More like he rehersed it really really hard.

Which intersex condition do you have?

exactly

same, I just put it in 2x speed and it was eliminated/sounded like regular speech.

I thought I was the only one. Thank god someone else feels this way!

no actually he should give it up zero evidence and poorly structured and organized. painful to watch. damn take a publ;ic speech class or something, f'ing clueless presenter.

Isn't it how he aproached the subject?

+Toxic Potato who says? Who are you so adamant about that? Leave people be and stop getting involved.

I mean, there are extremists. But when someone has told you gender/pronouns, etc then you should respect that. Other than that I agree with you.

The snivilling little liberal leftists have been the self appointed adjudicators of public discourse for about the past five or six decades I reckon, using their trusty stable of labels to socially stigmatise the non-conformist into conforming to liberal lefts world of PC. All was going well for the liberal left who created the religion of human rights, equality and people feelings and the entire grievance industry of fluff which achieves very little, produces nothing but costs the tax payer plenty. All was going well being past tense of ofcourse, with their movement on the wane I thought about disembowling the lefts lastest attempt at controlling how we think, but noticed their gender identity dribble is having a huge negitive affect turning soo many against them especially when they've tried to get this gender shit into primary schools. Which has exposed just how imbedded these cultural Marxist whack jobs are in the wests teaching instutitutions. I've long seen the regressive left's level of stupidity as the single greatest threat to western civilation, the gender gymnastics will die a natural death as most stupid ideas do, which I wouldn't mind the same happening to the whole stifling regressive left movement which is clearly vulnrable atm. We're about to be presented with an oppotunity that might do just that or least it should, the leftists don't know this yet but there's a paper being peer reviewed atm, that shows calculations used in feedbacks and forcings which apparently is what can mitigate or magnify the affect CO2 has on the climate, which don't quote me this it's not my area is rather significant in the climate modeling, which after all is what the world is spending trillions on, what climate modeling is saying. Anyways I have it from a good and reliable authority in the field, however they were applyng the influence the feedbacks and forcings had was grossly exaggerating the affect C02 had on average global surface temp in the climate modeling. He said the jury isn't even out this it's indisputable, and apparently they're grappling with how best to announce this to the world, which will be early next year. Which is huge when you think about it, can you imagine how they're going to break this to the world and they have to there's no way out. Um world just quick update on AGW slight error was made in the calcs sorry about the trillions we spent on this, but the good news is were not going to experiance sea level rise or pretty much anything our doom and gloom rhetoric said, which was scaring your children half to death. When the regressive leftists learns this from the IPCC and they will, after Brexit, Trump, then AGW becoming a non-issue I'm predicting a sudden widespread bout of self combusting lefties. Then we've got the European elections that will see Le Pen, Wilders and Pertry swept into office and the EU swept out as that waste of space is dissovled, the poor old leftist would be thinking it couldn't possibly get any worse. Think again you snivelling little group thinking fucks we've got the UN to bring down as well, that place is full of these idiots just like the EU. Is there more oh yes there's more, Islam and anyone stupid enough to follow it has decided they're leaving every western country all together with a bit gentle pervausion of course. Whilst we're setting upa new UN and EU the regressive leftist's should be spending long sessions in front of full length mirrors, and never again speak on public policy just listen, good advise that don't talk just listen.

Stfu you are basically saying that anyone with a different opinion are wrong and should be silenced

[CITATION/SOURCE NEEDED]

that is why i invented cookiegender. cookiegender is the sterotypical girly essence that we are fed though media and marketing, culture and toys. cookiegender "what are little girls made out of? sugar and spice and everything nice"

There are already people identifying as "genderless dragons" and various animals. I dont think its healthy for the individuals or for society.

