Active discussions

Help protect children from gaming harms.

Take our survey

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

One third of pupils kept home on "rainbow day" at Canadian school

280 replies

Rainbowshit · 17/02/2023 13:14

Yikes.

I guess there's more disquiet about this stuff in Canada than is reported.

lfpress.com/news/local-news/rainbow-day-why-did-one-third-of-kids-at-one-london-school-stay-home

OP posts:
Thelnebriati · 17/02/2023 21:35

@suggestionsplease1 As you are the one claiming there is a third gamete or sex class, please name it and describe its role. Does it gestate the fetus or fertilise the egg?

Original poster
Rainbowshit · 17/02/2023 21:35

Helleofabore · 17/02/2023 21:33

”I'm not prepared to start at the very beginning.”

This too is common. The mocking ‘I am not going to educate you’ tactic.

So, not one shred of credible evidence and not willing to ‘start at the very beginning’.

Posters who have seen this ploy many times have a good idea what comes next.

It's just boring isn't it? We've been here many many times before. Never anything new.

OP posts:
Igneococcus · 17/02/2023 21:36

"So even if you believed that it took a parents with binary sexes to reproduce, why would they necessarily and logically produce offspring with binary sex?"

Because evolution doesn't work that quickly.

DysonSpheres · 17/02/2023 21:36

StephanieSuperpowers · 17/02/2023 21:15

Rapist.

Show quote history

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Helleofabore · 17/02/2023 21:36

They don’t even bother posting the Ainsworth article any more. Not Fausto-sterling after she admitted it was tongue in cheek

AlisonDonut · 17/02/2023 21:37

suggestionsplease1 · 17/02/2023 21:23

Ok, right. Yikes. I'm not prepared to start at the very beginning.

So even if you believed that it took a parents with binary sexes to reproduce, why would they necessarily and logically produce offspring with binary sex?

Show quote history

Oh yikes.

Nobody has ever produced a child with a third sex.

Original poster
Rainbowshit · 17/02/2023 21:37

@StephanieSuperpowers

Rainbowshit
What is the third sex called? Male, female and...?

Rapist.

👏 👏

OP posts:
Helleofabore · 17/02/2023 21:38

And no one of any other sex has produced a child.

Nope. Just plain old male and female bodies. Built with many variations but still just male or female.

Helleofabore · 17/02/2023 21:39

In other words ‘sex is not binary’ is where the ideological thinking starts and tries to cycle back.

PermanentTemporary · 17/02/2023 21:40

@suggestionsplease1 I did it. I typed "sex binary" into Google scholar.

Since the idea that sex might not be binary is only supported by special pleading, that's what I found. Very near the top cane this gem.

Volpe et al 2023. My summary:
'Cardiovascular research based on the sex binary excludes transgender nonconforming nonbinary and intersex people. TGNCNBI people represent between 0.3 to 3% of people depending on age group. Therefore (sic) research on cardiovascular health needs to be more inclusive.'

I mean - that's a load of old crap. Sorry but it really is. Of course cardiovascular research doesn't exclude anyone by being based on male and female categories, because that includes everyone, even if a tiny number of individuals have a more complex form of their sex.

It also strongly suggests that in cardiovascular research at least, pretty much all scientists do think that sex is binary and set up their research that way. Given the poor history of research into heart health of women, it suggests that we could do with a lot more binary understanding, and a lot less trying to mush women's needs into hiding under a big shiny gender lid.

suggestionsplease1 · 17/02/2023 21:42

Honest to goodness, we'd be here all night, well...year, going into it and you still wouldn't have any consideration for the points that I would make. So I really don't see the point.

But if you can't acknowledge that the scientific community, in general (not exclusively, I agree, there are a minority still hanging on to a binary interpretation) are engaged in a broader understanding of sex over a reductive binary model then I think you've got your head in the sand and you're deliberately avoiding / refusing to acknowledge the discourse in this area.

Original poster
Rainbowshit · 17/02/2023 21:43

suggestionsplease1 · 17/02/2023 21:42

Honest to goodness, we'd be here all night, well...year, going into it and you still wouldn't have any consideration for the points that I would make. So I really don't see the point.

But if you can't acknowledge that the scientific community, in general (not exclusively, I agree, there are a minority still hanging on to a binary interpretation) are engaged in a broader understanding of sex over a reductive binary model then I think you've got your head in the sand and you're deliberately avoiding / refusing to acknowledge the discourse in this area.

