Personal determinism is not a single idea but the general attitude that if you weren't born able to do something, you can never learn to.
Critiquing this attitude is cliche, except that most of the people who critique it in various forms actually embrace it in many of its other forms. Here are some examples of it that are widely embraced and which I seldom hear criticized (at least seldom for the right reasons):
IQ. The idea that some people are innately smarter than others, and that this is a predictable, measurable thing that determines what kind of job or skill sets you're suited to. I'm actually sure that intelligence in this sense does not exist. People can learn from experience, and some lessons are more widely applicable than others, but the difference between intelligence and knowledge is a gradient, and there's no metaphysical "stat" that determines how "smart" you are apart from what you currently know and understand.
That many people are "not musical". Sure, a small group of people have damaged ears and actually aren't, but I was told when I was young that relative pitch couldn't be acquired, then I acquired it, then I was told that relative pitch could be acquired, but perfect pitch couldn't. Of course, "perfect pitch" is a misnomer because there's nothing special about middle C; the division of the octave into notes and the 440Hz standard for A4 is completely arbitrary. Since people can learn to tell the gap between notes and can also remember a frequency, it's obvious that one can also acquire "perfect pitch" (although I haven't done it yet, and may never because music isn't one of my main skill sets). "Absolute pitch" is the more correct term, although if I named it I'd say "anchored pitch". (If you're interested, this website is an excellent training aid for both kinds.)
The materialist account of the mind. Although most materialists still claim to believe in free will, rhetoric taken from this obviously free-will-excluding metaphysics is still employed regularly even by fairly reasonable people, like Shane Killian when he talks about how deceptive debate tactics manipulate your brain. The clear implication of this rhetoric is that you can't control it. Even though he doesn't say that in the video, framing it as a physical effect is a great way to insinuate the attitude of personal determinism and is not any more informative than leaving the scientific information out even if it were true.
Gender roles. This should be relatively uncontroversial among non-conservative readers. People that think the body you were born with to some extent controls what personality you develop or what positions you'll be effective in through any means other than affecting your sensory experiences need to reconsider their metaphysics. Far worse is the thought that it determines what positions you should be in, beyond what it makes you more physically fit for (which is rarely a large difference).
Middle-aged and older people saying they're computer-illiterate and insisting they always will be. Maybe this one isn't actually that common, but it's a personal pet peeve of mine since I've seen it a lot in real life. I know several people like this who refuse to learn to understand computers because, well, they're not smart enough to learn. (I'm not making this up! I know multiple people who say that... and when I point out the irony, they just giggle ☹)
I would honestly compare being unable to use a computer fluently in this era to being unable to read 50-100 years ago. Computers are the pinnacle of technology. Computers are the only invention whose fundamental idea is being able to program it to automate arbitrary tasks. The only piece of technology that isn't just a tool to accomplish a specific task, but a general-purpose tool. Computers are the only general-purpose invention that's ever been invented. Well, maybe electricity. But everyone knows how to operate a light switch and beyond that there's not much to know about using it. I'm not arguing we all need to know how to build computers. They're not going away; they're only going to become more essential to our lives. In just the last few decades computers have gone from being too expensive for individuals to afford to being so proliferated that most of us in America carry one in our pocket everywhere we go that can understand voice commands. If you're under 60 and live in America or a similar country and you think you don't need to learn to use a computer, you're fooling yourself.