@@tubester4567 well that's rude and unnecessary. do us a favor: don't say anything. Because clearly you're incapable of keeping your hurtful opinions to yourself.

sorry keep your head up be yourself surround yourself with people who love and accept you

lol

Aaaaaand we all know that feeling of utter disappointment when we relize that we might have just been trans but were denying it right? Hope we do!! I am in so much pain QwQ

typical - they know nothing and blind to truth

@@ventishoodiealt im taking this gender and communication class in school and i have learned alot and im still learning sometimes people will just stay close minded and that isn't your fault you are who you are it is your life take it and do as you please and want screw who ever doesn't agree with you they aren't the one's who have to walk in your shoes

Cara em nenhum momento ele falou sobre ideologia de gênero, vc ao menos viu o vídeo até o final? Ideologia de gênero é besteira e vai contra tudo q o cara do video falou, vc ao menos sabe oq é ideologia de gênero? Bem, vc citou olavo de carvalho então eu acho q não

Skycrystal Rain7 you're so inconsiderate. Why are you calling your little boy a girl? Shame on you as a parent to be so hurtful to your child.

my child was born a girl & is a girl she does not chose to change that. so why am I being inconsiderate to try & understand her changes.

How is this making the world a better place? How is confusing children into thinking they were born with the wrong genitalia helping the world? This speaker is intellectually assassinating the minds of children. Somehow this speaker is trying to make self-expression a topic about gender. When the two are barely related. The speaker builds his argument for gender expression based on his own assumptions of what is feminine or masculine. When in reality it is not gender expression; rather it is only identity(Biologically male or female) and expression. Identity and expression are barely related to each-other. Two different topics that he tries to merge as one based on how he has stereotyped men and women to act or express themselves. The speakers close-mindedness is why he confuses gender with a topic barely related to gender; expression. It harms children by confusing them about whether they were born in the right bodies or not. An you wonder why suicide rates are high for people that are confused about their gender. This is cruelty, and not making the world a better place. It's making it a confusing place for children, thinking God has accidentally given them the wrong bodies. Repent and trust in Jesus Christ so that you can see the truth instead of believing the lies/confusion about gender.

Happy Thoughts “intellectually assassinating” lmaooo thanks for making my day

How about "This is the role you choose to play, therefore you are a man/woman"? Also, here in the U.S., we call it SRS, or Sex Reassignment Surgery, which is more accurate.

***** Your identity as "trans" is not the norm, therefore it can not be applied to the norm.

Floyd what I'm trying to point out is, our society here in North America is overwhelming heterosexual.

***** As a trans person can you explain what use you personally find for the word "gender" is many people are using it now? I've always personally found it to be communicatively functionless and meaningless.

***** Hi! Have you tried - Hicklers Choose Gender (do a search on google)? Ive heard some pretty good things about it and my mate got cool success with it.

+Luna Girl please just stop...you're not "privileged" because you're straight.

***** You sound offended by the fact that I used the word 'prividlege'. Rest assure I'm not using it to put myself on a pedestal while putting others down. In fact I'm saying the opposite by acknowledging this.. The point is EVERYONE deserves equal treatment but thats simply not what's happening. Instead straight cisgendered folks are being treated better and given more rights. That's pretty much the definition of priviledge. 'a special right, advantage, or immunity granted or available only to a particular person or group of people.' sorry I don't understand your comment. let me just say (incase this wasn't clear) that I don't think this is fair but it's our reality.

+Luna Girl I will admit that if you were to go to the deep conservative south of the US cisgender people wouldn't be treated as poorly but I would like an example of cisgender people having more rights.

***** I can give one example. Think about washrooms. There is only male or female. Sometimes 'family' or 'disabled'. As a cisgendered individual I don't have to think about using a washroom, I simply walk into the female one. That is a priviledge. What cisgendered people don't realise is that there are people who don't indentify with female nor male. There are people who identify with both. There are people who identify with female but don't 'pass'. There are people who identify is male but don't 'pass'. Where are their washrooms? It's easy to say 'just pick one' or 'go find a single-stalled washroom' but that just proves the point I'm trying to make. It's a privilegde for a cisgendered individuals like me to be accommated by society in this way. The same accomodation is not made for transgendered people for example.The same accomodation is not made for anyone who isn't cisgendered male or female.

Luna Girl South park did a brilliant episode on this...Kyle's dad complained that they didn't accommodate for him being a dolphin man by giving him a special dolphin bathroom. At the end of the day you can't make everyone comfortable. They let a transgender man into the woman's UFC and it kicked the shit out of every female it fought and my guess is the female athletes didn't feel to privileged when they were getting clobbered...but hey equality right.

