Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

Minimize cultural differences... and biological ones EXPLODE. Jordan Peterson: "Men are more interested in things, women in people—and that's the biggest psychological difference we know between sexes." Huge effect size, replicated for decades (including recent samples in top journals like Science). To engineer? Extreme "things" interest (mostly men). To...

newstart_2024's profile picture

Camus

435,671 subscribers

18,309 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

The more equal the society, the bigger the biological differences between men and women become. Jordan Peterson explains: Men tend to be more interested in things, women in people. That’s the largest psychological difference we know. So as cultural barriers fall, you see more men in engineering and more women in nursing, even in highly egalitarian places like Scandinavia. Maximizing freedom of choice also maximizes differences in outcome. Large cross-national studies (including in Science and Psychological Science) document the “gender-equality paradox”: In countries with greater gender equality, sex differences in occupational and educational choices are actually larger, supporting stronger biological influences once social constraints are reduced.
2:02

The more equal the society, the bigger the biological differences between men and women become. Jordan Peterson explains: Men tend to be more interested in things, women in people. That’s the largest psychological difference we know. So as cultural barriers fall, you see more men in engineering and more women in nursing, even in highly egalitarian places like Scandinavia. Maximizing freedom of choice also maximizes differences in outcome. Large cross-national studies (including in Science and Psychological Science) document the “gender-equality paradox”: In countries with greater gender equality, sex differences in occupational and educational choices are actually larger, supporting stronger biological influences once social constraints are reduced.

Camus

141,710 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Elon Musk: We should look at each expenditure and ask, is this actually in the best interest of the people? “If your taxpayer dollars are not spent in a sensible and frugal manner, then that's not okay. Your tax dollars need to be spent wisely on things that matter to the people. I mean, it's just common sense. It's not draconian or radical. I think it's really just saying, let's look at each of these expenditures and say, is this actually in the best interest of the people? If it is, it's approved. If it's not, we should think about it.” Press Conference at the White House, February 11, 2025
0:27

Elon Musk: We should look at each expenditure and ask, is this actually in the best interest of the people? “If your taxpayer dollars are not spent in a sensible and frugal manner, then that's not okay. Your tax dollars need to be spent wisely on things that matter to the people. I mean, it's just common sense. It's not draconian or radical. I think it's really just saying, let's look at each of these expenditures and say, is this actually in the best interest of the people? If it is, it's approved. If it's not, we should think about it.” Press Conference at the White House, February 11, 2025

ELON CLIPS

16,222 просмотров • 1 год назад

“People-pleasing isn’t kindness — it’s sacrificing your credibility just to be liked.” Vanessa Van Edwards explained this on Jay Shetty’s podcast in a way that really hit home. Princeton research shows we judge people mostly on two things: warmth (can I trust you?) and competence (can I rely on you?). Warmth makes up a whopping 82% of our first impressions. Highly warm people-pleasers often throw their competence out the window to stay likable. They say “yes” when they mean “no,” fake interest in things they don’t care about, or pretend to agree just to keep the peace. The cost? They lose respect, and the relationship becomes inauthentic. Vanessa’s advice: you don’t have to choose between being liked and being respected. You can be both warm and competent, friendly and assertive. Real connection comes from honesty, not performance. When was the last time you people-pleased and later regretted it?
3:40

“People-pleasing isn’t kindness — it’s sacrificing your credibility just to be liked.” Vanessa Van Edwards explained this on Jay Shetty’s podcast in a way that really hit home. Princeton research shows we judge people mostly on two things: warmth (can I trust you?) and competence (can I rely on you?). Warmth makes up a whopping 82% of our first impressions. Highly warm people-pleasers often throw their competence out the window to stay likable. They say “yes” when they mean “no,” fake interest in things they don’t care about, or pretend to agree just to keep the peace. The cost? They lose respect, and the relationship becomes inauthentic. Vanessa’s advice: you don’t have to choose between being liked and being respected. You can be both warm and competent, friendly and assertive. Real connection comes from honesty, not performance. When was the last time you people-pleased and later regretted it?

