What is a Woman – The Video

When mutual respect for reality is lost (as this documentary shows is all too common throughout the dysfunctional West), there can be no honest conversation. Trans ideology does not respect reality; instead, it tries to reshape reality by changing the words we use to describe it to ‘fit’ with an incoherent ideology based on temperament and personality… ie feelings. Hence, we see the circular argument used repeatedly that a woman is defined as anyone who feels like a woman.

The wake created by the imposition of this ideology in and by our institutions is one of collaborative harm especially to the pipeline children – the vast majority who are girls – who are to be used to repopulate this activist group. This collaboration by well meaning but cowardly authorities – especially in medicine – is unconscionably irresponsible and deplorable child abuse. That’s what this affirmation ideology in medical action ‘treating’ gender dysphoric youth is in reality: child abuse. And women in particular are paying the price as they become – once again – second class citizens expected to yield in all ways to this dystopian transactivist invasion.

LikeLike

Isn’t it interesting that – like with criticism of Islamism – only the more right wing element seems able or capable of criticizing the extreme idiocy of the Left? I we follow your advice, DV, there would be basically no criticism of this insanity at all.

LikeLike

Oh, I do. I even put my money where my mouth is. One does not need to be a radical feminist to support women’s rights.

But the point is that when the truth is spoken and reality respected, the source simply doesn’t matter. Content over context. There’s the merit. Anyone and anything said no matter how true and relevant and needed can be smeared by context and dismissed on this basis. That serves whom?

For you to highlight the source – highlighting who is doing the saying rather than focusing on what is being said – as of questionable moral character for this other opinion or that other statement rather than the content of the one presented – undermines that core message of speaking truth to power. You are doing the work of the censorious woke.

LikeLike

You’re still doing it: vilifying the messenger as if this matters to the message. Every person who has tried to explain why trans ideology is anti-female to its core is vilified exactly the same way. Yet here you are doing the same thing. That deserves criticism regardless of WHY you are doing it because in effect you are serving only one master: the aims and goals of this deplorable ideology by discrediting some of its critics.

Because trans ideology is a left wing ‘progressive’ ideology (it is corrosively anti-liberal in its central tenets and wholly regressive in toxic effect) I see left wing people falling all over themselves to amplify the feelings of some males over the rights and protections and responsibilities of others, females in particular. This is deplorable. I don’t care what political stripe or other opinions someone might have if they are willing to denounce this abhorrent and damaging ideology for the right reasons, namely, in the name of refusing to go along with the lie that identity trumps reality, in the name of respecting reality enough to not trying to force others to join in the lie in the name of some anti-reality narrative. Every person of any political stripe who cares about the value of an individual in law should be screaming from the rooftops why going along with such a lie, codifying it law, implementing it in medicine, endorsing it as if a virtue when it causes so much harm in real life to real individuals is deplorable. But instead – and just like clockwork – the weevils come out to question the moral character of these brave people willing to stand against it in the name of something else and so undermine the message in the name of championing some imaginary other virtue. It’s not a virtue; it’s a vice.

LikeLike

“If you really want to help women in their fight against all this nonsense, lift up the voices of actual feminist woman.”

It would be interesting to count up just how many voices of feminist women have been raised here on Arb’s site (I think dozens) because you make it sound like raising Matt’s voice with this video is somehow a replacement, a step backwards, an offering that shows questionable anti-feminist preference. That’s your narrative imposed on others and it’s truly a bizarre and biased reading of this post.

You then presume Matt’s voice is raised because he’s a dude. That’s just insulting to anyone who thinks trans ideology is lacking enough on merit to question its wider and imposed application. This false accusation may help you feel like you’re helping ‘the cause’ of feminism by vilifying an obvious ally because he’s not aligned to your ‘correct’ radical feminist ideology, but all you’ve accomplished is trying to change the subject of the video being posted here (and Arb’s perceptive commentary) to be about Matt’s feminist credentials or, as you point out repeatedly, his lack of them. You don’t seem to realize why this approach you take isn’t a good idea when it comes to confronting the lies of trans activists and the incoherence of trans ideology with whomever shares the same concern… but instead put aside the very real threat this ideology presents when institutionalized really does cause real harm to real women in real life regardless of their radical feminist credentials.

You want to go after Matt’s character and smear it to suit your own reasons more than you want to go after a deeply dysfunctional and irrational anti-female ideology. You would prefer to vilify allies rather than welcome their added voices that serves this vital shared cause. I think that’s incredibly short-sighted and needs more, not less, criticism for taking your eyes off the prize and urging other allies to follow your lead. This tactic helps only trans activists gain ground while you get busy squabbling about who is allowed to criticize it.

LikeLiked by 1 person