I won't bash the ideas but I'll bash the guy since he's an unapologetic plagiarist off the work of trans people for profit: storify.com/cisnormativity/the-genderbread-plagiarist

+Ghast the Otaku You seem woefully underinformed to be making such declarative statements. IF you'd like to know how things work, and are unwilling to look into it yourself, I'd be more than happy to tutor you. OR you can jsut continue to wallow in your ignorance. I really don't care. I just thought I'd offer.

Transtrenders and non-binary identities do not, and will not harm me as a trans woman. Stop feeling offended by new identities just so that you can hate specific trans people.

SleepyDreamland I'm not offended. If some 14 year old on tumblr wants to identify as a demigender otherkin because he has a vivid imagination, that distracts from actual trans people who suffer from gender dysphoria. Now you tell me, how many nonbinary genders do we need? More than 3-4 is just vanity for childish people who want to feel special. In many cases they aren't trans, they're just imaginative young people who get wrapped up in certain tumblr communities, and do not need the same medical attention and sympathy of actual trans people who suffer and need to be taken seriously. Think about people other than yourself, and realize that just because you are trans doesn't give you the final say on this matter.

Otherkin is not a gender, it is irrelevant to the discussion. And that's cool and all, and you're welcome to your own (albeit wrong) opinion on the topic, but consider this. A lot of people grow into their identities, many people do not have a singular aha moment and then reroute their life accordingly. Many nonbinary identities are useful for people to ease themselves into a gender/sexuality that feels more correct for them, as navigating gender identity is not always an easy task. Also, more than 90% of people who transition are happier post transition, and a large chunk of the people who aren't have their displeasure related entirely to interpersonal relationships, ranging from verbal harassment, to threats, to abuse and violence. When you try to make boxes of acceptable and unacceptable gender identities, you play directly into the hands of an innefective and often malicious group of medical and societal gatekeepers, who constantly look for reasons to deny transgender people (yes, even those who have intense dysphoria) medical treatment. Pre-transition dysphoria should not be a medical requirement for transitioning, because medical boards constantly put up new hurdles for what dysphoria entails. These include what people want out of their bodies and fashion choices. There are countless instances of trans women being denied medically nessecary treatments because they refuse to wear a certain amount of makeup or wear dresses/skirt, and they are called off as "fakers". This isn't because of nonbinary identities, this is because of the people behind the rules themselves, and the only way more nonbinary identities will ever hurt me, is through proxy of those rule makers. Your points aren't the worst I've seen, but your target is far off.

SleepyDreamland +SleepyDreamland Trans women and men are not denied medical treatment because they do not qualify as looking like their expected role. They are denied medical treatment because they are not trans; they do not have sex dysphoria. Why medically transition if you are comfortable in and with your body? In my country you must have sex dysphoria to medically transition because that is what makes up transsexualism. I fail to see these so called 'nonbinary' identities anything other than gender nonconforming people. There are actual nonbinary people out there who suffer physical dysphoria, which I fully support and believe needs medical recognition, but these gender nonconforming people are not nonbinary. They are gender nonconforming, using a nonbinary identity, who believe they are not either gender or both because they are both masculine and feminine.

SleepyDreamland What do you think should be the requirements for transitioning?

+F Tw Maybe womankind needs to take over.

Rhonda Dinwiddie Well...lol...I have no doubt that everything would change for the better if that were the case. Wouldn't that be an interesting video to present? "If Women ran the World..."

+Entity of Existence - Word.

+KellySmith555millions of years of evolution and all it takes to confuse an entire generation is a few ted x talks and some ignorance to science. for the vast majority of females you ARE a female. The same goes for males both psychologically and physically. Granted their are exceptions to the rule from time to time and they shouldn't be limited to these rules, but the notion that we need to ignore all gender "stereotypes" and act like gender isn't a thing is ridiculous. Try having an army of all females and let me know how that goes.

