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

It's about the external validation though. She wants people to call her she and validate her perceived inner gender identity so arising from that she puts on exaggerated femininity.

The video only talks about outward presentation to avoid "misgendering" though and doesn't delve into what feelings the outward presentation is supposed to convey (if not stereotypical ideas of masculine and feminine).

This is the real point. If gender is something innate, then you don't ned to dress or present it in anyway. The TRA argument goes that biological sex doesn't matter, only an internalised gender feeling does. So why go to the bother of presenting and dressing in such an overt way, in a theatrical style - why not just be yourself and explain to people how that feels? Can't they just be a man talking about their more delicate feelings, and explaining how these have arisen?

Instead, we get 'The Black & White Minstrel Show', or a white person 'blacked out' talking to a black audiuence about how much they love R&B and gospel singing. Really feel it in their bones.

I see that and agree totally justhadathought. What I have issue with is using that to refuse to listen to another person's point of view. In my eyes its exactly the same as trans rights activists refusing to engage with GC feminists because of their GC beliefs, i.e. No debate.

...because your appearance and beliefs are insulting to me" sounds a lot like #nodebate, don't you think?

No, it means don't try and pretend that just by dressing in such a way - and mimicking gestures in an exaggerated, drag style fashion, that it makes you a woman. I'm finding it extremely odd that you cannot see this? Presentation is the whole point. Men presenting themselves as women based on clothing and mannerisms. Whatever the motivating feelings beneath that is irrelevant. 'Feeling like a woman' does not make you a woman either.

If I had the budget and the face for video I'd love to make a video but the other way around with my inner transwoman as the "baddy".

Yes, it is just about a feeling. And I agree that ultimately its impossible to get past that.

One point of the video I found really interesting was that Natalie explains her own experience as being that she used to be a man and is now a woman. I would be interested to hear how her feelings are different/changed, because someone acknowledging that surely must be able to identify what is the difference. The video only talks about outward presentation to avoid "misgendering" though and doesn't delve into what feelings the outward presentation is supposed to convey (if not stereotypical ideas of masculine and feminine).

But it doesn't address any of the actual points raised in the video. Saying, essentially, "I won't listen to this because your appearance and beliefs are insulting to me" sounds a lot like #nodebate, don't you think?

How would you feel if a GC woman dressed up in a wig; painted some stubble on their chin; a frilly dress and some DM's and gave a lecture to trans activists about the gender critical arguments?

If you're honest it would be reported to the police straight away, wouldn't it - as a parody; a hate crime

Maybe most who like that kind of presentation agreed with her anyway but whether you like it or not you can still listen to it and address the points raises. I find some of the long GC essays very difficult to get through but I do because I think what they have to say is interesting and worthy of attention.

My problem, and one I just can't get over, is that trans-genderism/sexualism is really all just about 'presentation', and feelings.... It rests on presentation. Presentation is what it is all about.
Presenting in a way that 'matches' the imagined feelings of what it means, or must feel like, to be the opposite sex.

If you have a problem with men presenting in a feminine manner

I love a ‘feminine’ presenting man, fyi [grin

But it doesn't address any of the actual points raised in the video. Saying, essentially, "I won't listen to this because your appearance and beliefs are insulting to me" sounds a lot like #nodebate, don't you think?

I hate this video. I couldn't watch it all it a few weeks ago when it popped up on twitter. How any self respecting woman cannot see this persons superiority complex is beyond me. They are patronising and condescending. And they are dressed like a parody of women.

This is not the future I want for my little girl.

Stand strong.
✊🏻💗

You're entitled to think what you like about Natalie Lamaha but then why comment on the thread if you've got nothing to add other than personal attacks? You don't get to dictate how other people dress and speak just because you find it grating.

People can dress and speak how they like, but when they go public with a lecture on such a sensitive issue, then they have to expect some criticism. The criticism is not personal, it is about the way they are presenting.... It is insulting, and people have listed the reasons why.

Maybe most who like that kind of presentation agreed with her anyway but whether you like it or not you can still listen to it and address the points raises. I find some of the long GC essays very difficult to get through but I do because I think what they have to say is interesting and worthy of attention.

I agree that the personification of GC feminism as a literal witch is...telling. It was frustrating how I really thought she was going to address the core GC issues but then reduced GC feminism to a baddy who only speaks in single sentences.

The article is interesting, the video as well IMHO. The insulting comments about the presenter in this thread are less helpful and seem unnecessary and cruel.

The fact is that presenting 'woman' in this way is also insulting; very insulting, and certainly not helpful.

Her point at the beginning is that she's aiming at those who are interested in or even swayed by GC arguments, but not those who already identify as GC proper because they are unlikely to be converted by her (this thread perhaps being evidence of that).

I fall into the former camp and found it persuasive and a lot of the points are well made and balanced. In my view not preaching to the chorus, who probably disagree with much of what she has to say re male socialization. At times OTT but it's YouTube.

I managed 8 minutes before the pretentious waffle and exaggerated facial expressions irritated me too much to continue.
Also, why were they dressed like a 1940s [female] film star?
And why dressed like the goddess of death in Thor Ragnorak when they were portraying a gc

Because women can be reduced to a series of pantomime stereotypes, and the elegant 1940's style 'type' of look floats their boat. GC women are the bad ones; the ones that that you at boo at when they enter the stage.

“Why should there be an obligation to present everything in a manner that you personally find worthy of inclusion in debate? ”

Not me personally. But you must agree that most people who enjoyed the content and presentation of that video probably agreed with her anyway. Apart from anything else If she really wants to break down barriers presenting the gender critical point of view as an Ursula style monster is a bit tactless!

I don't know but I'm sure I'm not the only person who was not impressed by Germaine Greer referring to the trans woman as "it"

Germaine Greer is just Germaine Greer - she doesn't do political correctness or politeness, as we all know. The "it" was probably her way of dealing with the pronoun 'issue'.

I think Trousering has the measure of it.

I wasn't meaning your comments Bertrand.

But on the point about the manner of presentation I disagree. Why should there be an obligation to present everything in a manner that you personally find worthy of inclusion in debate? This issue affects everyone, young, old, people able to read through length essays and people who prefer snazzy videos. Perhaps the video was intended to preach to the choir but I found it interesting nonetheless.

It is just preaching to the chorus and a invitation to the audience to roll out the same nasty points to women who disagree, exactly as highlighted by the OP.

The points made are not intelligent rebuttals with careful reasoning, they are smears, misrepresentations and lies.

“If you have a problem with men presenting in a feminine manner then start a thread about that but there's no need to make it personal.”

I don’t have a problem with men presenting in a feminine manner. I do have a problem with someone trying to engage on a serious and important subject and burying it in gimmicks and special effects. It makes me wonder how serious her desire to educate and inform is or whether she is just preaching to the choir,

Contrapoints audience isn't women concerned about the safety and dignity of women and girls.

This. Exactly.

I didn’t have a problem with the clothes.