• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

#1 defender

Member
Oct 27, 2017
889
Just watched a few more of her videos, as someone said in the thread earlier it's kinda crazy how much of herself Nat puts into these videos. She's very brave for doing so and said bravery is something I find inspirational (not sure if thats a word?) but also scary due to putting yourself out there. Given how shitty YT can be in terms of content with alt-right garbage, Youtubers like Nat are such a treasure and a joy to watch. I hope she continues to make vids for as long as she wishes. Her mood lighting is just <3 and the editing is very well done.

I watched a video of a talk she did in front of a live audience and one of the things she said was that all these characters she plays in her videos are a sort of protective mechanism, enabling her to disassociate from negative response or hurtful comments and not take them to heart as much.

And the criticism of her aesthetic/schtick comes off as petty. It doesn't relate to the validity of her argument.

I honestly find that aspect of her videos positively disarming.
 
Oct 25, 2017
6,927
If I was to criticize her aesthetic/schtick right now, I wouldn't bring up the costumes or nails/eyelashes (which, the nails and eyelashes do creep me out for some reason), but rather the framing structure she's been doing for months now in her last five or so videos where we're watching a video; the most egregious being in The Apocalypse where the Doctor comes in with their laptop and plays a video.
 

Ketkat

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
4,727
I'd like to see a followup response or something typed out after the video was completed because some of the earlier complaints do get addressed later, and that's a problem with live tweeting criticism and going into a video with already great disdain. It also does't help to bring in irrelevant stuff like finances and the like when the central point is about gender for the person doing the live tweeting.

That said, there are people who greatly take issue with her views on gender. A lot of this is genuine, but some are looking into things that aren't there, or constructing something from incomplete comments into something more nefarious. I don't suggest the person in the tweet thread is doing that, but there has been a lot of criticism of her views on gender for a year, and especially since The Aesthetics video she did. She's aware of this stuff, so at this point she should probably do a proper response to it all, and not in drips and drabs as it happens. That way people can have a more complete viewpoint of her thoughts on gender now, rather than how her views/thoughts have changed or been processed during the time of her very public transitioning.

She actually did address the stuff in the Aesthetics video, although she deleted it later because yeah, some of it is rough.

Some endnotes to "The Aesthetic"​

This video is primarily about trans women, and the role of identity, performance, and social recognition in our lives. The problems it deals with aren't abstract problems to me. They're problems of my moment-to-moment existence. I made this video because I wanted to show a wider audience the way trans people talk about gender amongst ourselves, and because I wanted to work through some of my private doubts about common explanations of what it means to be trans. I also wanted to reconcile the existence of a devoted Tabby fandom with my having created the character as a caricature of leftist ineffectiveness. Exploring the transness of Tabby made her more human and sympathetic to me. It's now a fandom I can live with. Justine is more of an independent character than in "The Left," but she does voice many of my concerns, though with the attitude of Lord Henry Wotton. She prefers wit to veracity. "Cis women are fully clockable" A lot of people expressed that they found Justine's point of view painful and uncomfortable. And it is painful and uncomfortable. But it's the chronic pain and discomfort that I live with, and for me voicing it is a relief. I didn't arrive here through armchair philosophical reasoning, but through living my life as a trans person and trying to make sense of my ongoing predicament. Some non-binary people disliked this video because they felt that the dialogue excluded or invalidated them. Whereas most of the feedback I got from binary trans people is positive. Which, fair enough—this is a video about binary trans women.
Being a binary trans person is very different from being non-binary. I feel like I'm being grossly misunderstood by NBs when they characterize the desire to pass, Justine's point of view, as "respectability politics." My desire to appear to others and interact fluently as a certain kind of woman is not a song-and-dance I'm doing to win acceptance for my transness. It IS my transness.​

My wearing long hair, makeup, changing my voice, generally softening my confrontation with the world is nothing like e.g. a black man wearing a suit and speaking in "white voice." I'm not doing "woman voice" to please cis people. I'm doing it because I want to be a woman.
Social recognition of my gender identity is not an independent, external source of validation. It's inextricable from the social, structural, material reality of the identity itself. Cis women understand this deeply. They know that they aren't oppressed as women because they psychologically identify as women. They know that misogyny is foisted upon them regardless of their psychology, so long as society views them as women.
Trans men escape misogyny to some degree—generally to the degree that society views and accepts them as men. And trans women are in the sad situation of having to claw our way into a social position where we begin to experience misogyny.It's not psychological identity that makes this happen. It's the interpersonal recognition that comes about as a result of habitually living/performing the identity. Let's be good leftist materialists here. Oppression doesn't happen in the realm of ideas.​