***** All people with only X sex chromosomes are female. That will never change no matter how many surgeries a person has. Gender Identity however, has nothing to do with chromosomes. So that statement "for the vast majority of females you ARE a female" doesn't make any sense. ALL females are female. -(Most people with one or more Y chromosomes as a result of birth defect are male, though some are born intersex and thus don't directly fit as purely male.)- Gender identity however is very much so a psychological manifestation, however, the very bases of identity is completely cultural defined as I stated above. A dress only signifies a female because our culture has defined it as such. If we change the culture, we change the definitions of gender identity with it. However, this statement... "but the notion that we need to ignore all gender "stereotypes" and act like gender isn't a thing is ridiculous." ...seems to have misinterpreted what I was saying. Put simply, my perspective is that gender is only defined by arbitrarily created symbols, personalities types, and social expectations, thus following them only perpetuates their existence. Altering our expectations for gender will alter how we see it. Think of it as something that only exists if we believe it to exist. If we changed the symbols signifying gender or neutralize them all together, the sense of equality among society could improve and people who identify with a gender opposite their sex would be less likely to feel the need to augment themselves withing a gender neutralize culture. The sexes however will always have differing characteristics thus making it impossible to completely neutralize the culture surrounding them, however there are, in my opinion, numerous improvement that can be made to common culture that could, at the very least, improve relations among the sexes.

+KellySmith555 There in no misinterpreting going on...lets look at a symbol that is commonly associated with either sex. Toy cars being associated with boys:It wasn't society that made men interested in mechanics and machines. it was evolution. Studies have clearly shown men's brains are hardwired to be more interested in this kind of thing. Its not to say a woman couldn't be interested in mechanics, some of them are, but the reason this is commonly associated with men is because typically women aren't. Obviously you wouldn't want a society that tells women you can't be interested in this sort of thing but there is no need to ignore clear patterns in behavior and push for social change because of anomalies. The same goes for transgender people. There are truly people who can go either way and don't fit the norm. Again, we should not limit them to these norms but we can't ignore the fact that they do not represent the vast majority of people. I understand what you're saying about dresses being feminine. This is one of those items that could go either way i.e kilts leotards etc...so there are some areas in which this theory holds true as some things are a result of societal preferences/expectations. My objection is to how far this theory actually remains accurate. In other words...not all of these symbols are arbitrary.

***** "Toy cars being associated with boys:It wasn't society that made men interested in mechanics and machines. it was evolution." That statement is completely false. There is no section within the male brain that is dedicated to mechanics that women don't have. Again, the symbols most certainly are arbitrary. The only reason men are interested in cars more so than women is because they are introduced to cars more so than women. Cars haven't been around very long, so current social behavior as evidence for evolutionary behavior is sadly misguided. Show me this evidence you speak of, and I might be inclined go believe you. But I've never heard of men's brains specifically being interested in mechanics where women's wouldn't be. Not to mention that the humans liability to build is relatively new within the species, though the exclusion of women from mechanical work has been even more recent, such as within the last 5000 years, which isn't enough time for a huge evolutionary shift to occur that differentiates the female and male brain. That sounds more like one of those pseudo-science explanations that seem to pop up from biased individuals attempting to explain reality without evidence. As I stated earlier, there are differences between the sexes. Hormones make men more interested in sex than women. Hormones make women more gentle than men. Hormones make women have a deeper emotions. Hormones make men more stoic. Hormones make men have thicker bones and stronger muscles. Hormones make women have larger breasts and more body fat. Body structure, chemical reactions, the whole biology of the human body will differentiated men and women and will contribute to the culture the differentiates men and women, however the symbols for our culture are not a result of evolution they are a result of circumstance and historical incident. Almost every symbol in existence can be traced back to an incidental origin, not a evolutionary one. There definitely is a biological factor where some of the stereotypes are concerned, but most of the culture, such as personality types, common interests, values and perspectives, are heavily culturally defined. There is a dialectical relationship in the works of nature vs nurture when applied to this situation but in the case of gender identity and gender roles the nurture aspect holds a far greater impact. I'm beginning to see where this conversation is leading and I'm beginning to see the objective behind your initial comment. I should have know better after reading this, "Try having an army of all females and let me know how that goes." That statement alone sums up your perspective perfectly. Though I gave you the benefit of the doubt. I believe no amount of discussion will alter that perspective to which I object. I think it best to end this discussion now rather than waste time attempting he impossible.

i know this is 6 years late but you could take a test to figure it out i have a link to it if you want

+Athena Chase No thanks, I'd rather not have to whip my dick out in front of any ladies. Last thing we need is for more 'rape' allegations from the feminists.