Camus

38,626 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

Mark Zuckerberg on why the people you surround yourself with matter more than you think "The most important decision you're probably going to make if you're in college is who you surround yourself with, because you become like the people you surround yourself with" "When you're in college trying to figure out what your circle is going to be, or evaluating different job opportunities... who are the people, even if they're peers, who in an alternate universe you would want to work for?" "Because you think you're going to learn a lot from them, because they're values-aligned on the things you care about, and they're going to push you. They know different things and have different experiences that are more of what you want to become like over time" "I think in general people are too obsessed and maybe not focused enough on the connections and the people who they're building relationships with"
1:49

Mark Zuckerberg on why the people you surround yourself with matter more than you think "The most important decision you're probably going to make if you're in college is who you surround yourself with, because you become like the people you surround yourself with" "When you're in college trying to figure out what your circle is going to be, or evaluating different job opportunities... who are the people, even if they're peers, who in an alternate universe you would want to work for?" "Because you think you're going to learn a lot from them, because they're values-aligned on the things you care about, and they're going to push you. They know different things and have different experiences that are more of what you want to become like over time" "I think in general people are too obsessed and maybe not focused enough on the connections and the people who they're building relationships with"

Jaynit

26,918 просмотров • 11 дней назад

Jordan Peterson hit hard: “People with extreme high IQs are so much more productive than people on the lower end… they’re not even in the same universe.” But here’s the part that matters most: IQ has nothing to do with morality. Being smarter doesn’t make you better. In fact, Peterson warns there’s a real “Luciferian temptation” that comes with high intelligence — the arrogant belief that your superior mind gives you the right to impose your systems and values on everyone else. We all have the same intrinsic human value. In a world that worships intelligence and status, remembering that smarts and goodness are completely separate traits is crucial. I’ve seen brilliant people do ugly things and “average” people show incredible moral strength. What do you think — does high intelligence actually make someone more prone to arrogance and moral blind spots, or is that just a stereotype?
1:57

Jordan Peterson hit hard: “People with extreme high IQs are so much more productive than people on the lower end… they’re not even in the same universe.” But here’s the part that matters most: IQ has nothing to do with morality. Being smarter doesn’t make you better. In fact, Peterson warns there’s a real “Luciferian temptation” that comes with high intelligence — the arrogant belief that your superior mind gives you the right to impose your systems and values on everyone else. We all have the same intrinsic human value. In a world that worships intelligence and status, remembering that smarts and goodness are completely separate traits is crucial. I’ve seen brilliant people do ugly things and “average” people show incredible moral strength. What do you think — does high intelligence actually make someone more prone to arrogance and moral blind spots, or is that just a stereotype?

Camus

444,365 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

"My biggest worry is... the perception of technology in America." Ben Horowitz on why optimism about AI is critical: "Over 70% of people in China are optimistic about AI. And less than 30% in America or something like that were optimistic about AI." "We're very focused on the dangers of AI here and not on the positive things." "We're going to... end traffic deaths. We're going to cure cancer. We're going to end poverty as we know it." "Those are pretty good things." "The positive uses of the technology are extremely positive. The negative ones are there, but we can manage them, in the same way we've managed the negative of every technology." "Starting with fire, which has very bad consequences — it can burn down your village... but it also heats your house, and cooks your food, and does some very wonderful things." benahorowitz.eth with David Ulevitch 🇺🇸
1:39

"My biggest worry is... the perception of technology in America." Ben Horowitz on why optimism about AI is critical: "Over 70% of people in China are optimistic about AI. And less than 30% in America or something like that were optimistic about AI." "We're very focused on the dangers of AI here and not on the positive things." "We're going to... end traffic deaths. We're going to cure cancer. We're going to end poverty as we know it." "Those are pretty good things." "The positive uses of the technology are extremely positive. The negative ones are there, but we can manage them, in the same way we've managed the negative of every technology." "Starting with fire, which has very bad consequences — it can burn down your village... but it also heats your house, and cooks your food, and does some very wonderful things." benahorowitz.eth with David Ulevitch 🇺🇸

