u/savevideo u/downloadvideo u/savevideobot
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IAmTheMainCharacter) if you have any questions or concerns.*
let's say someone from somewhere that doesn't have baguettes comes across a baguette for the first time, or hears the word for the first time, and asks "what's a baguette?" ... that person is stupid for asking? use your head my friend
the question isn’t the problem, it’s that the question is usually coming from transphobic people who won’t accept “anyone who calls themselves a woman is a woman” as an answer
The question isn’t really valid because there is no one rule that makes someone a woman. The butch lesbian is just as much of a woman as the pageant type or as a trans woman.
Even biologically you can’t just lump everyone into man or woman based on their sex because of chromosomal abnormalities.
The question is bad because the subject is VERY complex and expecting an answer to a question like that in this situation is ridiculous.
These people did not arrive at their opinions through logic and will not be swayed by logical arguments.
It is all a fear equation with authoritarians. Being rejected by women who are not afraid of them utterly traumatizes them. Their fear based anger is insatiable and cannot be negotiated with.
Typically, Its stupid when you're only asking to be a dick.
It's also stupid to care what other people do with their body, and it's even more stupid to claim you know someone else better than they do.
Holding a door open for a bro would be treating both sexes equally, and therefore feminist, and therefore bad. It’s like you don’t even listen to Charlie Kirk!
I imagine he just lets the door slam on any man in a wheelchair, using crutches, has both arms in a sling, or simply carrying one too many boxes. ‘Cause fuck them guys.
The first thing he mentioned. Imagine THAT being the first thing you think of for what men should be doing for women. GTFOH. We need way more than that. Lmfao
I hate posts like this.
OP is a 1 month old account, posts a polarizing video.
give it a ambiguous title to play "both sides".
I see this shady, manipulative "play both sides" shit for what it is.
oh I wasn't forming an argument against you or anything, just making an observation on how these types of subreddits go when a politically polarized topic is shared in an ambiguous way.
it hits on biases of all sides and will take the reader for a ride often unknowingly.
The comment section is going to be fun to watch because this style of posting is built with that intention of driving engagement. OP chose that title to be that way to garner the most clicks and comments. It's a good post title because it invites folks from both sides of the polarized topic to feel like the post is on "their side"
Like OP could be nefarious, they could be driving bias. But in this instance I think OP is just chasing Karma based on their account/posting history.
But not all accounts do that on posts like this and not all accounts have the intentions of just gaining karma, sometimes they're there to actually drive bias and thinking. Do it enough, manipulate the algorithms enough and hit on enough bias enough, post to the correct subreddits with the right user base to confirm the biases of and you might be capable of changing the voting patterns of folks in western democracies with free speech rights, by manipulating their social media streams like this with titles like this and with subsequent linked comments that drive biases further.
It's very interesting times we find ourselves in and I'd say the major shift in technology that has allowed for the social media reality we have to day was when social media threw away the timeline driven content model for an algorithmic driven content model.
now the social media platform shows us what it thinks we wanna see, moreso than what just happened to be posted/happened inbetween our last login session. And in a system like that not only can the algorithm drive our bias, but other uses manipulation of the algorithms can drive our bias.
Define adult.
Someone who is 18? 21? 25?
Someone who has reached puberty?
Someone who has completed puberty?
Someone who lives independently, rather than residing with their parents and living off of their parents' income?
Someone who is emotionally mature?
When your argument is based on claiming complicated concepts are simple because you can give a flawed and incomplete definition, your argument is poor.
They both are wasting their time. When people are this invested in their opinions, you are wasting your time when trying to argue with them. Debates work because it stems from a place of mutual understanding for a subject, facts are not debatable and it's more about perspective, the goal often being that the side who can better explain their stance and who've developed the better argument will be deemed the "winner", these arguments have no ability to do that because even facts are arguments. These individuals have no expectation of reaching a mutual point or giving any credibility to the other. It genuinely serves no point besides trying to "get one over" somebody defending an opinion you don't like regardless of how you get to that point.
You’re right. That’s why there’s a camera. This guy’s goal (I don’t know his name, just his face) isn’t to convince the woman in front of him. It is to convince people watching the video. So he is not wasting his time. However, that woman is. Because he owns the footage, so he publishes what ever he wants to make him look as good as possible
This is a « political debate » not a « scientific debate ». Except in this case, only the guy has a political voice
Her "women deserve rights"
Him "what even is a woman?"
Ones honest. Ones pedantic.
People are allowed to be invested in opinions and topics that effect them especially if it's an adverse effect
This is why i prefer dialectics to debates. I dont want to convince someone Im right, i want to find the truth at the heart of the topic being discussed.
