that never happen", then proceed to defend how it's a good thing that those things that never happen are happening.
Was it the John Oliver greentext?
Called Brainwashing.
i just think it's weird how people keep on forgetting that 'binary' means two categories, not two things that are always exactly the same
i have a pet peeve with with complex/complicated, that are treated as synonymous... the hell they aren't
Just because many factors could contribute to determining an outcome, does not automatically mean there are therefor there are X times as many possible final outcomes in a binary category, that can't be, and just because something has complexity, does not mean it is complicated
you could add complexity to something to prevent or reduce potential complications, or to overcomplicate it, or whatever in between.
you could rerarrange certain parts and not really increase complexity, but as a result make things complicated because the design is inferior.
it's hard to make things with very little complexity all that complicated, but that's about as far as their direct relationship goes.
let's say you're attaching a permanent lock to a bicycle, you now slightly increased the complexity of the setup,
but was it complicated to screw the 4 bolts on, or to use the locking mechanism or key?
does it make the bike more complicated to operate? not when it's unlocked lol
now if you were to lose the keys with bike locked, that would certainly make things bit complicated in trying to use the bike for its intended purpose.
but if the bike instead got stolen because it didn't have a lock.... well, that would make things even more complicated in pursuit of using the bike, yes, that's a hypothetical preventative type of approach, but that's the thing with complications, you kind of want to try to avoid most of them when you can ;)
a complication is a problem/hurdle to overcome by definition , complexity is many parts making up a sum.
the sum "A+B-C-D+E = F" is accumulated from 5 values, simple arithmetic add and sub, nothing complicated about that, but there's complexity to the amount of values though, you can't really simplify this equation because all 5 variables need to be there, that's complex
complicated is tackling hard to conquer matter like finding a mathematical formula, then providing all the mathematical evidence to prove your theory, complex could just mean adding up 100 numbers, that would does not require any type of advanced problem solving, reverse engineering, or pattern recognition.
importing database tables of 100 individual data points, complex
analyzing all those 100 data points, creating a system to determine which ones are relevant, and the how and why to weighing the individual metric scores to create aggegrate metrics, yeah probably a bit complicated to actually come up with the equations.
and there's no logic reason whatsoever to start claiming that:
when F = 7 but B = 2,
then F is magically somehow not 7, when all 5 numbers clearly add up to 7 for F, because B was not 1... that's ridiculous....
B plays a role in determining the outcome of F,
F has no say over B without B, B is required to even define F.
and the problematic circular endless inheritance of solving for F then solving B using F to then solve F using B, that's not what this equation ever suggested
---
Also, yes about the binary, example:
1 - goldfish
2 - not goldfish
See, one gets to freely set 2 categories :)
Does that mean that every goldfish is the same sex, size, age, shade of orange, and atoms count?
Does that mean all of them alive or dead? No inference can be drawn
Realistically, it would be a preposterous assumption that every goldfish would exactly be the same.
It's even more preposterous to assume or infer that some of the specimens in category 1 are therefor not goldfish
This exercise clearly shows that they must be goldfish if they're not not goldfish
I could either take a piss or a dump or vomit in the fish bowl, doesn't change anything about the fact they're technically still goldfish even if they're dark deep brown and fucken ded
Lol now anyone try to argue that everything in category 2 must be made up of all identical things because the categorization is binary... that's bollocks, there's plenty of things that are non-goldfish, bollocks are amongst those.
@@klontjespap I’m not reading all of this. TL;DR
@@klontjespap wtf bro why you writing a whole essay 😭😭
"The Debunkers" has to be my favorite series of skits you do on this channel. Keep 'em comin'.
In regards to infertility- if a toilet is broken and unable to perform the function that defines it as a toilet- it would still be clear to anyone upon examination what it was intended to do. Lack of function doesn't obscure what that function was clearly designed to be.
anyone who's walked into a paint aisle can tell you there are different kinds of red, but you'd be hard pressed to find somebody who could say, with a straight face, that red is just the same as green.
Unless, of course, the person you find is colorblind.
Actually because some people are colour blind, that means colour doesn't exist. Nothing is any colour.
@@llIlIlllII All these years, it was just a social construct. In fact, it's kind of bigoted to talk about things in colored terms. I guess the only real solution is to abolish the rainbow.
y'know, since it's only a harmful social construct and all.
@@chronicguardian9684 That just means their perception is flawed. Unless they are ignorant to that fact they'd know to just ask someone else which was green and which was red. You correct ignorance with education, not justification.