a16z

51,056 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

"You can either produce excellence or you can avoid criticism. But you cannot do both of those. The reason that you don't have certain excellence that you want is because you are afraid of getting criticized. You are afraid of the judgment that comes with it. You are afraid of standing out. You are afraid of being alone. You are afraid of people looking at you. You are worried about what people think of you. There are 2 categories of things in this world: 1) Things that are up to you 2) Things that are not up to you Which category does your reputation sit in? Your reputation is not up to you. I'm the one who associates your reputation with something, not you. You just do things. What's up to you? How you act. Your decisions. Your actions. That is up to you. Your reputation is not up to you. Here's how I know that: You all have a reputation about me and it's not in my control. I get to say and do whatever I say and do up here. I am in control of saying it. I am in control of doing it. The moment words leave my lips, who has control over what is done with those words? You! You are in control of what you think of me. And there's no way everybody in this room is going to think the exact same thing about me. No way. When it comes to exceptional, what we've got to understand is you can spend your whole life trying to avoid criticism and earn reputation, and it still won't be in your control. We can waste a lot of time missing out on excellence we could have been producing if we were just simply LESS trying to engineer what we wanted other people to think about us."
1:32

"You can either produce excellence or you can avoid criticism. But you cannot do both of those. The reason that you don't have certain excellence that you want is because you are afraid of getting criticized. You are afraid of the judgment that comes with it. You are afraid of standing out. You are afraid of being alone. You are afraid of people looking at you. You are worried about what people think of you. There are 2 categories of things in this world: 1) Things that are up to you 2) Things that are not up to you Which category does your reputation sit in? Your reputation is not up to you. I'm the one who associates your reputation with something, not you. You just do things. What's up to you? How you act. Your decisions. Your actions. That is up to you. Your reputation is not up to you. Here's how I know that: You all have a reputation about me and it's not in my control. I get to say and do whatever I say and do up here. I am in control of saying it. I am in control of doing it. The moment words leave my lips, who has control over what is done with those words? You! You are in control of what you think of me. And there's no way everybody in this room is going to think the exact same thing about me. No way. When it comes to exceptional, what we've got to understand is you can spend your whole life trying to avoid criticism and earn reputation, and it still won't be in your control. We can waste a lot of time missing out on excellence we could have been producing if we were just simply LESS trying to engineer what we wanted other people to think about us."

Brian Kight

308,812 просмотров • 1 год назад

part two of why Celeste Amadon thinks dating in SF is bad: "the men in dallas are looking for women who are sweet, nurturing and someone who will be a good mother" "the men in SF are looking for women as educated as them, as successful as them, diverse in their life experiences and someone who will be a good mother" "i don't think where you went to school should be one of the qualifying questions when you're dating at 35" "but i don't think it's unreasonable and i see why people care about it" "in SF people are looking for more than just a chemistry match and unless it's all of those things (compatibility, lifestyle, intellect, background) then dating isn't lucrative enough for them"
1:50

part two of why Celeste Amadon thinks dating in SF is bad: "the men in dallas are looking for women who are sweet, nurturing and someone who will be a good mother" "the men in SF are looking for women as educated as them, as successful as them, diverse in their life experiences and someone who will be a good mother" "i don't think where you went to school should be one of the qualifying questions when you're dating at 35" "but i don't think it's unreasonable and i see why people care about it" "in SF people are looking for more than just a chemistry match and unless it's all of those things (compatibility, lifestyle, intellect, background) then dating isn't lucrative enough for them"

atlas

44,879 просмотров • 22 дней назад

Mark Zuckerberg reveals what he thinks the meaning of life is "Human connection is the meaning, and it's a thing that our society probably systematically undervalues. When I was growing up in school it was like, do your homework and then go play with your friends after. But what if playing with your friends is the point?" "People tend to think about that stuff as wasting time, or that's what you do in the free time you have. But what if that's actually the point?" "There's a rabbi I've studied with. We were walking through Genesis, and it starts by talking about how God created everything. I've always found it meaningful that a lot of the point of what religion has been telling us to do is to create and build things" "So these things are not at odds. I've dedicated my life to creating things that help people connect. What I studied in school was psychology and computer science, and these are the two themes I care about" "For me, that's what matters: to create and to love, which is the ultimate form of connection"
3:11