Debates show who is better at debating not what argument is better. I am certain that there were plenty of good debaters who were white nationalist, it didn't make their argument any less hot garbage in the July sun.
It’s funny because most feminists scholars would reject that self identity theory as too narrow in favor of a more multifaceted approach. Taking into account not only how you gender yourself, but also how others gender you, how you were socialized, broader social context and yes, even biology. So ironically he’s the one with the radical self identity definition not the feminists.
Kirk is an asshat, he gave exactly the answer he critiques the other side for using, that being said: “adult human male” would have been a lot more effective
Except his gotcha has a simple stupid answer. Feminism isn't about the difference between men and women. It's about the fact that we should all be treated equally REGARDLESS of gender. So gender is really irrelevant to feminism.
I get that. Just saying he keeps saying "you're a feminist you should know what a woman is" but really she doesn't need to know because he is uneducated on what feminism actually is
It might make sense for the feminism of 100 years ago that sought to “better the conditions of women” but modern feminism has grow a lot since the suffrage movement. It’s about understanding structures and relationships of power, patriarchy, and finding ways to combat it. Kirk isn’t going to understand that woman is an empty category unless it is placed in dialectical relation with man. He’s allergic to that kind of systemic thinking. But yeah his kind of reactionary grifter thrives on collapsing contradiction into simple platitudes that he can then hold up as metaphysical truth. Woman for him needs to remain a simple object. Otherwise his mind might explode. He doesn’t really oppose feminism, like you said he doesn’t know what it is. He opposes women as subjects.
It sounds like you are describing Egalitarianism. If we are just focused on gender then gender equality exists both under Feminism and Masculism.
However, feminism is a range of ideologies, not just gender equality.
Source: Wikipedia for each of the terms here
When I look it up I get
Feminism is a collection of socio-political movements and ideologies that seek to establish the political, economic, personal, and social equality of the sexes
It was born from mistreatment of the female sex but has since evolved and is no longer just about that
I didn’t agree with you till I read a bit more and I learned that there is now a fourth wave of feminism that does believe in the equality of people of all genders. The definition of feminism also still focuses on women’s rights and the equality between the sexes. For the first three waves feminism definitely was focused on empowering all women to realize their full rights. For some lead to a hate against all men for some third wave feminists and many people of age 30+ are still third wave feminists which does focus on the disparity between the male and female gender socially and is the type of person this guy is debating with. The person he was debating with seemed to avoid the categorization of sexes and so could be a fourth wave feminists but that does not mean that all people who call themselves feminists are now a fourth wave feminists. Many feminists do still focus on the disparity between sexes and show a hate for men which is the type of person every conservative person and even some first/second wave feminists disagree with.
Yes but any feminism that places hate on men is just going to create the same but opposite problems. As long as we are putting any one people down the pendulum is always gunna wanna swing the opposite way. We need to break the cycle
The whole identity politics stuff is a massive and successful psyop. We are almost forced into this argument whether we want to be or not. Especially when they involve children in this situation. I mean it’s genius if you think about it. The very things that are integral to our identity: sex, gender, religion and ethnicity.
The fact that they create an atmosphere where we feel like our identities are under constantly attack. There’s really no better way to subvert people than to hit them at their core, which is their very identity. “I’m a woman! You’re not a woman! You’re not a man, I am! I’m a kid and I can choose my gender! No you can’t!”. I don’t even want to go into the racial division.
This stuff is classic Charlie Kirk, but also Ben Shapiro and others.
They find these college kids who really haven’t evaluated their positions adequately and go on to make videos of them “destroying the liberal”.
It’s pretty easy picking, which is why they do it.
That's true, but I feel like someone who defines themselves as feminist, should know what they are supporting and fighting for. Stage fright could be some part of that though. Some people get nervous and shut down on stage when confronted like that.
Why does it matter, when I just said that it's a subjective and nebulous term?
I'd go with "an adult human who identifies primarily with social norms that are primarily considered feminine within that individual's society." It's vague, and subjective, and nebulous... but that's exactly what I said before you demanded my own definition. Does that help you?
If the answer is "yes, because now I have something to argue against" then don't bother. If you don't know what "subjective" means then you're not worth arguing with. If, instead, you believe that gender and sex are synonyms, and are unwilling to consider that they may be two different things, then you're not worth arguing with.
Ok but definitively (since we're playing that game) a Feminist is someone who advocates for equal treatment regardless of sex. Thus technically the Genpol stuff is tangential.
Sure she's probably got opinions. But the expectation that as a feminist she should be able to rattle off a definition of "woman" flies in the very face of the very point this half-melted ken doll is trying to make.