+Kyle Gilbert Well, there could be men's bathrooms, women's bathrooms and then single-use gender neutral bathrooms. That's always a non-offensive possibility.

We don't need to add the title 'gender neutral' to those solo restrooms. They are restrooms plain and simple for anyone to use if the door isn't closed and locked and fyi they already exist.

+Kyle Gilbert Gender nuetral bathrooms wouldnt have urinals, so you wouldnt have to "whip anything out" in front of me. Also I agree false rape allegations are horrible..

That's part of the reason why gender neutral bathrooms are not a good idea. No urinals? Come on. Look, solo rooms make sense for gender neutral but not communal. There are just too many problems and inconveniences for both males and females. Why accommodate for a few and shaft the many?

it's a TEDx talk, it is not an actual TED talk

This is what this speech was all about though. It is about eliminating all of the stereotypes that we relate to gender, and that was just an example he gave to prove his point.

DarthYuYevon I didn't mean to imply that men's and women's restrooms shouldn't exist. Just that there should be an option for Agender people.

I'm gender-fluid, and dress as a cis-male would dress some days, and as a cis-woman other days, and some times a blend of both. I have female genitalia, so I always use the women's restroom, no matter how I'm dressed, but this has caused both embarrassment and verbal altercations. It would be wonderful to always have a neutral option available.

Have you seen this, Skye? You might appreciate it :) itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/2014/04/gender-neutral-bathroom-sign/

I am not quite sure if you mean that we should have 3 types of bathrooms or if all bathrooms should be "gender neutral", but since your comment and the video did not specify this, I am going to assume you meant the first option. What use does a gender neutral bathroom have? Are there any specific devices that can be used by gender neutral people that can't be used by others? Isn't the only point of having a gents room that you can put urinals there which are useless for women? What gender you identify with really shouldn't impact your choice of restroom. In fact it would probably be better if you'd just split it up into urinals and toilets and have people with penises who needs to urinate go to the urinals while everyone else uses the toilets... and then we have to add the handicap toilets too i guess

Some people who don't identify as either male or female feel utterly uncomfortable going into a restroom for identities that they don't have. A gender neutral restroom is basically one room with a toilet and sink. Some trans men/trans women don't look like society's standards of men/women, and that can at times be dangerous in a binary restroom. For example, a trans man might walk into a men's restroom, the guys in there might perceive that person as female, and say, "Hey! You're a woman! You're in the wrong restroom!" and trans people get harassed in those situations... or worse! Which is why a one-room gender neutral bathroom is important. It can only occupy one person, so there's no hassle of trying not to get beat up when a person has to go pee. Some people think that they should go to the bathroom that matches their anatomy, but that can be very invalidating and uncomfortable to a person who's outside does not match their inside. It's downright depressing! And it seems like the best way to make the public restroom experience comfortable for people of all genders is to have a gender-neutral restroom, a woman's restroom, and a men's restroom.

....Did you watch the whole video? I'm sorry, but I think you may be projecting. As far as I can see, nowhere was it stated in this video that identifying as a fully masculine man is a negative or wrong thing. I certainly don't believe that is what Sam is saying here at all, and I for one, am not about to throw those who identify/express as what is stereotypically man, or woman, under any buses. Why would I? It is simply one of many options in the spectrum, it is just as valid as any other identity, and I don't see how there's any conflict here at all. I do think there's a lot of bullshit around that focuses on demonizing men and those who identify as such, and that frustrates me to no end, but that is not what is happening here. The problem being addressed here, is the notion that being fully masculine or fully feminine (and being these things _only_ in accordance with your birth sex), is the only way that things work. This is a notion that is patently not true. A man not expressing your idea of masculinity, is no less of a man than you, if he identifies as such, nor is he a threat to your expression or identity. Likewise, your embracing your masculinity, should not be considered as an affront to those who don't care for embracing masculinity themselves! No-one (at least not here) is saying 'don't be a manly man, that's wrong!' instead we're saying 'you don't have to be a manly man, if you don't want to be! There's nothing wrong with that', etc. All that's being asked for, is understanding & consideration. Forcing ones dictate of masculinity/femininity/etc. on those who do not identify with it is wrong. Dictating that you know someones experience and identity better than they know their own, is wrong. Deciding that because you don't understand someone's situation and feelings, that therefore makes that person's situation invalid, is wrong. The fact that someone doesn't understand another's plight, doesn't give them a right to invalidate or ridicule that person. Someone not identifying in the same manner as you, should not threaten or invalidate you, and this goes both ways (I'm using 'you' as a general term here). I guess the point that I'm trying to get across is this: more and more people are realising that the world isn't simply pink and blue, it is a spectrum. This does. not. mean. that being pink and blue is now invalid or wrong, and now everyone needs to be purple or green. Pink and blue are still there, and they are still just as valid! Instead, we're realising that purple, green, orange etc. are just as valid as pink & blue; we're all in this together.