Mark Zuckerberg reveals what he thinks the meaning of life is "Human connection is the meaning, and it's a thing that our society probably systematically undervalues. When I was growing up in school it was like, do your homework and then go play with your friends after. But what if playing with your friends is the point?" "People tend to think about that stuff as wasting time, or that's what you do in the free time you have. But what if that's actually the point?" "There's a rabbi I've studied with. We were walking through Genesis, and it starts by talking about how God created everything. I've always found it meaningful that a lot of the point of what religion has been telling us to do is to create and build things" "So these things are not at odds. I've dedicated my life to creating things that help people connect. What I studied in school was psychology and computer science, and these are the two themes I care about" "For me, that's what matters: to create and to love, which is the ultimate form of connection"

Jaynit

133,638 просмотров • 11 дней назад

Scott Galloway: “When men are willing to take risks, develop a kindness practice, show resilience, dress better for God’s sake, shower, [and] work out. These things are really important and teach people—young men the most important thing in life… your ability to endure rejection.” “The only way you get to amazing yeses is with a lot of no’s. My biggest fear about po*n, which is increasingly becoming synthetic and more lifelike, is that it reduces men’s mojo to get out of the house.”
0:50

Scott Galloway: “When men are willing to take risks, develop a kindness practice, show resilience, dress better for God’s sake, shower, [and] work out. These things are really important and teach people—young men the most important thing in life… your ability to endure rejection.” “The only way you get to amazing yeses is with a lot of no’s. My biggest fear about po*n, which is increasingly becoming synthetic and more lifelike, is that it reduces men’s mojo to get out of the house.”

RedWave Press

100,050 просмотров • 9 месяцев назад

Zack Polanski, "Why do you feel so strongly about violence against women and girls?" Hannah Spencer, "When I was younger, one of our friends was murdered by her boyfriend" "I remember the reaction to that, there was a lot of victim blaming" "Gender based violence is a huge issue and no politician seems to be taking it seriously at all" "I've met so many victims and survivors of abuse who need someone to listen to them and speak up for them" "I work in a male environment and I see so many good men who are wonderful humans" "But a lot of the men struggle with emotions and feelings and having to try and support each other" "When I think about gender based violence and I think about how boys and men in society are being raised" "I see how so many are screwed over by the patriarchy, including the men" "But I think it comes out in a more extreme way as violence against women and girls" "Keir Starmer and Peter Mandelson, two men looking out for each other" "Keir Starmer says he cares about violence against women and girls, but how can he when he's surrounded by these people like Mandelson" "And we need more people with lived experienced in parliament as that's the only way we're going to change things"
3:00

Zack Polanski, "Why do you feel so strongly about violence against women and girls?" Hannah Spencer, "When I was younger, one of our friends was murdered by her boyfriend" "I remember the reaction to that, there was a lot of victim blaming" "Gender based violence is a huge issue and no politician seems to be taking it seriously at all" "I've met so many victims and survivors of abuse who need someone to listen to them and speak up for them" "I work in a male environment and I see so many good men who are wonderful humans" "But a lot of the men struggle with emotions and feelings and having to try and support each other" "When I think about gender based violence and I think about how boys and men in society are being raised" "I see how so many are screwed over by the patriarchy, including the men" "But I think it comes out in a more extreme way as violence against women and girls" "Keir Starmer and Peter Mandelson, two men looking out for each other" "Keir Starmer says he cares about violence against women and girls, but how can he when he's surrounded by these people like Mandelson" "And we need more people with lived experienced in parliament as that's the only way we're going to change things"