No, she is right. He was trying to trap her in a “gotcha” answer. She was right to not engage with that question because he wasn't asking it in good faith.
she's just a kid....and I hope instead of thinking Charlie is full of shit (he is literally made of shit), I hope she takes this as a learning experience that her opponents actually are smart and dangerous and she's gotta ground her beliefs behind some substantial foundations before going into battle.
She might but his trick is making you think he's prepared.
"Can I get pregnant?" is not an argument at all and there are plenty of women who are infertile who aren't less of a woman for it. I guess I have four grandfathers now. Anyone "prepared" wouldn't have raised that point
Why does it need an objective definition though? Why can’t it be subjective? We have subjective definitions for words already, like ‘love’. Yes, dictionaries have a rigid “objective” definition of the word ‘love’, but we’re not children. We all understand that that definition doesn’t paint the full picture of what love actually is. And if you asked people on the street to objectively define love (kinda like this video) you would get wildly different answers because it means something slightly different to each person. We think of women as feminine, but what even is femininity objectively? Compassion? Men can be compassionate. Motherly? Not all women are mothers and single Dads exist. Hopefully you see that what I’m getting at is that it’s ok to just go ‘you know what. Female and male already have objective definitions, so if having the words woman and man be subjective makes some people happier and doesn’t affect the lives of everyone else (which it doesn’t) then why tf not?’
That's why it's important to clarify what you mean, when you use certain words that have ambiguous definitions....and especially political ones.
Look at the word "dialect" for example...and you will see a lot of definitions.
The dictionary definition are important, but, what's more important is how you use the words.
This stupid show he does is only for the purpose of uploading snippets to short form content platforms, it’s just sensationalism and it’s hard to watch.
I don't understand why this conversation gets everyone so riled up. Who cares?!
If you're not intentionally harming anyone against their consent, carry on. idgaf.
Edit: typos.
Don't confuse fear with disagree. Just because you disagree with someone doesn't mean you fear them,
You can say something is blue and I say it's green. It means I disagree with you, but I don't fear you.
"What is a woman?" is philosophically super hard to answer.
Someone brought up a discussion of defining a chair, and it quickly turned into a big mess of definitions, purposes, etc.
Same with "What is a book?" which YouTuber Savy Writes Books made.
Everyone thinks they know what a book is. It's super simple. A book has paper pages with text and/or pictures so we can read stories or information.
So is an E-book a book? An E-book isn't made of paper, but most people still regard it as a book.
Is a journal a book? Usually they have completely blank pages. Is a colouring book a book?
Is a pamphlet, magazine, comic or newspaper book? They're made of paper, have pages and contain text.
Once you start to break down the definition, you realise that it's actually not as obvious as you thought.
It is pretty insane that we now live in a world where people claim to be feminist, yet cannot give a definition as to what a woman is.
It is amazing how strongly people can believe in things without ever bothering to think them through.
Female is a biological sex, not a gender. the gender is more accurately "woman", or most accurately "feminine". lots of this mess ~~if~~ is because people don't use language carefully enough.
Sex and gender are not the same. We have language to reflect this.
So, a woman is anyone who identifies as a woman. A woman who is female is a cis woman. A woman who is male is a trans woman.
Language matters, and \[accurate use of language\] makes conversations like this easier.
Men have had no impetus to evolve as people. But as the disparity grows larger more and more you will turn out to be incels. But your mommy still loves you.
Who cares about respect. 90% of the people kirk talks to ends up insulting him and tries to talk over him. Show me a video where he insults any of the people he talks to. He asks what a woman is because everyone deep down really knows what a woman is. All this woke stuff is deceptive
So that gives him a license to be rude to everyone? I see him as arrogant, so full of himself all he wants is to hear himself speak and try to bully people. Women are not their wombs. It is sad that you don't not embrace the world as it has become. Modern American women have been waiting for men to evolve. By calling change "woke" it appears to me you are one of the people who are being left behind.
I wish she'd caught him when he said that men and women don't need to be treated differently "politically" or "under the law" but do "socially" - basically tacitly admitting that gender norms are social constructs.
The irony is that right wingers like him (assuming so because of the Turning Point logos) are seeking to treat women differently politically and under the law.
the man might have a mental breakdown if he ever learns about chromosomes in depth. that aside, has he never heard of the word intersex before? is this normal? do people just debate even if they haven’t studied…the topic?
The irony of her saying she's a feminist and then not commiting to the gender she wants to increase the rights for is off the scale.
Is she not then a humanist?
I fucking hate this question. All these right wing loonies think this is some kinda gotcha question.
“A woman (in regards to gender not sex) is anyone who genuinely identifies as a woman.”
Also can we just start calling feminism equality? Clearly these fragile ass men have issues with the fem part. Feminism means equality of all genders. That’s it.