Before I transitioned I identified as genderqueer for a while. I presented basically as what used to be called a male transvestite. People were sometimes shitty about that, but my coming out with the NB identity was greeted mainly by, "sure, whatever bro, wear whatever you want."
I found that as an AMAB NB, I was for most intents and purposes—socially, structurally, materially—still a man. Whereas when I came out as a trans woman and began acting accordingly, every single aspect of my life was upended.​

I'm sure this is not the experience of many NBs. I leave it to them to articulate what NB existence looks like in a binary world. I do not and cannot speak for them. But surely an account that begins and ends with "I'm not a man because I don't identify as one" is pretty weak.
To return to Justine—it's right to point out that she's a a little villainous. She's harsh, she's insensitive, she's hyperbolic, she's glib. But she's not Tiffany Tumbles. She does care about Tabby (in fact she loves Tabby!) and genuinely wants to help.
Some of that help is unwanted and intrusive, but it's constructive criticism and it comes from a genuine place. I like to think that in public, in front of Jackie or Tiffany, Justine would be a fierce defender of Tabby.​

I'm sympathetic to Justine because people like her—willing to privately sidestep the hugbox and divulge pragmatic MtF wisdom over tea—have been the most helpful to my transition. I owe a lot to people like that. This is what's called the "trans mom" relationship, something I've wanted to depict in a video for a while. Of course I'm a lot more eager to learn than Tabby. If someone wants to teach me to walk in heels I'm like, yes Mommy show me I'm desperate. But of course it is a kind of Justinian vision of transsexuality that has turned out to be what works for me. Other trans women have other visions, involving combat boots perhaps, that they can make work just as well, as Justine finally concedes in the video.​

Remember that I'm in an abnormal situation. My transition needs to be contextualized. Hundreds of thousands of people are watching me transition. My pre-transition life, voice, body, sexuality, manner are well documented, & exist online forever beside present-me.
My appearance is the focus of so much discourse, some hostile, some "friendly." (I'll be browsing a trans forum and some egg will worry about attracting partners post transition. Another user reassures them, "you can be hot even if you don't pass, just look at contrapoints!")
I am under much more scrutiny than most people, and I feel that the bar for how I look, how I pass, is higher for me. I try not to read about myself but even when I succeed I know what's being said, I know people are talking about it.
The consequence is that I now spend around 50% of my waking life thinking about how I look. Half of my mind that used to get to do other things is now exclusively devoted to that.​

And because my pre-transition online existence is so prominent, I feel that my life's work at a glance is the absurd spectacle of a philosophy nerd becoming a glamazon. I feel that I will always be a freak show, but can never really be a woman so far as the Internet is concerned.
The most hurtful things Justine says are my confessions. I have no security in "feeling like a woman." I feel like I'm desperately trying to be a woman though confronted by endless obstacles. It's a shadow that hangs over me every moment of every day.
But these are just some feelings I have. I don't have opinions. I made this video to show off that I can walk in heels.​
 
Oct 25, 2017
6,927
She actually did address the stuff in the Aesthetics video, although she deleted it later because yeah, some of it is rough.
Thank you for that. I know she's deleted tweets and stuff from the past and I don't think I ever read this, and the most I ever saw as a "follow up" was her talking about the link I edited into my post where she co-signed some of the points in the response video someone did.
 

Deleted member 32561

User requested account closure
Banned
Nov 11, 2017
3,831
I've re-watched the video and she "kind of" addresses the criticisms I and others have of it later, but it's in such a brush-under-the-rug way that someone already offended by earlier statements might have their mind wander off when she one-sentence broaches individual things.

If it's a matter of her not feeling qualified to talk on such subjects.... then invite other trans people or genderqueer or nonconforming people to give their voices, or ask them questions. Because the alternative to her feeling unqualified is that she really IS gender essentialist and thinks that's the ONLY way to think about gender. So, I really can't find myself blaming trans individuals (particularly butch trans women or feminine trans men, or those unable to transition) for thinking she ain't shit or might even be transmedicalist deep down.