Farrukh

22,647 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

Konstantin Kisin made a point that cuts to the heart of one of the most forbidden conversations in the West today. He argued that much of our current cultural tension stems from an unspoken assumption: that all groups of people are not just equal in dignity and rights, but essentially the same in their aptitudes and outcomes. When reality shows persistent group differences — whether in sports, professions, or other fields — we’re left scrambling for explanations that avoid cultural or, God forbid, genetic factors. Kisin referenced Thomas Sowell’s observation that different groups naturally excel in different areas: Germans dominating global brewing (including China’s Tsingtao), Latinos overrepresented in baseball, white people in hockey, Black people in the NBA. These patterns, he says, are the normal human condition, not evidence of systemic failure. The problem arises, he suggests, when a society insists that any deviation from perfect uniformity must be explained by oppression or discrimination, rather than accepting that people and groups simply differ in strengths and interests. It’s a provocative take on why honest discussion about group differences has become so difficult. What do you think — are group differences in outcomes mostly cultural and environmental, or do we need to be more open to the possibility that biology and natural aptitudes also play a role?
1:08

Konstantin Kisin made a point that cuts to the heart of one of the most forbidden conversations in the West today. He argued that much of our current cultural tension stems from an unspoken assumption: that all groups of people are not just equal in dignity and rights, but essentially the same in their aptitudes and outcomes. When reality shows persistent group differences — whether in sports, professions, or other fields — we’re left scrambling for explanations that avoid cultural or, God forbid, genetic factors. Kisin referenced Thomas Sowell’s observation that different groups naturally excel in different areas: Germans dominating global brewing (including China’s Tsingtao), Latinos overrepresented in baseball, white people in hockey, Black people in the NBA. These patterns, he says, are the normal human condition, not evidence of systemic failure. The problem arises, he suggests, when a society insists that any deviation from perfect uniformity must be explained by oppression or discrimination, rather than accepting that people and groups simply differ in strengths and interests. It’s a provocative take on why honest discussion about group differences has become so difficult. What do you think — are group differences in outcomes mostly cultural and environmental, or do we need to be more open to the possibility that biology and natural aptitudes also play a role?

Camus

219,568 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

Angelina Jolie Has Finally Woken Up To The Fact The United Nations & Governments Are Run By Heartless Criminals There’s No Accountability For Crimes “If There’s A Business Interest Involved” “That is the biggest that is the most disheartening thing of I think we we or I thought at least even 20 years ago when I started to work internationally that there was this I in my head, some weird idea of good guys. You know? Some idea of those whether it be certain countries or certain people's maybe it was this holdover from World War 2 and this thought that this was, like so that the lines were clear and that there was going to be these human rights goals laid out and that there would be things stood up for, and that if these things weren't done, there would be pushback, and these were the and I really thought that's what it was. I even thought that's what the United Nations was… And I thought, okay. There's a there's some lines in the sand. There's some understanding. We're gonna grow and fight for improvements in these areas. And and to watch to watch and understand more and more how it's just simply that's not what it is. That's not the world. The world is not these are human rights. It is these are human rights sometimes for these people, maybe sometimes for these people, never for these people. Yeah. It's food aid, 6% for these people, 50% for these people, it's justice for these people, but not these people. Accountability for this crime, but not that crime if there's business interest. And this is truly the ugly state of of so much of the world that we are just becoming more and more aware of for just about every I mean, I don't know any countries that are are clean of it and, um, and willing to hold a line really consistently hand on behalf of the of human rights and laws”
1:52