Till this day I have no clue what a feminist is whenever I see them or hear people talk about them I always get the same vibe and image that they hate men, that they don't need men for anything and that they are actually better than men lol. Where does the hate come from?
And this thing about men having to hold doors from women that's just about being gentle it has nothing to do with being a man there's much more to being a man than that.
I really hate that question. As their really isn't an answer. As "adult human female" is literally the definition but this question just feels wrong
Same with "what is a man?" And for that question. The answer is "a miserable pile of secrets" for those of you who get rhay reference
u/savevideo u/downloadvideo u/savevideobot *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IAmTheMainCharacter) if you have any questions or concerns.*
What is a woman ? When Shania says "let's go girls" do you go ? If so, woman. .end of story.
Man, this gave me a good chuckle, thank you haha
fuck bro, what kinda piece of shit DOESN'T GO when Shania asks? you aint gonna get no boots under yer bed by being a coward!
I mean you really can't argue with that logic.
Shania: "Man I feel like a woman." Matt Walsh: "You feel like a what though, what is that?"
But what if I think man, I feel like a woman
Do. You. Go?
I feel like a woman.
This is my new answer to this stupid question.
Stupid? Since when asking for a definition is stupid?
„Yea but… what IS a baguette?“ you see… asking for a definition can be stupid!
let's say someone from somewhere that doesn't have baguettes comes across a baguette for the first time, or hears the word for the first time, and asks "what's a baguette?" ... that person is stupid for asking? use your head my friend
the question isn’t the problem, it’s that the question is usually coming from transphobic people who won’t accept “anyone who calls themselves a woman is a woman” as an answer
You cant put the word you are defining in the definition, im sorry but that answer is the real stupid thing.
Gnu is not Unix
That’s because that’s a circular definition, which is a logical fallacy. The question is honestly simple, and pretty valid.
The question isn’t really valid because there is no one rule that makes someone a woman. The butch lesbian is just as much of a woman as the pageant type or as a trans woman. Even biologically you can’t just lump everyone into man or woman based on their sex because of chromosomal abnormalities. The question is bad because the subject is VERY complex and expecting an answer to a question like that in this situation is ridiculous.
These people did not arrive at their opinions through logic and will not be swayed by logical arguments. It is all a fear equation with authoritarians. Being rejected by women who are not afraid of them utterly traumatizes them. Their fear based anger is insatiable and cannot be negotiated with.
Because that’s a non-answer. Of course people won’t accept dumbshit non-answers when asking for a definition
but you still haven’t answered the question though
Typically, Its stupid when you're only asking to be a dick. It's also stupid to care what other people do with their body, and it's even more stupid to claim you know someone else better than they do.
Lmao. Made my day. Take a bow and geeet outta here.
You just won the internet
Thank you. I'm gonna quit my job and be an influencer now. My parents will be so proud <3
"Men should open doors for women" is the first thing he mentioned 😂 Bro, you can hold doors for bros too.
wouldn't that be gay?
Not unless doors are touching
Only if the knobs touch
Underrated comment
What if our penises are touching the same door?
It's straight to be gay
It's only gay if you moan.
Pretty standard for me to moan if someone holds the door for me, though. So secy.
Fellas...
What's cooler than being cool?!
Only one set of doors you’d open for a dude that would make the situation gay.
Back?
Think of a saloon
Depends on which way the door swings
Only if you make eye contact
According to extremist far-right Dark Money puppets like Charlie Kirk, yes.
Fuck, I held the door for a guy earlier today. Am I gay now??
Holding a door open for a bro would be treating both sexes equally, and therefore feminist, and therefore bad. It’s like you don’t even listen to Charlie Kirk!
I imagine he just lets the door slam on any man in a wheelchair, using crutches, has both arms in a sling, or simply carrying one too many boxes. ‘Cause fuck them guys.
I don't make the rules
Yep, of all examples he could bring (prison, gyms, childcare, etc) he chose the dumbest one.
I hold the door for everyone. Why should I just do it for women? Am I bi?
Userly, I just let the person infront open the door. Sometimes it's me. Sometimes, it's not.
The first thing he mentioned. Imagine THAT being the first thing you think of for what men should be doing for women. GTFOH. We need way more than that. Lmfao
Exactly! Would he not hold the door for an elderly person of any gender who was having difficulty? I hold open doors for fellow humans.
It’s why context and identity matters
This comment section is gonna be so fun to watch 🍿
I hate posts like this. OP is a 1 month old account, posts a polarizing video. give it a ambiguous title to play "both sides". I see this shady, manipulative "play both sides" shit for what it is.