Now, to be clear, I don't think she is. I think she's just had a certain bullshit line fed to her through her research or education, and she's still getting used to the idea of something she thought she had pegged given it matched how she dealt with her own gender. But to individuals who are used to being attacked by people- including those who are supposedly "on your side" like Blaire White- it can feel dangerous to let someone legitimately stumbling towards your viewpoint speak in such an authoritative manner.
Mewshuji I know you edited it out but I've been stewing over your previous post, but your concerns are entirely valid. As Famassu explained she is speaking from the perspective of a trans woman and I definitely don't think she means to disregard others. And toward the end she does say "don't call any human being a trap".

I'm a male who may be at least somewhat non-binary who finds he prefers presenting in a more femme/androgynous fashion (in a day-to-day manner, not situational drag-event manner). So in a way I think we may be similar, Mew?

Anyway, I had to tell a couple acquaintances to not call me a "trap". And these weren't bigoted assholes, they were well-meaning queerfolk that had a few blindspots. That it's still bad to refer to a non-trans person as that, it still has transphobic origins and is harmful enough just being used in that way. And even then I'm not trying to "trick" anybody into thinking I'm someone I'm not, I'm honest about who I am and I'm just trying to be me

And before this, I'm embarrassed to say, I had to be told to to stop using it in what I thought was the "harmless" context. It really sucks the term so widespread, but if you hear it you can try to cut it out as quick as you can
I apologize for deleting my initial post, I just... got scared again I guess, loll

I do legitimately think she means well and isn't trying to disregard others. As I said, I just think her own experience with discovering her transness matched so well with the idea of performative gender that she just assumed for a long time that's how it is for all trans women... when it's not. At all. And she's trying to come to grips with that and figure out how to present that while not making it seem like that's how she views herself.

I unfortunately am at a point in my expression of identity where I feel like any attempts at crossdressing or even something simple like wearing makeup will just make me look foolish. I wouldn't be shocked if it's a partial source of my depression. But I indeed wish I was able to do things like wear skirts or even just pink clothing and actually... feel attractive to myself.

And I guess it should be enough to just say "it's used to dehumanize trans women, so don't use it at all", huh?

And I'd have to watch the video again keeping your point in mind, but I don't think she ever says that a feminine man with a feminine penis can't exist? She does talk about the feminine penis mostly in the context of trans women like herself, but I don't think she ever rejects any other alternatives outright. She even lays it on pretty thick about how there are no black & whites or even gray areas here, but it's a whole fucking rainbow.
I believe I addressed the rest of your post with the rest of mine, but, yeah, it's true she never outright says it. But I kinda feel like the way she frames it can make it sound like she thinks that. The omission of something can at times be as telling as the inclusion of it. But, like I said, I do think she means well, she just has this one viewpoint that doesn't generally mesh with most of the trans people and noncomforming people I know of and interact with.

Also thank you for quoting my post before I could edit it. I was scared I'd be attacked or something, so I'm happy to have level headed discussion on the subject.
 
Last edited:

Mechanized

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,442
Great video. I love how well she explains things and relates to her personal experiences. The obsession with "is this gay"? that some dudes have is pathetic. The assumption that gay is somehow wrong. You like what you like, just enjoy life and your sexuality.
 

Mulciber

Member
Aug 22, 2018
5,217
Yeah but it didn't took long for a video of a trans woman (which would later become a famous trans porn star) cosplaying as Haruhi to appear and they used "line trap" to define her because what is the difference from cross dressing and trans for bigods who think trans people are actually men in dresses?
Oh, and they love that video because at one point she lifts up her shirt, security comes over, and she says, "It's okay; I'm a boy." I've seen that video used for everything from "trans women are just men in dresses" to calling people gay to a host of other awful shit.

To be clear: I'm not blaming her. I think this was back when she was trying to still figure out her identity (which she has said can be somewhat fluid) and also just a snap defense to avoid trouble with security in a time before she had gotten breast augmentation.
 
Oct 31, 2017
4,333
Unknown
Any thoughts on this criticism of Natalie's video? Have to click to see the entire thread


That Natalie's video is out there to springboard counterpoints and advance the conversation is valuable and seems to be part of the reason she made it.
The character and appearance criticisms seem unnecessarily hostile and take away from the other criticisms and maybe should have been made separately.
On the matter of the introduction, it seemed proper for Natalie to reintroduce the subject after the opening in character to allow a space where serious matters could be addressed before continuing forward with the material.
 