Angelina Jolie Has Finally Woken Up To The Fact The United Nations & Governments Are Run By Heartless Criminals There’s No Accountability For Crimes “If There’s A Business Interest Involved” “That is the biggest that is the most disheartening thing of I think we we or I thought at least even 20 years ago when I started to work internationally that there was this I in my head, some weird idea of good guys. You know? Some idea of those whether it be certain countries or certain people's maybe it was this holdover from World War 2 and this thought that this was, like so that the lines were clear and that there was going to be these human rights goals laid out and that there would be things stood up for, and that if these things weren't done, there would be pushback, and these were the and I really thought that's what it was. I even thought that's what the United Nations was… And I thought, okay. There's a there's some lines in the sand. There's some understanding. We're gonna grow and fight for improvements in these areas. And and to watch to watch and understand more and more how it's just simply that's not what it is. That's not the world. The world is not these are human rights. It is these are human rights sometimes for these people, maybe sometimes for these people, never for these people. Yeah. It's food aid, 6% for these people, 50% for these people, it's justice for these people, but not these people. Accountability for this crime, but not that crime if there's business interest. And this is truly the ugly state of of so much of the world that we are just becoming more and more aware of for just about every I mean, I don't know any countries that are are clean of it and, um, and willing to hold a line really consistently hand on behalf of the of human rights and laws”

Wall Street Apes

658,860 просмотров • 2 лет назад

Elon Musk : If you can make it interactive and engaging, then you can make education far more compelling and far easier to do Generally, you want education to be as close to a video game as possible like a good video game You do not need to tell your kid to play video games they will play video games on autopilot all day I think that's how it should be. It shouldn't be that you've got these grades where people move in lockstep Everyone goes through English, math, science, and so forth from fifth grade to sixth grade to seventh grade like it's an assembly line “But people are not objects on an assembly line" That's a ridiculous notion. People learn and are interested in different things at different paces
0:58

Elon Musk : If you can make it interactive and engaging, then you can make education far more compelling and far easier to do Generally, you want education to be as close to a video game as possible like a good video game You do not need to tell your kid to play video games they will play video games on autopilot all day I think that's how it should be. It shouldn't be that you've got these grades where people move in lockstep Everyone goes through English, math, science, and so forth from fifth grade to sixth grade to seventh grade like it's an assembly line “But people are not objects on an assembly line" That's a ridiculous notion. People learn and are interested in different things at different paces

X Freeze

16,970 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

AOC: Why haven’t so many people been prosecuted? Why are Pam Bondi and the DOJ continuing to hide the majority of the Epstein files, which they admit contain even more direct evidence of genuinely shocking crimes and abuse of women, minors, and increasingly men who say they were trafficked in connection to the Epstein orbit? We need to get to the bottom of it. It does not matter if you are a Republican, Democrat, or donor. We are talking about sexual crimes and trafficking.
1:50

AOC: Why haven’t so many people been prosecuted? Why are Pam Bondi and the DOJ continuing to hide the majority of the Epstein files, which they admit contain even more direct evidence of genuinely shocking crimes and abuse of women, minors, and increasingly men who say they were trafficked in connection to the Epstein orbit? We need to get to the bottom of it. It does not matter if you are a Republican, Democrat, or donor. We are talking about sexual crimes and trafficking.

Acyn

1,151,474 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

True happiness comes from helping others: “By far my favorite thing in the world is championing other people. That's just what I enjoy doing. If I look back on my life, the sort of wins that I've had, the things that if you were to write a Wikipedia article about me would be like the accolades or the accomplishments…. I don't care about those things. I don't think about them. When they happened, they didn't do anything for me emotionally or otherwise. For whatever reason that's just not what I enjoy. But when your success happens or when many other people that I and my team have championed, have a win —I feel that deep in my soul and heart and gut in a way that is just more gratifying to me than anything else in the world. And this extends to my kids, my wife, my friends, the CEOs of companies that we've invested in, people that we have on our show, that we tell the world about. That's the repeated thing that I love.”
0:55

True happiness comes from helping others: “By far my favorite thing in the world is championing other people. That's just what I enjoy doing. If I look back on my life, the sort of wins that I've had, the things that if you were to write a Wikipedia article about me would be like the accolades or the accomplishments…. I don't care about those things. I don't think about them. When they happened, they didn't do anything for me emotionally or otherwise. For whatever reason that's just not what I enjoy. But when your success happens or when many other people that I and my team have championed, have a win —I feel that deep in my soul and heart and gut in a way that is just more gratifying to me than anything else in the world. And this extends to my kids, my wife, my friends, the CEOs of companies that we've invested in, people that we have on our show, that we tell the world about. That's the repeated thing that I love.”