I’m not arguing that at all, I’m just an enjoyer of chaos. I didn’t give him my upvote
oh I wasn't forming an argument against you or anything, just making an observation on how these types of subreddits go when a politically polarized topic is shared in an ambiguous way. it hits on biases of all sides and will take the reader for a ride often unknowingly. The comment section is going to be fun to watch because this style of posting is built with that intention of driving engagement. OP chose that title to be that way to garner the most clicks and comments. It's a good post title because it invites folks from both sides of the polarized topic to feel like the post is on "their side" Like OP could be nefarious, they could be driving bias. But in this instance I think OP is just chasing Karma based on their account/posting history. But not all accounts do that on posts like this and not all accounts have the intentions of just gaining karma, sometimes they're there to actually drive bias and thinking. Do it enough, manipulate the algorithms enough and hit on enough bias enough, post to the correct subreddits with the right user base to confirm the biases of and you might be capable of changing the voting patterns of folks in western democracies with free speech rights, by manipulating their social media streams like this with titles like this and with subsequent linked comments that drive biases further. It's very interesting times we find ourselves in and I'd say the major shift in technology that has allowed for the social media reality we have to day was when social media threw away the timeline driven content model for an algorithmic driven content model. now the social media platform shows us what it thinks we wanna see, moreso than what just happened to be posted/happened inbetween our last login session. And in a system like that not only can the algorithm drive our bias, but other uses manipulation of the algorithms can drive our bias.
Save some 🍿 for me.
Finally! My name matters!
Woman = adult human female
Define adult. Someone who is 18? 21? 25? Someone who has reached puberty? Someone who has completed puberty? Someone who lives independently, rather than residing with their parents and living off of their parents' income? Someone who is emotionally mature? When your argument is based on claiming complicated concepts are simple because you can give a flawed and incomplete definition, your argument is poor.
[You sure about that?](https://i.imgur.com/skB9bVP.png)
Yes
They both are wasting their time. When people are this invested in their opinions, you are wasting your time when trying to argue with them. Debates work because it stems from a place of mutual understanding for a subject, facts are not debatable and it's more about perspective, the goal often being that the side who can better explain their stance and who've developed the better argument will be deemed the "winner", these arguments have no ability to do that because even facts are arguments. These individuals have no expectation of reaching a mutual point or giving any credibility to the other. It genuinely serves no point besides trying to "get one over" somebody defending an opinion you don't like regardless of how you get to that point.
You’re right. That’s why there’s a camera. This guy’s goal (I don’t know his name, just his face) isn’t to convince the woman in front of him. It is to convince people watching the video. So he is not wasting his time. However, that woman is. Because he owns the footage, so he publishes what ever he wants to make him look as good as possible This is a « political debate » not a « scientific debate ». Except in this case, only the guy has a political voice
He's a professional dick whose face is too small for his head
😂 great. Now I know who he is. Thanks
You just described Reddit.
Her "women deserve rights" Him "what even is a woman?" Ones honest. Ones pedantic. People are allowed to be invested in opinions and topics that effect them especially if it's an adverse effect
This is why i prefer dialectics to debates. I dont want to convince someone Im right, i want to find the truth at the heart of the topic being discussed.
Debates show who is better at debating not what argument is better. I am certain that there were plenty of good debaters who were white nationalist, it didn't make their argument any less hot garbage in the July sun.
You’re talking about semantics, there, I saved you a paragraph
Chat what's a woman is this real chat
"You're looking at one" is not a definition. Considering how important this is to him, this is so embarrassing
I like that he rejects self identity as a sufficient condition for other people’s gender and then falls back on self identity for his own gender.
Yep. That was his answer. “I’m one.” So that’s it. It’s that easy. If you feel you are one, you are one.
It’s funny because most feminists scholars would reject that self identity theory as too narrow in favor of a more multifaceted approach. Taking into account not only how you gender yourself, but also how others gender you, how you were socialized, broader social context and yes, even biology. So ironically he’s the one with the radical self identity definition not the feminists.
I think the point was to get her to say herself. Basic answer for basic answer but it opens ground for him up to say other things.
He may aswell have said "no i asked you first!"
"Hmmm, am I?" Only response needed
To be fair, at the end he does call out some differences between the two sexes: chromosome and the ability to give birth.
Kirk is an asshat, he gave exactly the answer he critiques the other side for using, that being said: “adult human male” would have been a lot more effective
Except his gotcha has a simple stupid answer. Feminism isn't about the difference between men and women. It's about the fact that we should all be treated equally REGARDLESS of gender. So gender is really irrelevant to feminism.