Pepperwheel I appreciate your response and while i agree with most of it, My point was never in line with persecuting others who might want to express themselves differently than myself. My point was that who I am and the kind of man I decide to embrac was not the function of socialization or coersion into some ridiculous idea that I was shaped by exteranl cultural paradigms into the man I've become. And this is more than likely true for most men. Its odd that the very PC types that claim to ask for understanding and consideration also are usually the same one's who feel qualified to determine for me what I should or shouldn't think to qualify for social enlightenment. Not much understanding and consideration comes from them if you don't submit entirely to their view of what they think you should feel, behave and think. Guys like the comedian (so-called) gives an impression people really have nothing better to do with their day than sit around and agonize over his inner turmoil about what people perceive him to be. No, most people with actual real legitimate concerns do not spend time vexing over his choice to be effeminate.Maybe if he had a decent father (my impression from the video) he'd know that men, fathers and sons have a lot of ways to communicate that doesn't always involve words. Men can communicate vast ideas with gestures, examples of shared experiences and other methods. Women mistake this for a deficit in communication in men and automatically render it a negative quality in men rooted in oppressive masculine culture. And Killerman adopts the same line of thinking by the very people whose lived experiences have nothing to do with understanding the complexities of male identity. And the whole gender binary thing about sex and gender is perpetuated by feminist none of whom are neurologist, neuroscientist or specialists in the field of behavior science. None of them are experts in economics, environmental paleontology, or cultural anthropology. Their assertions about sex and gender have no more credibility than the old discredited science of phrenology and race eugenics, both of which were considered appealing for those seeking scientific justification for their belief in the inherent inferiority of a certain type of person.

Okay I _think_ I somewhat get what you're saying. Am I correct in my understanding that you're addressing your disagreement with people who: believe gender is totally a social construct, push for the complete elimination of gender (and perhaps even men themselves :/), and believe those who do identify with the traditional male & female gender to be perpetuation a problem? I'm no expert myself in gender studies/psychology/insertrelevantfieldhere (although I wish I was, so I could discuss this with more authority), so I can only talk for myself, based on what my own experience and what I've learned from observation. I personally do not agree with the idea that gender identity is completely (if at all) socially determined, nor do I believe that gender should be eliminated. I suppose I'm making these statements based on my own bias, as someone who is hurt when told that my gender identity (how I've basically identified my whole life), is based on brainwashing due patriarchy and that I don't know what I actually want. I am happy this way. I am not hurting anybody. This is who I am. And I believe that most other people who identify as they do (including those who feel they have no gender), truly feel at connected with their identities as well. To say that gender identity is a completely social construct, and therefore invalid... I don't agree with that. What I believe in is the expansion of ideas; the understanding that the traditional ideas/roles work for some people, but definitely not for everybody, that there are actually more possibilities & variations than we may think, and that acknowledging this is a positive thing. I feel what you are describing is the same thing that happens when women state that they _are_ happy being caretakers & housewives. Suddenly they're jumped upon as being brainwashed, unambitious, and not knowing what they want. Some women _do_ actually want that, and are genuinely happy that way. While people definitely are impacted by rigid societal expectations and ideas based on sex, I don't believe it is right to therefore assume that anybody who _does_ embrace what is considered typical, must be brainwashed, and therefore treated as inferior and deserving of stigmatization. This is just jumping from one pile of BS into another. I will say that I do feel there is a definite need for these conversations, and visibility, in that people who don't identify with or conform to the 'norm' in this regard are frequently the targets of hate crimes and discrimination. A lot of people _do_ seem to care when someone is expressing themselves in a way they view as being deviant (and this seems to be the case especially if the person's sex is male), to the point where life for that person becomes a dark and dangerous place it shouldn't need to be. I do wonder how much it helps, being online and discussing these things, but I do think that any discussion of it at all is a very positive and important thing, even if it is not on the same level as actually getting out there in the streets and protesting. Again, apologies for my long somewhat-vent; I do find those who claim to be fighting for equality, and then proceed to carry out their own discrimination, quite infuriating. Hatred packaged under the guise of equality >:/ Anyway, I'm not sure if I was correct regarding my interpretation of what you said (feel free to correct me if I'm way off), but I do hope that in some way, this helps/clarifies/adds to he discussion... or something (insert eloquent statement here). :)