David Senra

20,234 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

A man who claims to be a woman attempted to explain what women think about men who claim to be women. He completely failed. *ahem* • “They reject the distinction between gender identity and sex and that these two things can be in conflict” No. We know that gender identity & sex are very different. In fact that is basically our entire argument. Gender identity = a manmade concept. Sex = Naturally observable over the entire natural world, including humans. Binary & immutable. • “They are concerned with the safety & integrity of spaces that are typically reserved for women” No. Not “typically”. *Are*. ARE reserved for women. “Typically” is an admission that you know the group trying to gain access to the women’s spaces aren’t women. Which is our entire point to begin with, sir. They’re men. • “Trans people are concerned with safety & privacy in private spaces.” Great. Then leave women’s spaces alone, respecting the women who want them, and focus on creating your own spaces catering to your “man claiming to be woman” needs, whatever they may be. We won’t stop you. • “Trans people are seeking to go about their business & mind their business” Cool story, but the problem is the process of that appears to be changing the definition of “woman” in law & gaining access to women’s spaces, services & sport. So we fight back because we are not willing to give up our rights & needs so men in dresses can “go about their business”. • “We have had inclusive policies… and there was not a spate of people pretending to be trans, going into spaces & abusing anyone.” Either a) you’re ignoring all of the cases of men invading women’s spaces & sexually assaulting women - we can name 10 examples just in prisons off the top of our head - because it doesn’t suit your argument; b) you’re completely aware & just lying; c) you argument is they weren’t “trans” which means they must have been making it up; d) even if there were no cases, it still doesn’t make men women! • “Discomfort alone is not grounds to exclude people.” No, it isn’t. Sex is. Men are excluded from women’s spaces on the basis of sex. We exclude all men, including men with a gender identity and men we are comfortable with. It’s frankly unforgivable to speak this untruthfully about this issue in 2026, and it’s utterly shameful that two men just nodded along to blatantly obvious untruths. This is the intellectual equivalent of junk food.
1:20

A man who claims to be a woman attempted to explain what women think about men who claim to be women. He completely failed. *ahem* • “They reject the distinction between gender identity and sex and that these two things can be in conflict” No. We know that gender identity & sex are very different. In fact that is basically our entire argument. Gender identity = a manmade concept. Sex = Naturally observable over the entire natural world, including humans. Binary & immutable. • “They are concerned with the safety & integrity of spaces that are typically reserved for women” No. Not “typically”. *Are*. ARE reserved for women. “Typically” is an admission that you know the group trying to gain access to the women’s spaces aren’t women. Which is our entire point to begin with, sir. They’re men. • “Trans people are concerned with safety & privacy in private spaces.” Great. Then leave women’s spaces alone, respecting the women who want them, and focus on creating your own spaces catering to your “man claiming to be woman” needs, whatever they may be. We won’t stop you. • “Trans people are seeking to go about their business & mind their business” Cool story, but the problem is the process of that appears to be changing the definition of “woman” in law & gaining access to women’s spaces, services & sport. So we fight back because we are not willing to give up our rights & needs so men in dresses can “go about their business”. • “We have had inclusive policies… and there was not a spate of people pretending to be trans, going into spaces & abusing anyone.” Either a) you’re ignoring all of the cases of men invading women’s spaces & sexually assaulting women - we can name 10 examples just in prisons off the top of our head - because it doesn’t suit your argument; b) you’re completely aware & just lying; c) you argument is they weren’t “trans” which means they must have been making it up; d) even if there were no cases, it still doesn’t make men women! • “Discomfort alone is not grounds to exclude people.” No, it isn’t. Sex is. Men are excluded from women’s spaces on the basis of sex. We exclude all men, including men with a gender identity and men we are comfortable with. It’s frankly unforgivable to speak this untruthfully about this issue in 2026, and it’s utterly shameful that two men just nodded along to blatantly obvious untruths. This is the intellectual equivalent of junk food.

Sall Grover

122,589 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад