The Radical Truths of Transgender Studies | Levi Hord | TEDxWesternU 

That is some serious narcissism...

I am not trying to be rude, but there were no “radical truths” revealed during this talk. Just a personal testimony.

It's been "philosophically proven"? What is that? I didn't know philosophy could prove anything. What does that mean? Some % of philosopher have agreed?

Nobody who says "philosophically it's been shown that... " should ever be trusted.

No knowledge is neutral? Really? So the fact that humans need access to oxygen or they'll die isn't neutral? It's somehow dependent upon context. In what context don't humans need access to oxygen? Ugh - these are such platitudes. Again, even if you agree with this stuff, this "defense" is terrible.

Good golly. Remember back in the 00's, when you thought TED talks would help the world grow intellectually?

4:21 - uses the tactic of.. ‘go do your own research’ I’m not explaining it to you. I’ve studied law, economic, accounting and psychology and never in those disciplines did I ever hear, ‘go do your own research’ . It was always come talk to me after class, I will be happy to explain it to you. This comes across to me as dishonest.

5 minutes into the video and still nothing that resonates...

So because you cant justify or explain it, we should stop. Then move forward without understanding. Rediculous. That is not scientific at all.

No, no, no - this is nonsense. The point of the framework is accuracy, not feelings. We rejected Aristotle's model of the solar system because IT WAS WRONG. We should reject the "current" understandings of gender if and only if they are wrong. The question here is whether or not those models are wrong, not how they make you feel.

So is this what Gibby from iCarly is up to nowadays?

Good grief..get to the point!

this is a joke right?

I listened to this presentation with the hope it would give me some understanding and clarity. It's given me neither. To talk about biochemistry and cells (a well established and proven arm of scientific research) in the same sentence as seeking to logically justify transgenderism is not valid - it's a 'straw man' argument. The presenter also played the victim card really well (I have some sympathy as to why), but it doesn't strengthen the argument . . ."then maybe we can stop turning to truths like science to take trans people down." Science doesn't take anyone down or lift anyone up - it simply is what it is! One of the dangers with this debate, is that when someone offers a different view to what the trans activists are saying, they are slapped down hard and threatened with prosecution under 'hate speech' laws. We need to understand that 'tolerance' is a two way street. If we don't, then we'll have a form of liberal fascism which is very intolerant indeed. That appears to be where we are heading.

I’m really disappointed in Ted right now

It's funny that nobody laughed at her jokes. Yes, there *were* jokes

Almost as cringy as the "slim privilege" talk.

The best part of this video is the comments below. Thank you all for your contribution to this Ted Talk. Otherwise it was 20 minutes I ll never get back.

Each pause for a laugh that doesn’t come brutally attacks my brain cells..

"No knowledge is neutral" Sorry but this is nonsense !

From a Trans perspective: ?????????

"we can stop turning to truths." About sums up their argument...

"Hey biologist, believers in facts, and people who know what chromosomes are, you are all idiots!" - person who majors in gender studies

In conclusion "No idea what to say, please don't ask me"

I tried to watch this to get some sort of understanding about something I know little or nothing about. This person hasn’t said anything of any relevance, I feel like in some ways they may be much smarter than me, but they are completely incapable of making a point.

“Tropes like science” did she really say that without wincing!

Her talk actually begins at 20:02 if any of yall are wondering...

ok so what’s the point of the video tho

Hey, I think our theory isn’t boding well with science. Hmm… Ooh, I know! Let’s change science!

“Gender neutral language”!?! Might work in English... but are we supposed to reform whole grammatical structures in Slavic or Romance languages??

Wow. That was a lot of pseudo-intellectual nonsense.

This is ridiculous. The connections she made are so lacking in logic and thought. Trans people are not an exception to the rule. They are quite well within it: men or women. Our subjective, narcissistic and imagination-fueled view of ourselves does not change who we are scientifically. How can she approach science with that mindset?... you know what is literally a physical, biological exception to the rule? Intersex people. And science is well aware of them and their biological makeup😂 and guess what? They never asked us to redefine the system for them, or reform our society and our language. Even though they make a bigger percentage of society than trans people, btw. they are a valid part of the rules, because despite her misinformed argument, exceptions do exist (*ahm ahm* l'hopital's rule). Its just like saying that just because some people are born with 6 fingers, science is wrong for describing humans as having 5 fingers(?!?!)

Word smithing jargon waffle at its finest.

9:18 when's she's waiting for applause. Go home and rewatch your ted talk and figure out why it went so wrong

I just lost out on 20 minutes and 3 seconds of my life that I will never get back.

Did she just compare the cells that bring us life... to a feeling ?

She's riding a wave of currently fashionable nonsense, and will almost certainly never leave academia.

OH MY GOD! THEY'RE GOING OFF ON GENDER IN GRAMMAR!!! UGH! GET THESE PEOPLE OUT OF MY LIFE!!! JUST GO TO YOUR GERMAN CLASS AND LEARN A DAMN FOREIGN LANGUAGE-- THAT"S ALL IT IS, NOT AN ATTACK ON YOUR DAMNED IDENTITY!!

