Trans ideology potentially debvnked?

“trans ideology” is a spook so there’s not really anything to deboonk
why do bongs in particular have such a visceral hatred for freedom and individual liberty though? It’s strange how they seem to all have this inherent drive towards authoritarianism. Maybe because every modern bong is the descendent of those who were too cowardly and slavish to escape to one of the colonies.

this video was fucking retarded

cool argument but you look like this so

Not watching your ‘tube video shill, but why does his avatar have greasy pedophile breadtuber phrenology? It looks like something vaush would use

why would anyone watch this lol what a waste of time
go on a walk. listen to an album. watch an episode of the sopranos. do literally anything else with 41 minutes and 38 seconds
and the video is 41 minutes not 42 minutes like the title says! #noticing

Assuming you’re the guy from the video. Posted this on your channel too. Hope it boosts engagement. People should get the chance to engage critically with stuff like this or they’ll never know why they believe what they believe.

The problem with your argument is you treat “man” and “woman” like categories with fixed, universal definitions, when historically and culturally they’ve always been social classifications built around biology, not solely determined by it. You act like biological sex is simple and binary, when in reality it’s bimodal — you admit exceptions exist, but then pretend those exceptions somehow reinforce the rule. A category that requires exceptions to function isn’t a clean binary. It’s a rule of thumb with edge cases, meaning the category’s borders are blurry.

And your “self-identity is arbitrary” claim misses the mark. Not all identity claims are material. Religion, nationality, sexual orientation — none of these are purely biological, yet we treat them as real because they describe personal and social reality, not just physical traits. Gender identity works the same way. It's a claim about how someone relates to themselves and to a gendered society. You don't get to handwave that because it makes your worldview messier.

Also, language doesn’t just describe material facts — it also organizes human social life. If language only described facts, words like “citizen,” “enemy,” or “marriage” wouldn’t change meaning over time. But they do. Definitions evolve because humans decide which definitions are useful, not because they're handed down from the cosmos.

Your argument isn’t about accuracy. It’s about policing categories you’re uncomfortable seeing other people control. You keep appealing to “reality” but refuse to admit that reality includes psychology, social structures, and lived experience. That’s why your position isn’t analytically superior — it’s incomplete.

I know ai writing when i read it

Religion, nationality, sexual orientation — none of these are purely biological, yet we treat them as real because they describe personal and social reality, not just physical traits. Gender identity works the same way.

but none of these examples are coductive to self-id? why would you mention them?

AI on Anon Babble

the boymoder slop is one thing but jesus fucking christ please not this get the fuck out

Even i can tell you didn't watch the video.

You accuse others of treating “man” and “woman” as fixed categories, but ignore that all useful categories draw boundaries. Biological sex is largely binary — not because there are zero exceptions, but because the categories are based on reproductive roles, which are binary in nature. “Bimodal” doesn’t negate binary; it describes statistical distribution with two dominant clusters. Exceptions don’t dissolve categories — they define their edges.

Your comparison to religion, nationality, and orientation actually undercuts your point. Those identities are real because they’re tied to systems: shared culture, laws, behavior. We don’t accept identity claims in a vacuum — we verify, contextualize, and often reject them. Saying gender identity “works the same way” only helps you if gender also relies on shared definitions. But that’s what you’re trying to discard.

As for language: yes, it evolves. But not all linguistic evolution is progress. Redefining “woman” to mean “anyone who identifies as one” makes the term so vague it loses descriptive power. Words change through consensus, not coercion. If clarity is sacrificed for inclusivity, communication breaks down.

Finally, accusing people of “policing categories” just because they insist on definitional coherence is projection. Categories exist to distinguish — without limits, they’re meaningless. Your argument insists that subjective identity overrides observable reality, and that rejecting this isn’t analytical failure but moral failure. That’s not a defense of truth; it’s a power play dressed in empathy.

the ai are FIGHTING
STOP
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA NO NOT HERE PLEASE NOT HERE

Buy an ad, faggot.

Wowzies my hecking beard fell off at the 20 minute mark, by 27:46 I was positively hecking tradwife hella funky at 38:26 a juuuugeeeee amount of discharge came from my yaoi bonus hole
Hecking strange

erm...did you know...that erm...trans women aren't real women...c-checkmate wokeoids!

yeah no shit retard literally everyone here agrees. go post your engagement bait on twitter where you might earn some money doing so.

is that the aqua debate?

i dont need someones viewpoint. it took my years to crack my egg and i really dont give a fuck about most people. most of us just want to be left alone and not shove our dysphoria in others faces.im most often boymoded cos i dont want the attention

buy an ad faggot

You’re right that “Bimodal” doesn’t negate binary, but it does create spectrum and nuance. Reproductive roles aren’t the only relevant element in a discussion about gender. Societal expectations surrounding gender are apparent whether you consider them sexist or not.

You act as though identities like nationality, religion, and sexuality are largely agreed upon — they aren’t. More often than not, the boundaries of these categories are disputed between factions within the category. Where do you think the “no true scotsman” fallacy comes from? There are no clean lines. The identities persist in spite of the lack of clean shared definitions — not because of them.

You are mistaking one definition of woman for all definitions of woman. There are several definitions for woman that could include trans people — they don’t all rely on circular reasoning. Can you give me one solid, concise definition of a woman that doesn’t exclude any variety of cis women? Even if you could, you’d be hard pressed to get everyone to agree with that definition. This, once again, points to the same pattern — that gender isn’t necessarily only biological in nature. No matter how much it would help your narrative if it was.

There. Handcrafted without AI. I’ll admit that my first response was tidied up by chatgpt, but I left this one raw. Are we all happy now?

yes we got debunked. im detransing now

i think he fumbles hard in the section titled "accuracy defence". imo you can sum up his argument here as

social utility isn't as important biological sex

but i think this is a bad argument because we already have male and female to describe biological sex. he said he'd describe passoids as men who look like women but i think you can just as easily say male women and lose none of the nuance he's trying to get at while being able to use a more socially expedient definition of woman

i'm not going to watch your video. if you want me to engage with your argument you can put it in text somewhere that doesn't give you money when i click on it.

the postmodernist definition of woman as “anyone who identifies as a woman” has not helped our case at all. it’s not my definition and I’m tired of arguing with people who assume that’s the only position trans people can have.

I'm a trans woman but my goal in life is to live as an afab woman.
That is to say my dream (perhaps not achievable for hundreds of years) is to live my life indistinguishably from how it'd be if afab.
Today main barrier to that is no kids/pregnancy

yeah it confuses a heuristic with a definition
you should generally respect the claims people make about their own gender identity because they're best positioned to know the truth about themselves. that doesn't mean there's no underlying reality that the claims refer to, and it doesn't mean the claims can never be incorrect.

i agree and i'm not arguing with that

do you really think mtfs would be okay with people classifying them as "male women"?

waste of time, no one is transphobic due to phislosophical or linguistic reasons people are transphobic because trannies are gross and icky if you wana convince people trannies are le bad post a gross pic of them and if you wanna do the opposite start passing and looking good

simple as

what is "trans ideology"
what are the points being made
explain for yourself I don't want to watch a video essay since they all suck

when you stop arguing in favor of your views eventually you'll get embarrassed by midwits like matt walsh.

i'm mtf actually i'm just using the woke flag because i think it's funny
i'm not super comfortable with it myself but whether or not mtfs are comfortable with it isn't really important to me. i actually think i'm a male man in most contexts because i don't pas in most contexts

Nta but we are kind of beyond having these convos. It's just best to leave some debates in the past, where we've already had them over and over for years. The only people who think Matt Walsh can embarrass you are low IQ.