@@tomwalker8944 This analogy kinda works because as some people are color blind, it seems there are people who are "gender blind" lol
Not only Jon doesn’t know what a woman is, he seems so confused he doesn’t even know if he’s a man😳
Not sure, but I think he's a eunuch.
He's a follower of the crazy narrative. He can't think for himself enough to make funny jokes.
John is whatever he needs to be in order to be relevant to his audience. At least until he steps wrong, and the wokies come for him.
Here's the thing, if you actually thought about the whole Trans thing, it doesn't even work as a concept.
1. To even make the claim that you are a blank (man or women, pick one) in a blank's (the other one) body, you have to acknowledge that the first thing is something that exist and has distinguishing qualities that differentiate it self from everything else that exists other then it's own kind.
2. If you claim you are an exception to the rule, you both need to acknowledge that "the rule" exists in the first place and explain why you are a new exception to the rule and don't fall under a previous one.
Perfectly said.
Frankly I love this series. Its one of those "its funny cause its true" moments. The fact that a single question about a single, tiny, immutable piece of reality just upends an entire narrative. These people forget that reality has it's day. They will die, reality will go on. Their remains will be found hundreds, maybe thousands of years later, and will be identified as what they truly were, not what they wished they were. They will identify women as women, men as men. Down to the bone structure, DNA, and chromosomes. There is nothing the left can do about it, and that brings me peace.
And yet I saw a clip, I think from the Young American Foundation, in which an actual professor of anthropology states, without the slightest bit of irony, that you cannot identify the gender of a skeleton. The left seems to almost always and immediately fall back on the fallacy of expertise/experts. Just because some college was stupid enough to hand this nutjob a degree, doesn't actually mean he knows anything. Skeletons are identifiable based on gender and several racial distinctions. Forensic investigators do this every single day to help solve crimes. Because it works and is verifiably true.
The "Bigot Boy" with the popping 'B's is what finally broke me. Great video Seamus!
Well done Seamus! I can tell you had fun making this one!...😁
Please keep doing these.
The debunkers are my favorite series of yours.
I love the fact that Jon says without realizing it that the dumber you are: the more female you are. Also the fact that tomboys are the least female of the women is another take of Jon's
Butch lesbians are ahead of tomboys in that regard.
Jon Stewart looks confused, like he doesn't really understand what he's daying but he's just going through the motions to collect a check.
So glad you covered this! I watched this segment and felt absolute confusion and shock.
How anyone could watch this terrible excuse for "points" and "ideas" was like watching those shitty Disney movie where a character is so clearly evil, but nobody seems to notice. It felt like being in a bizarre dream.
When 2 cartoon characters with an IQ of 101 do a better job at making sense than an entire writing room for a big show on network t.v.
Kinda harsh on the IQ number, I'd say they are easily Mensa members. After all, they DO know what a woman is.
Writers don't need IQ. They haven't needed that in Hollywood or the MSM for decades. They either just need to be related to the correct people or check certain diverse boxes.
Actual talent was never a prerequisite.
@@matthewphelps5136 It's a reference. There's an episode of the debunkers in which it's hinted that their IQs aren't actually that high. You really need to check it out. It's incredibly funny.
@@creativitysubs9935their IQ also dropped in that episode to 99 (troglodyte)
Can’t get enough debunkers
It's good to see Jon Stewart get the Fact Checking he so richly deserves.
he got checked but not by facts
@@lvrbad5588 🤓🤡
His last name is actually lebowitz. Every. single. time....
Well, alot of mma people keep buckets next to them when they sleep, hydration is a huge part of training and so is sleep. Buy yeah, the sink thing is kinda gross (f it retained the smell though he probably needs it cleaned anyway, think about like rinsing eggs or beef broth, if it just hung out on there the sink already probably reeked. But still, why not just use a toilet?)
@@lvrbad5588 what did the debunker characters say that wasn’t factually accurate?
Some shades of purple are more or less purple than purple.
That doesn't make them not purple.
I will never understand how we went from accepting people even if they don't fit the stereotypical social traits of their gender to invalidating the persons identity by suggesting they are an 'other' if they don't fit strict guidelines for what 'real' men and women are. Then you have to be some other gender or the opposite gender.
Why can't we just have masculine women and feminine men? I'll judge them all the same anyway, regardless of what they call themselves because that's just how I am.
We GOTTA get more debunker content in the future!
Seems they're back for good at least.