What a word salad. The gist is, im upset because I do not want to conform !!! Recognize whatever pronoun i choose to use. Embrace and indulge my personal reality as opposed to true reality.

436 dislikes to 184 likes is worth a ray of sunshine

Calling bias a lens doesn't make it more reliable. The fact that you might not have a "normal" body (despite your previous objection to using terms like normal & abnormal) doesn't really mean anything. Perspective isn't clarity. For example, many studies have shown that tennis players (who have a unique perspective) are LESS accurate in making calls than tennis umpires, who have a different & BETTER perspective. Different &/or unique are NOT synonymous with accurate or better. Again, this is NOT proof.

When you propose ideas, you need to prove yourself and defend them. There was a time when the existence of cells was controversial, and they didn't become accepted because of self important righteously indignant moralizers

She could be asked the simple question “can you explain what you just said there” after every “point” and her entire world would fall apart. Not one thing she said stands up to the most basic of logical questioning? But they just lecture and hardly never debate. Any debate you’ll find is just them falling apart and resorting to the narrative of “respect “ and “acceptance”.

1:00 - I don’t like how she starts off by framing her gender and her studies as both of equal importance to her and her identity. That sounds very much like she is likely to be biased and not objective. Scientific research is meant to start from a disinterested place. Which is more objective and less bias that were she is starting from. Making the discourse and dialogue personal holds it back far more that does objective questioning from some one new to the topic.

As soon as I clicked on this I rolled my eyes knowing this is a waste of time

I feel sorry for anyone that is looking for others for approval and acceptance. Especially strangers!!! That's going to be a rough life

In order for there to be wide spread acception there must be wide spread knowledge. You can't expect the world to believe in something that is not explained well or at all.

This person doesn't know what she's talking about. Linguistics is the science of language and no one in the field has ever said or hold the assumption that language is "static, fixed and reflects the real world", on the contrary, language is ever-changing, it's not fixed and it reflects the social world. This person built the whole argument on a straw man, it's ridiculous that she calls herself an academic. Is this a philosopher or a linguist? She speaks about language and about philosophy, but she's not an expert in any of those fields, she's an activist. What does gender theorist mean anyway? Language was invented for communication purposes, the oldest written language that we know about are lists of animals a king owned and how many taxes he should collect. This whole 20 minute performance is just pseudo-science.

lots of words, nothing said. someone loves oneself!

"How do you know cell exists?". Lord...

Aaaaaand I just lost all credibility for Ted X talks.

Postmodern nonsense. Not just the talk, the entire ideology.

This is like watching a flatearther explain their research

It's all in your mind and it's okay ... Just because youre different doesn't mean the laws of the universe have to change

She must be the only employed gender studies graduate working in gender studies !

Her Source: Trust me bro.

9:49 ". . .not having your pronouns used is a painful and visceral experience." As a woman, seeing congress change the word 'mother' to 'birthing person' is painful, hearing biological men say 'I can't tell you what a woman is because it's whatever you feel it is.' This is painful and rights off my entire 'lived experience' as a woman

2:56 - I have a problem with the metaphor. I’m a lawyer. I don’t really know what cells are. I don’t really care. I don’t need to have that knowledge to have a good life. Now if I didn’t understand the ‘freedom of speech’ right, I would have a problem. I personally researched it extensively because I need to as I am a lawyer. There were and are tutors and lecturers office hours, class mates and librarians I could visit to ask about thing I needed to know. That didn’t hold back the field of study from progressing. No one is holding the progression of any study back by asking questions. You can’t teach an advanced math class without first teaching time tables. The metaphor is dishonest.

So, she basically wants us to shut and believe what she is saying and then we will start to understand everything. Thank you

I knew where this was going by just looking at the thumbnail

😂😂😂😂 she said how do you know that cells are real

Gender is determined by biology not linguistics

You cant create a problem, create your own solution, and then force everyone else to not only buy into your solution, but practice your solution because of your subjective senses.

I can use a lot of words to say nothing. I can say a lot of things that don't mean anything. I can mean a lot of things that don't make sense. I can make a lot of sense into total nonsense. I am nonsense.

Remember in school when you wrote unnecessarily long sentences to meet the word number requirement… That’s what this entire woman’s speech was. Pointless long winded sentences, which mean nothing.

Here's a weird question: Trans people believe that they're the opposite gender of what their body displays and that gender is something we "feel" or can change. *If this is how it works for them then why can't we change race?* What led me to ask this question?: I was watching the "I'm white" girl from Dr. phil (pretty much an African American girl who claims she's white) And I saw the reaction of a few trans people in the comments. They all, without any hesitation, agreed that a person can't change or identify as a differnet race. My ultimate question is why do they agree about this if it's THE EXACT SAME CONCEPT?

Is it just me or is this entire speech just attention grabbing opening lines back to back? Nothing was said

feelings are not truth some of the time. they're the rectangle in the world of squares. pun intended and not.

