Gundog wrote:

---

I am very saddened by how our country has become so disrespectful to women, for years women struggled for equality to eventually to succeed.

Now its under assault from trans right activists, supporting males who identify as female to be able to compete in womens and girls sports, use the same dressing rooms and toilets.

I have viewed many Youtube clips where, when asked what is a women, often they will not or can not respond, others will respond if you identify as a women you are a women.

Recently here in Australia we had a group of women, who tried to have a meeting to Let Women Speak, only to have a of trans rights protestors disrupt the events. Whats happened to free speech.

The other day world athletics banned trans athletes for elite competition, and on the same day in South Australia a male claiming to be a trans female won a sprinting event in schools sport.

We even have male criminals identifying as female so they can be placed in womens prisons

How do we stop this rubbish.

---

 Great post Graham. As far as I know, when a child is born it is it is one of only two sexes, these being male and female. There are no other options, as far as I know, although Biology was not my favourite subject at school. No amount of body mutilation, playing with the plumbing, or bowing to representations by pressure groups by introducing legislation that says that Bob now is Gaye (Pun intended!) will change this.

All acceptance for participation in gender-specific sport should be based on the participant's sex at birth, not what he/she/it now "identifies as". Could be a deterrent, and reduce crime too, if this happened as I'm sure that someone who "identifies as woman" would be welcomed  in a mens' gaol?  

If someone is born with testicles that person is male. Removing those testicles doesn't change that, despite all the hype. Not sure, but I heard somewhere that the birth certificates of children born in Tasmania do not include the sex of the child? Is that child now an "It"? Spare me. 

And don't get me started on couples other than male and female wanting to adopt a child, as of right, to then be classed as a "family". No Cheers here.

-- Edited by yobarr on Sunday 26th of March 2023 03:42:25 PM

Whenarewethere wrote:

---

XX or XY.

---

 XY was one of the best Ford Falcons ever built! Not sure about XX though?  Cheers

smwhiskey wrote:

---

Gundog wrote:

---

How do we stop this rubbish.

---

By not treating various demographics as "special"?

---

 It astounds me that such a small, insignificant number of misfits are not only tolarated by the vast majority, but are let loose to run riot, demanding that legislation be introduced to suit their agenda. Seems we may soon have a country full of "ITS" Cheers

Possum3 wrote:

---

Many children are born with misshapen genitals.

---

My understanding is that in the UK (~60,000,000 people) about 50 babies per year are born of indeterminate sex and an operation is performed to produce a boy or a girl so about 25 in 60,000,000 or 0.00004% will be wrong.

Possum3 wrote:

---

Not a simple solution;

Many children are born with misshapen genitals. In the past, many of these children were surgically "corrected" to the parent's direction, even though the child's DNA and glands may have been different to the surgically modified sex. It was hoped that these "corrected" children grew up to become the surgically assigned sex. Sadly, this hasn't always been the case.

It is probable that many of the "Transexuals" publicly demonstrating are emotionally identifying as male/female even though there is no biological reason for their such expression. Understanding of the reasons for such behaviors should be paramount, not incitement to bash/criminalise/abhor their personal stance.

There are also the rat bag element and rent-a-mob that are using the unfortunate to promote a social/political view.

As responsible adults it is our "duty" to refrain from incitement..

---

 Well put Possum. 

Maybe a third classification in sports: men, women, transgenders???

Charles Darwin was pretty well on the money when he suggested that only those best suited to their environment will survive in the long term.

Some of us feel it's our duty to interfere with everything, biology included, we're not talking surgery to correct minor imperfections/deformities, this is life changing stuff, and in many cases those making the changes get it wrong.

If people are born with genetic imperfections why on earth would they want to pass their genes onto future generations, it doesn't make sense.

"Survival of the fittest"^[1] is a phrase that originated from Darwinian evolutionary theory as a way of describing the mechanism of natural selection. The biological concept of fitness is defined as reproductive success. In Darwinian terms, the phrase is best understood as "Survival of the form that will leave the most copies of itself in successive generations."

I think this one says it all.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrQNj0iwuy4

deverall11 wrote:

---

Maybe a third classification in sports: men, women, transgenders???

---

 NO, That would just open the gates....