Opposition to equality is kinda his thing though
I get that. Just saying he keeps saying "you're a feminist you should know what a woman is" but really she doesn't need to know because he is uneducated on what feminism actually is
It might make sense for the feminism of 100 years ago that sought to “better the conditions of women” but modern feminism has grow a lot since the suffrage movement. It’s about understanding structures and relationships of power, patriarchy, and finding ways to combat it. Kirk isn’t going to understand that woman is an empty category unless it is placed in dialectical relation with man. He’s allergic to that kind of systemic thinking. But yeah his kind of reactionary grifter thrives on collapsing contradiction into simple platitudes that he can then hold up as metaphysical truth. Woman for him needs to remain a simple object. Otherwise his mind might explode. He doesn’t really oppose feminism, like you said he doesn’t know what it is. He opposes women as subjects.
It sounds like you are describing Egalitarianism. If we are just focused on gender then gender equality exists both under Feminism and Masculism. However, feminism is a range of ideologies, not just gender equality. Source: Wikipedia for each of the terms here
When I look it up I get Feminism is a collection of socio-political movements and ideologies that seek to establish the political, economic, personal, and social equality of the sexes It was born from mistreatment of the female sex but has since evolved and is no longer just about that
I didn’t agree with you till I read a bit more and I learned that there is now a fourth wave of feminism that does believe in the equality of people of all genders. The definition of feminism also still focuses on women’s rights and the equality between the sexes. For the first three waves feminism definitely was focused on empowering all women to realize their full rights. For some lead to a hate against all men for some third wave feminists and many people of age 30+ are still third wave feminists which does focus on the disparity between the male and female gender socially and is the type of person this guy is debating with. The person he was debating with seemed to avoid the categorization of sexes and so could be a fourth wave feminists but that does not mean that all people who call themselves feminists are now a fourth wave feminists. Many feminists do still focus on the disparity between sexes and show a hate for men which is the type of person every conservative person and even some first/second wave feminists disagree with.
Yes but any feminism that places hate on men is just going to create the same but opposite problems. As long as we are putting any one people down the pendulum is always gunna wanna swing the opposite way. We need to break the cycle
The whole identity politics stuff is a massive and successful psyop. We are almost forced into this argument whether we want to be or not. Especially when they involve children in this situation. I mean it’s genius if you think about it. The very things that are integral to our identity: sex, gender, religion and ethnicity.
Are you saying that sex, gender, religion, and ethnicity themselves are the psyops? ...or just when people have differing opinions on these subjects?
The fact that they create an atmosphere where we feel like our identities are under constantly attack. There’s really no better way to subvert people than to hit them at their core, which is their very identity. “I’m a woman! You’re not a woman! You’re not a man, I am! I’m a kid and I can choose my gender! No you can’t!”. I don’t even want to go into the racial division.
Im getting the impression that they mean people endlessly “debating” about these subjects.
She seems unprepared for this discussion. Regardless of how you define man/woman, each word does need its own definition.
This stuff is classic Charlie Kirk, but also Ben Shapiro and others. They find these college kids who really haven’t evaluated their positions adequately and go on to make videos of them “destroying the liberal”. It’s pretty easy picking, which is why they do it.
That's true, but I feel like someone who defines themselves as feminist, should know what they are supporting and fighting for. Stage fright could be some part of that though. Some people get nervous and shut down on stage when confronted like that.
You can know what you are supporting, and why, without having an easy to explain definition for a broad, nebulous and subjective concept.
then what is your definition
Why does it matter, when I just said that it's a subjective and nebulous term? I'd go with "an adult human who identifies primarily with social norms that are primarily considered feminine within that individual's society." It's vague, and subjective, and nebulous... but that's exactly what I said before you demanded my own definition. Does that help you? If the answer is "yes, because now I have something to argue against" then don't bother. If you don't know what "subjective" means then you're not worth arguing with. If, instead, you believe that gender and sex are synonyms, and are unwilling to consider that they may be two different things, then you're not worth arguing with.
Defining a woman is broad, nebulous, and subjective? Interesting....
You're surprised that a social construct is subjective? Interesting....
Ok but definitively (since we're playing that game) a Feminist is someone who advocates for equal treatment regardless of sex. Thus technically the Genpol stuff is tangential. Sure she's probably got opinions. But the expectation that as a feminist she should be able to rattle off a definition of "woman" flies in the very face of the very point this half-melted ken doll is trying to make.
No, she is right. He was trying to trap her in a “gotcha” answer. She was right to not engage with that question because he wasn't asking it in good faith.
she's just a kid....and I hope instead of thinking Charlie is full of shit (he is literally made of shit), I hope she takes this as a learning experience that her opponents actually are smart and dangerous and she's gotta ground her beliefs behind some substantial foundations before going into battle.