Framing the language is a way to control and frame the discourse. She is right about that but completely wrong that defining terms prevents a subject from studied and explored and understood in depth. On the contrary defining terms is essential to the core knowledge of a subject especially when it comes to biology and other sciences. Distorting those terms, on the other hand, is not. This woman does not understand biology at all or the fact that while you can attempt to erase the language of biology but you can not erase the biology.

“I would be the academic” 🤦🏼‍♂️ “Claiming to be wise they became fools”

12:20 "white male doctors". Nice labelling

☝️ If you study history this type of thinking appears in history many times and shows signs of a weakened society that has lost their identity. In history it shows the signs of a future collapse. So basically it's just a human Made ideological movement that has been looping through Humanity for years. This ideology is not new but through history has spelled disaster. This is why it repeatedly has falling in and out of favor of the public.

Someone come get there son he's loose again

Out of her 20 minute speech, the only thing she was able to clearly say, was we should leave the question of transgenderism unanswered and begin to shape our future on top of gender identity. If, statistically speaking, over half of Trans people have attempted suicide at some point in their lives, they are in no mental condition to "shape the future of humanity" and they are in no condition to be accepted as normal people. If they were normal people, then they would got to jail when making violent comments to anyone who disagrees with them (not all of them do, but way more than you think). The latest generations think, that because they don't feel like they don't fit in, mainly with gender roles/expectations, such as "men don't cry" the solution is to change genders. Instead, why don't you argue with those gender roles/expectations. Say "men can cry, girls don't have to be overly emotional and not enjoy rough, outside activity. They can be fascinated by bugs, rather then scream at their sight." Argue with the definition of "manly" and "ladylike" being different should not mean you have to change yourself, just change what people define as different. Those are the frameworks we should be changing.

So whats the correct pronoun for people with kidney stones? What about rights for kidney stoneists?

I’ve been wanting a pet unicorn for the longest time, so I just went out to my stable and strapped a paper cone to my horse’s head.

This dude rlly be denying science huh

Poor THING had no idea what its talking about

Take a shot every time she says "framework."

Arguement of authority is a logical fallacy.

First youTube video I've seen with more dislikes than likes

... Still waiting on an explanation or example of one of the constantly mentioned "frameworks" that are so damaging... Or do we just have to accept that because Levi Hord said it it must be so 🤷

Humans made up those words but they didn't make up biological differences.

"I am a trans scholar" and I live in a fantasy. There. Fixed it for you.

All I got from this was it depends on feelings.

This is really a thing?? 🤦🏾‍♂️

Insane in the membrane ^^

This seems to be an attempt to intellectualize a delusional condition. There's an overwhelming sense I'm being gaslighted.

Wow, this girl is very unintellectually motivated. Pretty depressing really. She doesn’t want to prove her base thesis, she just wants to talk about all of her ideas that come from it.

She said and I quote "humans made up all of the words." Of course we dont speak wildebeest. And they made millions of them, some forgotten, compare Mandarin to English.. there is a word for weird in every language and your that

if philosophers simply proved and agreed upon things, philosophy wouldn't even be a field. There are likely just as many or perhaps even more philosophers who think that your worldview is nonsensical.

I’d love to ask lady if cells popped out of the magnifying glass and said they aren’t cells anymore, what would we do?

This is like watching a comedian bomb. Or the scene in Billy Madison where Adam Sandler's opponent tries to explain business ethics

THIS IS A SCARY THOUGHT How long before believing the earth is flat will be tolerated

A descent into hard solipsism.....

Humans made up the words but not the meanings that words associate to.

im trans myself and will always be in support of my community, but.. i feel like this ted talk made little to no sense in terms of what he was trying to explain. /:

I would say the radical truths are that what we've thought of as standard is not actually the truth. The radical truth is something yet to be fully explored and accepted by the general population. The analogy to previous scientific discoveries are that we knew the truth was that the earth doesn't move. It's common sense, we're standing on it, of course it doesn't move, it's "radical" to think that the earth moves. It was also common that we knew an apple falling would hit the ground, however further examination of that led to knowing the equations in which gravitational pull existed which ultimately put satellites in orbit that gives up GPS today and many luxuries that we use. The use of discoveries that we've already experiences which has changed our way of thinking to a fundamental level is what is needed for discussions on gender identities in which we describe as normal or abnormal based on our own deeply embedded framework which defines them as true. The way that scientist saw that planets did not move consistently with a structure that was supposed to be the center of the universe is the same approach to look at gender as a truth even though we see the entire LBGTQA community. That community is the planets moving counter to expectations on a flawed framework. Therefore to deny things are true even though we see them on a daily basis and have since the beginning of time, means our perspectives are out of date, and in this case, thousands of years out of date. However by the inclusion of that perspective, these things can be fixed. And the same way Newton gave us F=MA which ultimately led to our better way of life, a new perspective on the cultural norms of language and expanded inclusion will also better the life for all.

Fun fact: “Man” and “woman” have dictionary definitions that pre-date many modern gender studies.

What if instead of wasting time arguming over the factual evidence of what a woman is and spent our time expanding gender norms and stereotypes? Instead of redefining what a woman is, what if we debated what womanhood could be? A much healthier conversation.