Matt Walsh's "What is a Woman?": The Mad, Sad World of Gender Ideology

I didn't pay to see the whole thing, but if you've seen clips from it, you know how crazy the people he interviews are. Nothing qualitatively new there--you've already seen near-identical NPCs saying near-identical things. And, in case this point has slipped past you somehow: it isn't just gender ideologues. The core problem is political correctness, i.e. the postmodern-progressive left's subordination of facts and reason to leftist dogma. Aided, of course, by the obscurantist methods and terminology and free-form, quasi-poetic interpretive "method" they adopt from recent Continental philosophy / the weaker humanities and qualitative social "sciences." It's the relativistic orientation and religious obsession with leftist politics that leads to all the more particular kinds of madness. Bad methods, deliberate obscurantism, and a disregard for truth/reality--that philosophical foundation will lead you somewhere crazy, whatever particular kind of crazy that might turn out to be.

   Bartosch says that Walsh is clearly building on the work of people like Kathleen Stock, and should acknowledge it. I admire Stock for standing up to the crazies, and I started reading Material Girls. But, honestly--absolutely no criticism intended--the errors of ("trans")gender ideology are pretty clear to everyone as soon as they encounter it. Everyone knows that women are adult, female humans--I bemusedly explained that to the first person who shrieked tGI at me on the interwebs. Woman is such a simple concept that anyone can "analyze" it--or, rather, easily identify its three constituent properties. Abigail Shirer is, IMO, more important because she's revealed facts about the medical side of things--and those you can't figure out on your own, obviously. Though the most important person on that side of things, IMO, has been Alice Dreger. Galileo's Middle Finger was not just a wake-up call, but a fire alarm. I guess it seems like ancient history now. But basically all the madness of the (trans)gender ideologues was described in there--though I don't think they'd started going after the kids yet. Anyway.

   Bartosch also criticizes Walsh--rather gently, I grant--for "having a problem with feminism." Which...well...you ought to have a problem with feminism. Feminism is no longer a liberal, egalitarian view, and hasn't been for decades. Feminism--especially academic feminism--is a collection of crazy, anti-male, anti-liberal, anti-rationalist views that generally make pretty much no sense. Feminism is how we got GI. The splinter group--"TERFs"--who are now rebelling against it are dissenters from the feminist mainstream. It's still mainly an anti-male--and, worse, anti-rationalist--movement. A small, dissident splinter group just happens to be right about GI. Don't mistake them for fellow travelers...not, at any rate, about any other topic. 

Blah blah blah.