Oct 27, 2017
6,745
I rarely find myself able to sit through 30+ minute video essays, but Natalie always manages to keep me engaged with her pacing.
 

broncobuster

Member
Oct 26, 2017
8,139
Great stuff as usual from her. The bit about some social media 'woke' people using progressive ideas as a mask while harboring regressive views is spot on.
 

amoy

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,230
oh ... she has been out for ... 6 years
I find it weird that someone can know her from before and not know about this xD

Well, being honest, I am out of the loop regarding this subject :P

But the actual reason I even know who Pejic is, is really weird or dumb, depending on your POV...

Back in 2011, someone sent me some funny pics, one was a bunch o comparisons with limecat.

One of the pictures, was a fashion model, with a jet black bob haircut, really striking picture.

So I looked for the source and ended having my mind blown, because I learned then, that Gemma Ward, Sasha Pivovarova and Vlada Roslyakova aren't the same person, even tho they looked pretty identical.

Don't remember the specifics, but it was a Lavin/Lanvin 2007 collection, anyway, one of the articles linked was about Pejic and some controversy regarding a magazine cover that featured a bare chest on display or something to that effect.

I don't really follow fashion and that's how I got to know Pejic.
 

Alpheus

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,655
I watched a video of a talk she did in front of a live audience and one of the things she said was that all these characters she plays in her videos are a sort of protective mechanism, enabling her to disassociate from negative response or hurtful comments and not take them to heart as much.



I honestly find that aspect of her videos positively disarming.

I see, makes sense. Still a very constructive way to blunt online negativity which is in it's own way very inspiring of her. Makes me like her as a YouTuber even more.
 

Deleted member 203

user requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
4,899
Any thoughts on this criticism of Natalie's video? Have to click to see the entire thread


As a trans woman who is not (yet) on hormones, her statement that "there's nothing homosexual about a man's attraction to a trans woman who's been on hormones a couple of years" was very hurtful, because it implies that (in her opinion) you're not *actually* a woman until after years of HRT and if you pass as a woman. That's a baffling statement coming from her, and I have to believe she knew exactly what she was saying. Her going on about the feminine and masculine ways to use your dick was also a total head-scratcher. I don't get why you'd be gender essentialist about that. I've liked her videos in the past but this one was hurtful in spots and not very educational (which I expected) and overlong.
 

How About No

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
5,785
The Great Dairy State
As a trans woman who is not (yet) on hormones, her statement that "there's nothing homosexual about a man's attraction to a trans woman who's been on hormones a couple of years" was very hurtful, because it implies that (in her opinion) you're not *actually* a woman until after years of HRT and if you pass as a woman. That's a baffling statement coming from her, and I have to believe she knew exactly what she was saying. Her going on about the feminine and masculine ways to use your dick was also a total head-scratcher. I don't get why you'd be gender essentialist about that. I've liked her videos in the past but this one was hurtful in spots and not very educational (which I expected) and overlong.
im just gonna go out on a limb and say that was an awful misphrase and not at all what she meant
 

Deleted member 203

user requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
4,899
im just gonna go out on a limb and say that was an awful misphrase and not at all what she meant
I really find that hard to believe given how much work she puts into her videos and how calculated that phrase sounds. Like, the qualifier is there for a reason, right? And it's not the one thing, it's a lot of things she says in the video that betray her view on gender as being somewhat essentialist. There's no other way I can interpret that first statement. So regardless of what she meant, that is what she said, and until I hear otherwise from her, I'm going to assume she meant what she said, because I don't think she's stupid enough to make such a careless mistake.
 

ZealousD

Community Resettler
Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,303
She's specifically talking about the concept of "traps" in this video. Almost by definition, a so-called "trap" has to pass as a woman because it's predicated on the idea that the cishet male is being "tricked" by seeing a woman only to discover later that she's a "man".
 