I can't imagine having young kids right now, how do you explain any of this to them? What a stupid timeline
I'd move to a small town, keep them away from internet and TV, and raise them Christian. We don't need them "yikes'd!" into being communists
I just teach my son the basic simple truths of life and then lovingly show him how absurd this stuff is when he's mature enough to handle it. I also show him how this ideology leads to confusion and hurts ppls lives.
We just raise him the same way we were raised and then point out the absurdity of it.
Good answer: You don't.
Best answer: Teach nad show them the undeniable truth of sex chromosomes ingrained into all cells.
Homeschool, and don’t expose them to this idiocy before they have a foundation of good values and can think for themselves. I’m not a parent, but that’s how I grew up.
Also, beware of the internet. There are so many online LGBT “cults” that drag kids in (no pun intended).
YES!!!! Debunkers rock!
Need more of these, I've missed them so.
A++
Excellent! Thank you FreedomToons for speaking up for us gals! ❤
"Jon Stewart is so smart"
-Nobody ever
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." -Vladimir Lenin
I can't believe it took me this long to realize that "the Debunkers" is a play on the bunker that they live in.
I'm incredibly stupid
Well, you just got bunked. Welcome to the club.
Really? Even back when they said "Our debunker bunker"?
I mean, I'm not judging. I've had moments like that too.
Hilarious that one of his funniest “bits” is how Chicago pizza isn’t pizza. But apparently he believes that a man or woman can identify as anything they want.
Don't worry, I'm sure he'll apologize about this statement
Jon is a deep dish meat popsicle
Great animation Seamus!!!
There are so many people I’d love to share this with, but it is less than a month before Thanksgiving, and it has become awkward enough.
Keep up the good work and props for the great dunking on Jon “I do as I’m told” Stewart.
Nice new intro, team! Looks and sounds fantastic, love the Ambience music, and tittle card animation!
Keep up the awesome work, Freedom Toons, and you as well shamus! (Just don’t know how much you guys, have expended )
On points explanations and jokes as always, guys. Dynamite writing and editing. Would love a cut off all the jokes that didn’t make it some time, or just the board room meeting goig over what to use..
I don't know whether to laugh or cry, because all their observations are spot on.
Do one, because you did the other reflexively
"Ariostotle, what makes a woman a deformity?" Aristotle answers by explaining the differences between women and men.
"Coverture Law, how can you tell which spouse loses all rights when becoming wed?" Coverture Law looks puzzled at the unspoken assumptions, but if it accepts them for the argument, it proceeds to explain that it's the woman, and how you can tell which one is the woman.
"Leviticus, how do you know to set this person's value at 30 shekles?" Leviticus tells you that it's because she's a woman, and can tell you how to identify this fact.
Show a woke person two people and ask which one is the more oppressed by Coverture Law, and that woke person will be able to identify that it's the woman, and will either have to dodge the question or answer that there was no confusion at the time over whether the law applied to this person or not.
My only regret is that I have but one "like" to give for FreedomToons, The Debunkers. -Nathan Hale, if he were here with us.
The best argument against this nonsense was an accident.
A “mother” (I put that in parentheses because the lady gave birth to the child in question but is not acting as a caring parental figure) is in a video talking to her 4 year old boy.
She asks the boy if he is a boy or a girl. The boy insists he is a girl. To which the mother is ecstatic. Yay, he’s a girl.
Then the mother asks how old “she” is. The boy says seven.
Mom corrects “her” and says you are 4.
The boy states again that he is seven.
This repeats for some time.
The end result is simple. If we have to accept that a 4 year old boy says he’s a girl, why do we not accept that a 4 year old is 7?????
Because gender and time are two completely different concepts? 🤔
@@Ronnie.Raymond Are you suggesting that one concept is more valid than another?
If time is a concept that cannot be altered by our feelings, why is gender alterable?
If the science of male and female is subject to our whims, why not time?
I’ll wait for a serious response.
@@frankphillips7436he got silent💀
@@bryantheawsome9011 I’m fairly used to that. It’s better than the alternative which is personal attacks.
@@frankphillips7436Ronnie is just a troll.
You can totally tell that at very least on a subconscious level he knows he's lying, and it pains him. He's not funny anymore because he's lying. He lost his talent because he's a coward who has been bullied into saying what he knows to be untrue. The only big laugh he's gotten in recent years was when he found the courage to speak the truth one time. That should have been all he needed to realize the only thing wrong with him now is that for something to be funny it has to ring true. And like I said... coward.
