I know many are sceptical re: Matt Walsh but this is so worth watching...

That makes sense. That tweet did not seem consistent with his Catholicism or other things I have heard him say.

But men on the right/center right do listen to PP when she appears in the media, and even to JKR though she is seen somewhat on the right as a person who has in the past accused the right of being bad people, so isn't likely to be as popular.

Someone like Candace Owens might be a more popular female voice on the right, being right wing herself. She talks more about id politics than gender, but she's a popular pundit even though she's a woman.

Right-wing and centre-right men (and women) will listen to Matt Walsh, whereas they wouldn't (at least until recently) listen to left wing women, like JKR or any feminist trying to bring this subject to a wider audience.

So there is an element of a pincer movement in trying to get the left to listen to certain people with a profile, and getting the right to listen to the same messages but from someone else.

In these polarised times, with people applying purity tests to people before they are deemed listenable, I think it's the only way to drive momentum across politically and ideologically diverse audiences.

The part where he listened to a transwoman and realised he shared all their thoughts and feelings, so he too must be a..... transwoman.

I thought that was an interesting admission of social contagion - a thing that is desperately denied by TRAs.

The Catholic position is pretty straightforward, all human life counts as a person at the same level, so killing someone deliberately at any stage, or in any condition, carries the same moral implications. As far as I know that's Walsh's position.

But this idea that a Walsh is listened to when women aren't - I don't really agree. I think that Walsh is reviled on the left. Just like JKR or PP. Any difference in vitriol IMO is because he was never on the left himself. Men on the left or even in the center who have spoken out to any significant degree are largely now considered right wing baddies too, GL for example, or Jordan Peterson for that matter. People on the right or even in the middle seem happy enough to listen to all of these people.

Apparently it's a fake tweet anyway:

https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-walsh-tweet-idUSL1N32W2K9

I disagree with Matt Walsh, but I think that's just the Catholic position, so it's not surprising.

It could just mean something like he was drunk, and the girl was drunk, and he doesn't think that is really "taking advantage".

OMG 🥲that’s terrible.

He also thinks 12 year old girls who have been raped don't deserve an abortion.

I think this means that half the sexual encounters in his life have been sexual assault.

Is he a convert to Catholicism then? Surely if he were a life long catholic he should have only had sex with his wife?!

OMG - kind of new here and didn’t get OP’s health warning about Matt Walsh now I get it!!

*I am glad he can do it. But it doesn't make it less galling to know that If women's opinions were respected, we could have punctured this ideology years ago.

Yes it's a complicated place to be.*

Kara Dansky says that if we could be heard we would win. That's how I feel and I agree it's galling that a right wing man talks and everyone listens. The problem for US feminists is we're also fighting for abortion rights, which Walsh opposes. So if less critical minded viewers of Matt find his GC arguments compelling, which they are, it stands to reason we will LOSE support for abortion rights from the easily swayed.

I do appreciate that TRAs spoke at this event because every time they do, the sunlight show the truth.

The sheer misogyny of it makes me seethe. Women shouted down, assaulted and attacked for doing the same as a man.

Eurgh, Sara pascoe manages to shoehorn in TWAW every time she's on monkey cage. sanctimonious pillock

I'd really like to hear a conversation on that topic between Brian Cox and Robin Ince tho.

It's interesting that the episode of IMC I linked to above is from 2016, before much of the current nonsense started, and that both Robin Ince and Sara Pascoe are perfectly happy discussing biological differences between the sexes back then, but are both firmly TWAW now, though in both their cases I imagine it's a case of "career induced" backtracking rather than actual belief.

As far as I was aware, they have yet to find actual differences between "female" and "male" brains that cannot simply be put down to the normal size differences between men and women.

Certainly that is what Professor Sophie Scott (Prof of neuroscience at UCL) was saying in 2016 on this episode of The Infinite Monkey Cage The Infinite Monkey Cage - Series 14 - Battle of the Sexes - BBC Sounds

As for why GI has been able to perpetuate, particularly among younger folk, I do think a lot of it is due to lack of critical thinking. Whether it can be traced back to a failing in global education systems, or if it is just general apathy among the population I don't know. Social media alogorithims mean it's very easy to end up in an echo chamber and if people don't know (or can't be arsed) to fact check and look for primary sources/actual peer reviewed science rather than relying on opinion pieces or the hearsay of others then it's easy to see why so many people can fall down a rabbit hole.

It's hard to imagine a sense of self that entirely relies on the agreement of those around you. Like a kind of real life 'AIBU?'.
Desperately walking round at constant risk of being misgendered, and vanishing in a puff of outrage.

There are quite a few brain MRI studies indicating self perception difficulties in both FtM and MtF individuals.

They don’t show similarities with opposite sex, non trans controls.

I think it would be great if gender dysphoria could be diagnosed via brain scans, it would hopefully end any potential social contagion and lower the risk of regret and detransition.

Transactivists deride this as the ‘truscum position’.

I think it said structures. A quick google search will bring up quite a lot of papers on this. Its definitely an area being studied.

Structure or reactions within the brain?

Because female brains are structured according to their small skulls, aren’t they? They certainly have more delicate fibres and are more prone to damage as the Swansea Uni research pointed out.

I think that hormones affect the brian differently too. So estrogen, even artificial estrogen, has a different effect. Is that right?

The one I like though is that different activities create similarities over time. So if you were a male but were interested in activities that were considered for comparison to be more ‘female oriented’, then that will create similarities to ‘female’ brains.

No, they can never back anything up.

Not altogether surprising...

The study I read, albeit about eight years ago now, said something along the lines of you could tell the difference in the brain structure, but it was the part that deals with self image. And that obsessing about self image, or body image, could create the alteration.

The same area affected by anorexia, apparently.

I don't know if that sounds plausible or not, to be honest!

I’d like to ask them how they know what sort of contraceptive is required and which person has to use it.

I’m also wondering if the current generation have a less secure sense of self generally due cultural shifts and changes in parenting style, less grounding in a local community where everyone knows each other, less time spent in face to face real world play with friends known from an early age, fewer long term friendships, less contact across the generations, too much time online where visuals are very important, a tendency to encourage narcissism being part of the online world, the ability to cut off communication with anyone who doesn’t agree with you and the tendency to encourage hostility also associated with online interactions etc etc