Oct 27, 2017
3,826
im just gonna go out on a limb and say that was an awful misphrase and not at all what she meant
I'm not entirely sure. I don't doubt her belief in an inner "trans-ness" that doesn't invalidate the identities of non binary tans people and non passing/early transitioning trans women, but her argument focuses on the point where inner identity meets societal perception. It's a practical argument that stands on shakey ground. If a man being attracted to masculine qualities in a trans woman, who for whatever reason doesn't conform to traditional standards of femininity, could be considered homosexual from his perspective, then the entire concept of the "feminine penis" throws that argument in a loop. Society considers a dick to be the #1 masculine signifier. If it's masculinity can be subverted, of all things, so can every other masculine signifier. At what point does a masculine quality change to a feminine one? When does it change its nature? There is no hard line. Is inner identity just as arbitrary as societal gender norms? Is Natalie's idea of trans-ness just as arbitrary and meaningless as society's at large, just more inclusive?

... We're gonna need more psychedelic gel lights.
 

SageShinigami

Member
Oct 27, 2017
30,474
As a trans woman who is not (yet) on hormones, her statement that "there's nothing homosexual about a man's attraction to a trans woman who's been on hormones a couple of years" was very hurtful, because it implies that (in her opinion) you're not *actually* a woman until after years of HRT and if you pass as a woman. That's a baffling statement coming from her, and I have to believe she knew exactly what she was saying. Her going on about the feminine and masculine ways to use your dick was also a total head-scratcher. I don't get why you'd be gender essentialist about that. I've liked her videos in the past but this one was hurtful in spots and not very educational (which I expected) and overlong.

It doesn't imply that at all. It does imply the world at large thinks that, though. If I told you I see you as a transwoman because you identify as a woman (which I do), I would still just be one person, and I cannot guarantee the majority of the world will see it the same way. (So we're clear, that doesn't necessarily mean you should care what the world thinks.) As Natalie said early on, her goal was "to shit post her way to the high ground". You'd only have to do that if you were working from the bottom.

This is just my read on the situation so I could be SUPER wrong, but I honestly don't think this video was ever meant for trans people to begin with. It's about them, but it's talking to straight people. It's talking to those teenage boys who'll type "Are traps gay?" into Google. And, as she said, she's meeting them where they're at. And they're at a point where they're asking whether even a post-op trans woman model should be considered a woman or not, which is the most softball of softballs.

This is why the complaints in that Twitter thread, while potentially valid (over my head mostly so I can't decide one way or another), aren't going to go anywhere. Yeah, you can try to get someone else to lead the conversation, but if they can't handle it the way Natalie does they're going to fail. They're just going to attract people who type "traps are gay lel" into YouTube commentary. Because typically these people assume they've already won the argument and are condescending, or they're insulted/mad they even have to have it, and they want you to read a billion fucking books on the subject to "educate yourself" instead. At some point someone has to have these discussions, and they have to work from where people are at instead of just yelling at people.
 
Oct 25, 2017
6,927
I really find that hard to believe given how much work she puts into her videos and how calculated that phrase sounds. Like, the qualifier is there for a reason, right? And it's not the one thing, it's a lot of things she says in the video that betray her view on gender as being somewhat essentialist. There's no other way I can interpret that first statement. So regardless of what she meant, that is what she said, and until I hear otherwise from her, I'm going to assume she meant what she said, because I don't think she's stupid enough to make such a careless mistake.
She tweeted back at that person with the following: (embedding isn't working for me at the moment, so just twitter text until I can update later)
@probskay my direct answer in the video is: "male attraction to a trans woman is not gay because trans women are women, and a man having sex with a woman is [checks notes] not in fact gay."
@probskay But I then acknowledge this might not be convincing since most cis people seem not to truly believe that trans women are women. So, later on I say, "the easy-sell version of this argument is...." and then I make the claim which you've taken out of context.


And specified this later:
@EllieODaire you don't need hormones or surgery to be your gender. medical gatekeeping is bad.

Don't know if those tweets confirm or alleviate anyone's thinking of her intent, but considering she doesn't tweet much about her videos, that's all she's added right now.
 

Platy

Member
Oct 25, 2017
27,703
Brazil
As a trans woman who is not (yet) on hormones, her statement that "there's nothing homosexual about a man's attraction to a trans woman who's been on hormones a couple of years" was very hurtful, because it implies that (in her opinion) you're not *actually* a woman until after years of HRT and if you pass as a woman. That's a baffling statement coming from her, and I have to believe she knew exactly what she was saying. Her going on about the feminine and masculine ways to use your dick was also a total head-scratcher. I don't get why you'd be gender essentialist about that. I've liked her videos in the past but this one was hurtful in spots and not very educational (which I expected) and overlong.

