[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

The problem I found throughout the video, in simple terms, was that she too often takes a premise as accepted and builds a long argument on that premise ... but without making an argument for the premise. The root of logical debate is working a problem back until you reach an agreed premise and I think she jumps the gun on what's agreed.

In terms of "NB identities" for example, to even start down the route of validity you have to be at a place of agreement that the gender binary is real, that it's meaningful, and that the "problem" isn't the initial societal gender expectations and stereotypes. If you counter that that's effectively what NB identities are about... you also have to have the agreed premise that non-traditional gender presentations necessitate categorising and labelling.

My observation is actually that it's a late-millenial/early GenZ phenomenon, the later GenZ's and especially Gen Alpha kids seem to be moving past the rigitidy into a looser "I am what I am" territory that I personally think is likely to be a far healthier and less conflicted mindset.

That is what we were always aiming for in the 90's as teens too though. To get rid of labels as such (except obviously were biology matters in a physical way) that people can like, dress, have a career in or enjoy whatever hobbies they want regardless of their sex