ZERO logical errors were made in the first minute.
Okay, I listened to 18:00 minutes, and I made a list of 19 issues with the presentation. Some strawmen, many distinctions without a difference, many hasty generalizations, gish gallops, several conflations, and at least one instance of non-scientific, agenda-driven language.
A few (rough) timestamp examples:
:30 he strawmans thoughtful disagreements about gender stereotypes
:33 same with gender
:51 he talks about a "two gender system" - another strawman
Jumping ahead at around 17:30 or so he says:
"Gender is how an individual organism expresses their sexual identity in a cultural context".
Even by his own standards, that's inconsistent with other things he's said and it's inconsistent with what thoughtful people understand about gender. For example, a girl who expresses a lot of masculine traits, i.e. a "tomboy" is in NO WAY expressing her sexual identity when she climbs a tree.
==
Now, how about you spending half the time reading the link I gave you?