Like I said before, later in the video she mentions her experience pre hormones where straight dudes sended her sexting
 

Deleted member 203

user requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
4,899
This is just my read on the situation so I could be SUPER wrong, but I honestly don't think this video was ever meant for trans people to begin with. It's about them, but it's talking to straight people.
You're definitely right about that, but doesn't mean she should peddle regressive gender ideology. Understand, I'm not out here to cancel her, I think she does more good than harm, but when you're saying shit like that statement I quoted, you have to be EXTREMELY careful. I watched the whole video, and I don't think there was enough context to make it explicitly clear that she didn't mean it the way I interpreted the phrase.

In general, Contra has always leaned VERY hard on passing/presenting and society at large as being like, the most important part of your identity, which... it's not. I don't present (yet) most of the time, but my (cis) girlfriend unquestioningly accepts me and sees me as a woman. Guess what's more important to me: what my partner sees me as, or what the check-out clerk at the store sees me as? Like yeah obviously if I want random strangers to see me as a woman, I'm going to have to look a certain way. But that's not the most important part, and we're not ever going to break down the gender binary if we just keep insisting that everyone has to "pass" for their (gender) identity to be seen as valid. She can pay lip service to "all identities are valid" on twitter as much as she wants, but that isn't what she's actually saying most of the time. She puts almost all of the onus of trans people being accepted as their gender on trans people passing, instead of cis people widening their perspective on gender.

I think Contra could be doing a lot more with her platform to foster acceptance for people who are gender non-conforming in ways that aren't simply binary trans people. Is that asking too much? I don't think so, personally. I certainly don't think it's asking too much to ask for her to be more careful about how she says certain things. She has a tendency, especially in this video, to take her experience and paint all of us with that brush. The part where she goes on about feminine and masculine ways to use your genitals was the most baffling part of the video by far in that respect.
 

Rendering...

Member
Oct 30, 2017
19,089
She actually did address the stuff in the Aesthetics video, although she deleted it later because yeah, some of it is rough.
God I love her. It's so valuable to have a person share these messy unglamorous personal feelings on the internet. Reading this kind of material can be a powerful catalyst for empathy. Confessional stuff much like Natalie's remarks helped me outgrow my youthful prejudices way back when.
 

hurroocane

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,869
Germany
I think it's one of her better videos. The later parts are especially strong.

Also concerning the discussions of the last few pages looks like she's clarifying her views on twitter right now



I'm pretty hesitant to clarify my own views or address rumors, since in the past that's only made things worse for me, but it really never hurts to say: you don't need to be on hormones to be a trans woman, you don't have to pass, you don't have to be a bottom.

But when you're in conversation with straight men who think men who like trans women are, in virtue of that fact, gay, I think it helps to start with examples of trans women that they're likely to find comprehensible from the cis point of view.

I feel like I'm pushing the limits of cis toleration and understanding as is by being so forward about the "feminine penis" aspect. But it seems like a lot of trans people want me to push it even further to "hairy tops not on hormones can be women too"—which yes, yes they can!

But in view of the fact that most cis people don't really view ANY of us as women, I'm not sure that's the place to start, rhetorically speaking. But I'd be genuinely happy to be proved wrong!
 

Amnixia

▲ Legend ▲
The Fallen
Jan 25, 2018
10,424
So I think this was a good video (I'm a CIS male).

I tried explaining to some people why a man dating a trans women would not make the man "gay" (for a lack of better phrasing). But I'm not nearly as eloquent or informed as Natalie so her points help me in future arguments.

Though I do doubt that arguing with bigots has a point these days.

I read some people have a problem with some of her opinions, can't really get into that since I'm not a trans person and don't want to presume to be able to speak for them.
 

Soph

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,503
Good stuff, most of it will fly over the heads of the intended audience though.
 

Boddy

User Requested Ban
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
2,160
I tried to watch it again and I got through it this time.
The video got a lot easier to watch after the alt-right and murder part was over.

Not much new stuff for me obviously , but I'm glad she made such a informative video.
 

Don Fluffles

Member
Oct 28, 2017
7,061
Even now, the term's still used in the anime community. Reading that shit makes me mad.
Those who say it need a little reeducation.