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

[emerencealwayshopeful]

I watched it. I was doing washing up as well, so it wasn't focussed attention, but I don't recommend others force themselves through it. The production values are nice though, if you appreciate such things.

I'm just feeling lost again, turning on social media after a couple of days away and finding this shared a few times over with words explaining that nobody could be 'swayed by so-called gender-critical arguments' after seeing this all the way though.

How do intelligent women not understand that none of this has anything to do with denying the existence of people who are clearly here and all of it has to do with the fact that this ideology is a threat to women and girls?

This, the Ogre's piece denouncing JY (And the other articles about that vile human) and I need to avoid social media - except that I also have a social life that is barely real so need to go there sometimes to prove to myself I still exist.

You know very little of my views or why I refer to this person as she.

I fundamentally disagree with the idea that anyone should police who can be feminine and to what degree
Has anyone tried to police anyone in this way on this thread?
and what that necessarily means.
You disagree with people having opinions on things (aka having a perception of what something necessarily means) on a discussion forum?

I posted this back on the first page but I don’t think anyone really noticed it. It’s an excellent point by point take down of Contrapoints’ video, in two parts (because it would be hella long otherwise).

You can listen while doing something else, and it covers the whole CP’s video, so you don’t need to watch it first.

Made by a U.K. based left-leaning GC man who used to be a trans supporter but went off to research radical feminism (in order to critique it) and realised that radical feminism actually made sense.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=I7QXcYBgNIY
m.youtube.com/watch?v=rr3h4-bLUwo

You know very little of my views or why I refer to this person as she.

I don't need to know your views to find this choice of words offensive.

People are allowed to think other people have been taken in by a con trick. You can think whatever you like about my views, I don't care at all.

Thanks Betty, I was going to watch it later, I can't right now as am out of the house.

I abhor drag-but I do try very hard to separate it in my mind from transwomen. One thing this video did was to help me understand the hyper femininization thing- that made a lot of sense.

Maybe, but resorting to exaggerated parodies of femininity does not really express feeling( inside oneself) supposedly 'womanly things'. If anything, it heightens the discrepancy; makes more of a pantomime. It doesn't convince anyone: quite the opposite. It literally is just a parody - no matter how deeply felt the motivation.

So many of the on-line trans divas seem to spend all their time cultivating what they associate with femininity; but the moment the mask drops, the genuine, wholistic person pops out from behind the show.

This person is not a drag queen, so what's your point?

What's the difference in your view? I can't spot any differences, and I'm sure neither could your average person. The only difference is the inner feeling or motivation.But you don't need to dress up to tell us about feelings.

"Has anyone tried to police anyone in this way on this thread?"

Well, it's rather obvious that I think you are! By "what that necessarily means" I was referring to what that means at a societal level. In other words, I disagree with anyone who thinks they can tell someone that being feminine means xyz so they shouldn't be feminine. Apologies if that was unclear.

Anyway, I'll leave it there as this is on a bit of a road to nowhere.

But I think the intention behind drag and the intention behind the hyper feminisation of trans women is very different.

Intention is all that separates the two, though. I certainly don't think they pass at all. Drag is what immediately came to mind.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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...

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?

“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!

Thanks betty

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

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 .

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?

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