Another day, another friend insisting that THIS video will change minds and hearts

support everything you say...…..

then I’d be saying that my time is less important than yours......

No you wouldn't, you've already watched it. You didn't have a massive aversion to the style of it, in fact you've spoken quite highly of it. It would hardly be any skin off your nose to give an summary of one of the worthwhile points you think it made from memory.

“Any chance you could outline the bones of the argument on the thread?”

Yeah, well, I could. But then I’d be saying that my time is less important than yours......

Can anyone who watched it and found it interesting/insightful/intelligent/thought-provoking/etc let us know on the thread any specific points? Just vague summary/paraphrasing of any of it would be good.

I don't really want to watch the King rebuttal because I assume it plays through the whole thing and takes it apart line by line. That will take even longer than just watching the original and drawing my own conclusions and i'll still have to watch the original within it anyway.

Any takers? Anything you thought was pertinent? People on the thread are talking about hyper femininity explained being good. Any chance you could outline the bones of the argument on the thread?

The “King” video addresses all Natalie’s points one by one, clearly and calmly. He also explains why he uses “she” and talked about the kickback he got for doing it.

Nobody is disputing their interpretation and explanation of their actions and feelings; what people are disputing is whether this, alone, makes them a woman. It doesn't! And whether people people must see one as one sees oneself. People can't be forced into confirming one's feelings about oneself. If your identity requires continual affirmation from strangers then it is very shaky indeed.

Do they explain how it's possible to change sex and why woman and girls shouldn't have sex segregated spaces?

The “King” video addresses all Natalie’s points one by one, clearly and calmly. He also explains why he uses “she” and talked about the kickback he got for doing it.

I've seen one or two if their videos,but they've never addressed or come close to explaining the two things that are key to me:

How it is possible for a man to change sex, and
Why should women and girls lose their sex segregated spaces?

There were some reasonable points

Were there? I watched the first 12 minutes or so of this person failing to respond to any of the points, then gave up as I couldn't stand the bizarre delivery any longer.

There were some reasonable points

Would you be able to expand? I'd like to know what is worthwhile without needing to watch the whole thing.

I've now watched it all the way through. There were some reasonable points and others less so.

In my view, one lives as a woman and one performs as a woman principally for comic effect.

Can you explain exactly what you mean by 'living as a woman', JustBecause? How does a man's life change, in your view, if he 'lives as a woman'? What is different about 'living as a woman' compared to 'living as a man'?

Is it just about wearing different clothes, or what?

You do seem to do a lot of condemning without watching!

Life is short. I don't particularly like watching videos as a format anyway - too bloody time-consuming and time based - you can't scan read etc. In this case I was put off by the obnoxious presenter and disrespectful treatment of Germaine Greer and the CBBC level of patronising, in the second, I gave it a whirl, far too much of the video was real-time replication of the first and then his disregard for the need to be equally kind and loving to the never-bepenised sex pissed me off.

If someone could summarise what was actually worthwhile in either I'd be grateful.

Maybe Bertrand, since your namesake suggests you are in favour of lucid, empirical arguments, you might be able to help out in that area .

The first 60 seconds are great. After that - parody of some fantasy teacup-and-fascinator antiquated vision of womanhood? NO THANK YOU

Thanks betty

“Betty I couldn't watch that video. It bugged me that he chose to use female pronouns, etc to be kind/loving etc. It's not kind or loving to prioritise the feelings of entitled males who call themselves women over women and girls who find it upsetting and offensive when males diminish all it means to be a woman.”

You do seem to do a lot of condemning without watching!

In my view, one lives as a woman and one performs as a woman principally for comic effect. In the video, I see a feminine woman. Knowing that the person is trans, I see a person born male who now outwardly presents as a woman.

Is a woman or presents as a woman?

Is 'woman' just an act that anyone, male or female can perform?

WeRiseUp - I get your objections - he actually uses it as a set up to make a really good point later on - it’s no use if he’s annoyed the audience sufficiently that they switch off and never get there though!

I will try and find you (and any similarly put - off lurkers) a time stamp for relevant bit...

Women can over exaggerate femininity too - and it is equally as insincere, and comes across as manipulative or similar.

A people can exaggerate masculinity too - which can come across as just as phoney.

In the absence of socialisation (ie cruel piss-taking for non-conformity) both men and women would have a mixture of mannerisms which come across as masculine or feminine. But some mannerisms occur naturally - such as women's walk because of the pelvis shape and thigh-bone rotation - it is phoney if a member of the opposite sex apes them.

What are the motivations for women who are extremely feminine?

If the 'femininity' is instinctive and a product of one's personality then there is no obvious motivation of that sort...But some women do hype up the female/sexuality/femininity for show - and also come across as false. They put it on as a costume, and take it off once home.

None of that means, however, that "cis women" shouldn't have our own spaces, our own sex protections and our own political movements promoting our own interests.
When the trans lobby stop attacking us outside meetings and trying to get us fired from our jobs-I'

There is no such thing as a cis woman. I'm certainly not a cis woman, and I resent very much the imposition of tis label; a label that has been manufactured in order to bolster claims that trans women are actually women. They are not. They are trans women - and it they that should have the 'qualifying' pronoun.

Pretty uncomfortable with the idea that femininity is a parody or caricature of womanhood. I am not a feminine woman but there is nothing wrong with femininity per se.

Feminine 'gestures' tend to be natural and instinctive expressions of certain personality functions or social adaptations -whether they be expressed by a woman or by a gay man, or even by a heterosexual man. For example being very expressive, articulate or flamboyant with one's hands.

But, in a man, when coupled with female costume and accoutrements it does just come across as an act. Women can over exaggerate femininity too - and it is equally as insincere, and comes across as manipulative or similar.

So is your view that all transwomen are drag queens?

Not quite....! What I think they are is men adopting exaggerated or studied poses of what sort of 'femininity' appeals to them. I'm sure most genuinely feel that they cannot wholeheartedly identify as men, or with certain masculinities, and feel more able to identify with certain femininities. They imagine themselves to be women, rather than men ( like many gay men do in their youth). This does not make them women, though.