In college we learned about that boy who had his penis burned off in a botched circumcision, and him and his twin brother were referred to Dr. Money who did sex change operations, did hormone replacement therapy and sexually abused them, and both boys grew up to commit suicide. We learned from this lesson that it was a bad thing that should not be done, a lesson that we now forget about. But then I got to thinking recently, what are the odds of such a freak accident on one boy of a set of identical twins. And I realized that it was totally on purpose. These doctors must have been friends of Dr. Money and he said "Hey, next time you get a set of twin boys, cut off one of their penis's and I'll take it from there." An involuntary experiment that they got roped into.
This was a basis for a Crime and Oder SVU episode, but the twins ended up killing the doctor.
I never thought of that, but Money was a p.o.s. and it seems plausible.
My doctor mentioned this story to me a couple years ago, and added that he, along with many others in the medical field, were pretty sure it wasn't an accident.
Not sure how it could be an accident. I believe the boy was castrated during the circumcision. It happened in Winnipeg. It was probably seen as an opportunity by Money after he heard about it or was approached. I don't think it was something he himself planned. After he got hold of them, he put his sick plans into effect. Terrible story.
@@greyone40 Why would the doctor have castrated him if it wasn't fo the purpose of Dr. Money's experiment?
We never should've closed the asylums.
We need more of these... miss hearing you on Shimcast brother.
Funny how what always gets left out of any mention of coverture law is that the reason women had different or no legal standing in some cases was because her husband was legally responsible for almost everything she did. And, because of that, there was no point in her having legal standing. Her having a legal standing would interfere in her husband's social and legally enforced responsibilities to her.
So many people try to make it out like it women's accountablity to men was oppression of women by leaving out men's reciprocal obligations to women.
Figured I'd let you know, I received the notification for this earlier, but when I checked it a few minutes ago the notification was gone and it wasn't in my recommendations. I had to search your channel to find it.
And to think, 20 years ago when my cousin was very young and just learning about God, he asked me what would happen to humans if they turned away from God. I guess I wasn't very imaginative at the time because what we are living through now is SO MUCH WORSE than what I described to that young boy in his bed.
Pretty sure we have farther to fall!
It's because you were too good to comprehend how bad most people could be... because you hadn't seen war or any real tribulation yet.
It's going to get... much tougher soon.
Cult moment
What is God?
@@republicofkoreaball4349 Well in some places you are allowed to peacefully practice your religion, and in some places it causes a public disturbance. So who knows, really, what a God is?
"You can be less like John Stewart than you were yesterday" sold
When people ask "What is a woman" it's a gacha question.
When people ask "What is a man" they will say: "A miserable pile of secrets!"
I keep forgeting to put that in the comments. SotN gold.
I know these must take forever, but i love these sooooo much! Thank you! ❤️
"No excuse for you to take a shit in the sink." Absolute gold.
Always a great day when the debunkers come to visit
I know these take longer but I absolutely love the debunkers
Remember a couple of years ago when Jon Stewart went on TV and told people that Covid came from a lab in Wuhan? Did he get sent to a reeducation camp?
"A sink is different from a toilet. 'But toilets come in all different shapes and sizes', you say. Indeed, they do, but these variations are no excuse for you to take a sh*t in the sink." -A brilliant intellectual
If you look closely, the streaks of light on the Debunkers’ monocles resemble the patterns on an anime girl’s pantsu.
"Are you tired of being unloved and bad at debunking things? Ground News can solve one of those things!"
Finally...someone to love me
I had to pause the video, I was laughing so hard!
Jesus loves you. He is the only way we can be saved from our sins and reconciled with our holy Creator God. 💛
The problem is that "Gender" has multiple definitions, and the Left keeps trying to jump between "different arbitrary categories of humans" and "sexes".
I said it before- Jon questioned lab leaks, but then he got the memo and now he’s back in line.
I love the sink analogy. "But these variations are no excuse for you to take a sh__ in the sink."
Chihuahuas have almost nothing in common with Dobermans, and yet, neither one is a cat.
“Bigot boy” had me rolling
Can we get a Matt Walsh cartoon about the rally he set up in Nashville???
12:29, even then, it’s the female who lays the egg and male who fertilizes it. It’s just that the male seahorse houses the egg during fertilization
Thank you I was wondering about that
"There are variations within dogs, so they aren't dogs."
Arguing with Jon Stewart - that's a good way to "catch the stupid".
Yay! More debunkers!
The wilting “as am I” cracks me up every single time
Jon has really been rockin' that Stockholm Glaze.
Great video. The debunkers are my favorite cartoon you make. Keep up the great work