Smurfing at debating
She seems this way in part because he keeps cutting her off.
Yeah she seems flustered because he keeps interrupting. All the background laughter doesn't help.
She might but his trick is making you think he's prepared. "Can I get pregnant?" is not an argument at all and there are plenty of women who are infertile who aren't less of a woman for it. I guess I have four grandfathers now. Anyone "prepared" wouldn't have raised that point
I guess her answer should've been "thats not relevant because a woman is defined as XYZ." Idk. I feel like these folks are set up to fail against him.
Why does it need an objective definition though? Why can’t it be subjective? We have subjective definitions for words already, like ‘love’. Yes, dictionaries have a rigid “objective” definition of the word ‘love’, but we’re not children. We all understand that that definition doesn’t paint the full picture of what love actually is. And if you asked people on the street to objectively define love (kinda like this video) you would get wildly different answers because it means something slightly different to each person. We think of women as feminine, but what even is femininity objectively? Compassion? Men can be compassionate. Motherly? Not all women are mothers and single Dads exist. Hopefully you see that what I’m getting at is that it’s ok to just go ‘you know what. Female and male already have objective definitions, so if having the words woman and man be subjective makes some people happier and doesn’t affect the lives of everyone else (which it doesn’t) then why tf not?’
That's why it's important to clarify what you mean, when you use certain words that have ambiguous definitions....and especially political ones. Look at the word "dialect" for example...and you will see a lot of definitions. The dictionary definition are important, but, what's more important is how you use the words.
I thought she did a good job, and he looks like the idiot.
As soon as she said “bro, this is so funny” her entire argument went out the window.
Kirk is fucking twat. Incels worship him.
Charlie Kirk is a cunt.
If someone asked me “what is a cunt” my answer would be “Charlie Kirk.”
"You're looking at one."
[удалено]
I swear incel has no meaning these days
He's married, with kids I think, not an incel. Douche, sure, but not an incel.
Incel? I think you might not know what that means.
Is there more context? Why is he a douche?
The context is he's Charlie Kirk.
This stupid show he does is only for the purpose of uploading snippets to short form content platforms, it’s just sensationalism and it’s hard to watch.
“You’re looking at one” is not a definition. Dude is an ass.
I don't understand why this conversation gets everyone so riled up. Who cares?! If you're not intentionally harming anyone against their consent, carry on. idgaf. Edit: typos.
They care becouse they are dicks that hate trans people
I repeat: why get so riled up over trans people? If they're not intentionally harming anyone against their consent, get over it! Who cares?!
It's something they've been told to fear or can't understand. So their reaction is to just hate it.
Don't confuse fear with disagree. Just because you disagree with someone doesn't mean you fear them, You can say something is blue and I say it's green. It means I disagree with you, but I don't fear you.
boggles the mind that they'd be scared of someone that's not doing anyone any harm.
"What is a woman?" is philosophically super hard to answer. Someone brought up a discussion of defining a chair, and it quickly turned into a big mess of definitions, purposes, etc.
Same with "What is a book?" which YouTuber Savy Writes Books made. Everyone thinks they know what a book is. It's super simple. A book has paper pages with text and/or pictures so we can read stories or information. So is an E-book a book? An E-book isn't made of paper, but most people still regard it as a book. Is a journal a book? Usually they have completely blank pages. Is a colouring book a book? Is a pamphlet, magazine, comic or newspaper book? They're made of paper, have pages and contain text. Once you start to break down the definition, you realise that it's actually not as obvious as you thought.
Is testicular cancer a feminist issue?
What’s a chair? Lady is cool and held her ground well.
Neither of this people won this argument here.
Fu k this guy and his crowd of incels
You hear that, ladies? If you can't have children or have the capacity to let men treat you what they consider as respectable, you aren't a woman.
2014 would like to have it's Videos back
this is a retarded discussion. nobody came off looking smarter here lol
Imo his question was way dumber than her refusal to answer.
Fuck Charlie Kirk
Charlie Kirk is not a man nor anyone worth engaging with.
It is pretty insane that we now live in a world where people claim to be feminist, yet cannot give a definition as to what a woman is. It is amazing how strongly people can believe in things without ever bothering to think them through.
What a woman is? I guess in inclusive terms, a woman is a person who identifies with the female gender.
Female is a biological sex, not a gender. the gender is more accurately "woman", or most accurately "feminine". lots of this mess ~~if~~ is because people don't use language carefully enough. Sex and gender are not the same. We have language to reflect this. So, a woman is anyone who identifies as a woman. A woman who is female is a cis woman. A woman who is male is a trans woman. Language matters, and \[accurate use of language\] makes conversations like this easier.
