Not my video, but it does raise some interesting points.
Femcels, sort of the counter part to incels(involuntary celibate men), but with a caveat that these women are not incapable of finding sex, but rather incapable of finding a lasting partner. Almost all of these self proclaimed femcels have had sex and relationships before, but they have all been bitter disappointments to the point where they believe finding a lasting partner isn't possible.
The TLDR on the video is:
Women on the pill have a very different hormonal makeup of women off the pill who are naturally cycling.
Women naturally cycling are perceived as more attractive than women on the pill by men.
Women naturally cycling favor men with similar MHC(a series of genes linked to our immune system) levels, which has a scientific correlation with genetic compatibility. Women on the pill prefer men with very different MHC levels than their own.
Women on the pill view masculine faces as less attractive than women naturally cycling did.
Women naturally cycling found men with softer faces more attractive, while women on the pill only preferred men with very masculine features.
The conclusion is that the pill, while useful for many things, has a detrimental effect on a woman's ability to both find a mate and make a lasting relationship with one. They are both seen as less attractive to men and are less attracted to men overall, and the men they do find attractive are arguably less compatible with them. The creator of the video did a good job at taking the time to find and highlight sources for her conclusions.
So what is everyone else's thoughts on the subjects? Does this change anyone's opinion about using the pill one way or the other?