Pepperwheel Yes.you get what I'm saying. And I agree an open dialogue is important. Unfortunately the new feminist priests of human determinism wants to continue monopolize the discourse, asking and answering questions to fit their sanctimonious preferences for what and how human existence should be defined. If a person wants to adopt the sensibilities of the effeminate I don't have a problem with that. But it seems to me if anyone is being socialized into a gender binary its probably some of the guys who believe that by eradicating a significant part of their personal identity to appease the popular novelty of overt feminine expression advocated by feminist themselves. I do not say for everyone this is entirely the case. Some guys just prefer a different manner than what is considered the traditional masculine expression. But when people suggest that my sensibilities and who i am as a man is a role, it suggests the core identity that shapes my preferences of being is little more than a false persona developed for the benefit of a social audience.And that is a lot of rubbish. People tend to be shaped by their experiences as well as many other influences direct and indirect. However human beings are not cattle and they are not so mindless that despite social influences or even aspects of socialization most people do have within them a volitional barometer where they make choices and decisions rooted firmly on their own manifested principles based on their own unique system of values.

Yeah, I feel that it can be compared to deciding that people who are straight (because the majority are so) must only be doing so to fulfill a socially accepted role, and that that expression as a result needs to be eliminated, because gay/bisexual/etc. people are stigmatized & dehumanised for not being heterosexual. All of these orientations are valid! The heterosexual isn't that way because it is the 'favoured sexual role', they just _are_. The fact that there is intolerance for variation, which does need to be addressed, doesn't therefore invalidate the identities of people who just happen to be accepted by the majority. I am perplexed by the intolerance presented by a lot of people who claim to be fighting against intolerance. It's frustrating as it seems this sort of extremism is bringing down the credibility of all the rest of us who are simply trying to be accepted as who we are, and to be treated as the people we are. But, I'm preaching to the choir; it's been nice talking with you. This was a very interesting discussion. Have a good one :)

Dude is a gender neutral term when I use it too, and depending on how I feel, and remember it's about the subjective abstract concept of how you feel, sometimes I like to use the gender fluid pro-noun Dudus. How's the expectation there placing on everyone, it's the height of arogance to think they can impose the terminology upon others about how they refer to people. Can you imagine "excuse me Mr Betsmart I get offended by non-gender neutral terms could you kindly refrain" Um let me think about that, 99.99% people don't if you do then that's a matter for you and your feelings, so no deal with it..

You belittle people that go through years of inner torment with a completely fucking stupid argument. A dog is not a human and it is not possible to identify as one.

Good one

syphorx7 OMG you just insulted furries you insensitive, oppressive shitlord. Reddit will hear about this.

+anthony johnson I laughed a lot!

+anthony johnson Hands down, one of the funniest, and oddly most intelligent, youtube comment Ive read on youtube. Ever.

+Ping Pong Cup Shots I don't know if you actually watched the video... but he made it pretty clear . . ... ..

But it's not really an opinion is it, if it's sociologically and scientifically proven? Also, why do you get to judge what's right or wrong and he doesn't....?

No. The real problem is what we THINK OF biology as being. Nature is queer!

Apparently...

Nope, they intentionally leave it out. That's how you get to make scientifically false claims that are politically profitable.

Just because you don’t agree with it doesn’t make it propaganda

some of mao's finest