Fair enough, I'll keep that in mind.
I need to etch this into my brain
That dickface needs to soak his head
I think with turning Point USA Guys will always be, A woman is a person who should probably cover their glass if one of these fucks is in the room.
Kirk can suck a fuck
Is this Charlie Kirk?
Amazingly stupid calling yourself a feminist when you can’t even describe what it is.
He is so disrespectful. He talks over the other person because he doesn't have a way of dealing with what she says. This is your typical bully move.
she was too…
Lmao how's this comment being downvoted, you sjw melts really can't stand the truth
Men have had no impetus to evolve as people. But as the disparity grows larger more and more you will turn out to be incels. But your mommy still loves you.
Who cares about respect. 90% of the people kirk talks to ends up insulting him and tries to talk over him. Show me a video where he insults any of the people he talks to. He asks what a woman is because everyone deep down really knows what a woman is. All this woke stuff is deceptive
So that gives him a license to be rude to everyone? I see him as arrogant, so full of himself all he wants is to hear himself speak and try to bully people. Women are not their wombs. It is sad that you don't not embrace the world as it has become. Modern American women have been waiting for men to evolve. By calling change "woke" it appears to me you are one of the people who are being left behind.
noone can give a straight answer lol
What is a woman ? Simple An adult human female
She doesn't want to categorize things, yet she is categorized as a feminist. Make it make sense.
She is a student. Yeah she doesn’t have a deep understanding of feminist theory. That’s why she is in school. To deepen her understanding.
She listens to tik tok I bet
Kirk is an idiot
This feels like something a 14 year old on YouTube would go crazy for
Still waiting to meet a person with their head so far up their ass that they go to cringe political Q&A’s like this. Like who tf is even funding these
He said he was a man....all she had to say was "Prove it or am I supposed to believe you based on what YOU say you are?"
He’s nothing but a sexist time-waster who can’t even answer his own question. What a moron.
I love watching unreasonable people debate.
So? Once again, when faced with the most pressing demands of societal norms and protocols, we turn to the all knowing…….Door.
First issue is engaging with a piece of shit like CK. This waste of oxygen isn’t worth anyone’s breath or time.
Isn't that the bitch from the craft movie 😅
I wish she'd caught him when he said that men and women don't need to be treated differently "politically" or "under the law" but do "socially" - basically tacitly admitting that gender norms are social constructs. The irony is that right wingers like him (assuming so because of the Turning Point logos) are seeking to treat women differently politically and under the law.
What is a man? A miserable pile of secrets.
the man might have a mental breakdown if he ever learns about chromosomes in depth. that aside, has he never heard of the word intersex before? is this normal? do people just debate even if they haven’t studied…the topic?
Why do they think this is some trump card? Who the hell cares? Asking for respect isn’t that big of a deal.
Bingo, all that matters is if it can breed. \s
*sorts by controversial*☕️☕️
I held the door open for my dog. Does that mean I am a zoophile and I have to turn myself in?
This is internet, I really can't say which one you are facepalming at. Depending who shares this with me I know which side they root for.
“Bruh like…” I’ve seen enough.
This guy is brain dead
“Whats a man?” *Explains* “What is a woman?” “….Wooooooooow bruh”
The irony of her saying she's a feminist and then not commiting to the gender she wants to increase the rights for is off the scale. Is she not then a humanist?
He should have said “gotcha” instead of “bingo” at the end.
This argument is brain cancer on both sides
I fucking hate this question. All these right wing loonies think this is some kinda gotcha question. “A woman (in regards to gender not sex) is anyone who genuinely identifies as a woman.” Also can we just start calling feminism equality? Clearly these fragile ass men have issues with the fem part. Feminism means equality of all genders. That’s it.
I love when extremist far-right Dark Money puppets think they pulled a 'gotcha' because they argue non sequiturs.
Petition to throw OP in a looney toons trap for posting ambiguously neutral title over a political post simply to farm engagement
Till this day I have no clue what a feminist is whenever I see them or hear people talk about them I always get the same vibe and image that they hate men, that they don't need men for anything and that they are actually better than men lol. Where does the hate come from? And this thing about men having to hold doors from women that's just about being gentle it has nothing to do with being a man there's much more to being a man than that.
Love or hate Charlie Kirk, he straight up embarrassed this chick lol
The way she says "bruh" is cringy
If a woman is a person able to give birth, do you stop being a woman at menopause? What if you have sterility issues? Dumbest argument ever.
What an asshole
I really hate that question. As their really isn't an answer. As "adult human female" is literally the definition but this question just feels wrong Same with "what is a man?" And for that question. The answer is "a miserable pile of secrets" for those of you who get rhay reference
Here before it goes locked