Southern Cruizer wrote:

---

dogbox wrote:

---

Greg 1 wrote:

---

I really don't care what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their bedroom, nor do I care if some one decides to identify as a chicken if that's what floats their boat.
Just don't keep trying to ram it down my throat that this behaviour is somehow normal because it's not, so if you fit in those categories just go off quietly and live a happy life.
I certainly won't be bothering you if you do.

---

 x3

x2

---

 

---

 x 3 x2 x8 x10= I thought it was Adam and Eve..........not Adam and Steve   

Whenarewethere wrote:

---

XX or XY.

---

 I was born with the chromosone count  of 47XXY. I did not know about that until 2 years into my army career. I expected to be booted out, but, they said I passed all the requirements and they saw me as a male, which, is how I saw myself, and how my family raised me. Later in life whilst still an armed forces member, met up with a  group, that was formed with this known "Disability", and many of them identified as Transexual, or went all the way and became female. I never had that urge to be different other then male, but I don't begrudge anyone wanting to be either male or female, or trans, or whatever. You people making these comments have no F idea, what people like myself are going thru and still go thru. I was lucky, that my family saw me as a male, and raised me as same. I think that has a lot to do with how you turn out, environ-mentally speaking, but a lot of these kids today, once their families find out about this issue, they  the parents change how they go about raising them, and I think that is the wrong approach, sure monitor them , but ask them how they identify, find out how they feel, nurture them, protect them and help them get thru it as best as you can, and with maybe psychological help if need be. I am disappointed in the comments above, and it is people like you that are forcing these kids/young adults/and adults to force their point of view down everybodies throat to get that point of view and understanding of what they are going thru across all persuasions of everybody out there. Not everybody identifies as just either Male or female, and un til you know, learn and understand their are differences in the sexes of people, you cannot really make uninformed comments like above, because you just don't know anything about it. It just comes across as discrimination.

As I see it, the anti-trans movement has sprung up in response to unreasonable attacks against social norms. They should not all be written off as just an insensitive bunch of bigots wanting to suppress the transgender lobby.

There are obvious absurdities and outright injustices in allowing biological males to compete in women's sports and to use women's amenities. Just because a man psychologically identifies as a woman should not affect those societal and institutional norms which treat him as the biological male that he really is. Why is this even subject to argument?

By all means, let's treat those who don't fit neatly into the traditional gender categories as the human beings that they are. Show them compassion and understanding. Make accommodations wherever possible, as long as they are reasonable and do not disadvantage other sectors of society. Unfortunately, the transgender lobby has fomented societal upheaval, and this is what will ultimately turn their supporters against them.

I'm one of about 5% of males who are colour-blind. Relatively few females are similarly affected. This means that 2.5% of the population do not perceive the world in the same way as colour-sighted people. My life is not significantly diminished, although people may laugh when I reach for a purple shirt, thinking that it's blue, or if I hit the brown snooker ball, thinking that it's red. Fortunately, the design of traffic lights accommodates people like me. However, imagine what the world would be like if fashion designers, product marketeers, graphic artists, etc limited their choice of colours for my benefit.

All I'm saying is, be compassionate, but also be reasonable.

Possum3 wrote:

---

It is probable that many of the "Transexuals" publicly demonstrating are emotionally identifying as male/female even though there is no biological reason for their such expression. Understanding of the reasons for such behaviors should be paramount, not incitement to bash/criminalise/abhor their personal stance.

---

I think it is this cohort who are the main reason for the antagonism of the anti-trans lobby. Clearly, for a biological male to identify as a female is not "normal". At least this behaviour is not driven by chromosomal factors. The question then becomes, at what point do we perceive certain behaviours to be mental disorders, and, if so, how should we deal with them? (I hope I'm not using the word "normal" in a derogatory or judgmental way. Maybe "unusual" would be a less emotive term.)

As a counterexample, there are people who harbour an intense desire to paralyse or amputate their own perfectly functional limbs. Amazingly, there are surgeons who relent to their demands and perform such operations. How do they deal with the enormous ethical dilemma? What I'm saying is, where does one draw the line when dealing with psychological issues?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_integrity_dysphoria

In John's case, he didn't expect that his community should make any major changes, or any changes at all, in order to accommodate him. I think that's the crux of the conflict. If you read Spiked, their anti-trans crusade exclusively targets biological males who self-identify as female and then intrude into private female domains. If one were to eliminate this aspect, or at least define it robustly in law, then Spiked would have nothing to write about.