No I don't acknowledge that at all. Because it's not true.

OP posts:
Helleofabore · 17/02/2023 21:43

”It also strongly suggests that in cardiovascular research at least, pretty much all scientists do think that sex is binary and set up their research that way.”

Yep.

research should be based on sex and then include variations caused by artificial hormones and other medication.

A male with artificial hormones need to be included, maybe even researched separately, as males. They are still not female bodies.

FrancescaContini · 17/02/2023 21:45

OneLongSmorgasbord · 17/02/2023 18:59

I've said for a long time that "acceptance without exception" in relation to trans ideology is going to have big repercussions for the LGB community.

But it's no longer enough to educate kids that some people have 2 mummies or 2 daddies, it's now

That's just the first 3 examples off the top of my head. There are lots more. None of those are OK and I'm surprised more people inside of the rainbow community can't see just how bad they look to those outside it.

When parents are reading about these things, why would they trust schools anymore?

When there is literally any problem that is related to someone trans or queer or whatever, it's hidden, explained away, and ignored. People get called bigots for highlighting the above things.

I think more LGB people need to realise that they are going to catch the backlash and start speaking up that maybe it's a bad idea to invite drag queens into schools, or at least doing cursory social media searches on the people they do invite in, that young children don't need to learn about sex toys, that teachers do not have the right to indoctrinate kids into their views in any way. Kids go to school to learn English, maths and science, not to talk about sex games with the teacher.
The more this inappropriateness is pushed from one side, the more it's going to get pushback from the other. I only hope it doesn't take down the whole of the LGB community with it.

Those examples you give - grimmer than hell and have no place in schools or nurseries.

AlisonDonut · 17/02/2023 21:45

suggestionsplease1 · 17/02/2023 21:42

Honest to goodness, we'd be here all night, well...year, going into it and you still wouldn't have any consideration for the points that I would make. So I really don't see the point.

But if you can't acknowledge that the scientific community, in general (not exclusively, I agree, there are a minority still hanging on to a binary interpretation) are engaged in a broader understanding of sex over a reductive binary model then I think you've got your head in the sand and you're deliberately avoiding / refusing to acknowledge the discourse in this area.

Of course you don't see the point because the claims you are making are all pointless.

But if you could just furnish us with the name of the third gamete and its role in reproduction we can all get an early night.

suggestionsplease1 · 17/02/2023 21:46

Rainbowshit · 17/02/2023 21:43

No I don't acknowledge that at all. Because it's not true.

Show quote history

Yes I know that's what you think, it doesn't surprise me in the slightest to hear you say that 🤷‍♂️

People become wedded to their views, and further evidence that challenges it is simply accommodated and caveated into their existing understanding.

It is too threatening to the self and cherished views to entertain otherwise.

Helleofabore · 17/02/2023 21:47

suggestionsplease1 · 17/02/2023 21:42

Honest to goodness, we'd be here all night, well...year, going into it and you still wouldn't have any consideration for the points that I would make. So I really don't see the point.

But if you can't acknowledge that the scientific community, in general (not exclusively, I agree, there are a minority still hanging on to a binary interpretation) are engaged in a broader understanding of sex over a reductive binary model then I think you've got your head in the sand and you're deliberately avoiding / refusing to acknowledge the discourse in this area.

Yep. That is the next step.

The exasperation.

There are no other sexes. There are no other ‘broader understanding’.

You wish to convince people there is, but won’t post the evidence. Because there is nothing that proves sex is not binary. There is plenty to show that there are a wide range of body types in each sex category.

FrancescaContini · 17/02/2023 21:47

@suggestionsplease1 ”Reductive binary model” 🥱

gawditswindy · 17/02/2023 21:47

MourningTea · 17/02/2023 13:55

Why does there need to be a rainbow day in schools.
The only appropriate place to discuss sex is sex ed.
It's not exactly inclusive if kids attending is mandatory and it's being rammed down their throats..kinda like brainwashing.

Do you also feel that we should cancel Black history month?

AlisonDonut · 17/02/2023 21:47

I don't feel threatened. I feel I'm about to get whipped by the name of the third gamete ( let's call it Sam for now) and its role in reproduction.

Come on, educate me.

suggestionsplease1 · 17/02/2023 21:48

Helleofabore · 17/02/2023 21:47

Yep. That is the next step.

The exasperation.

There are no other sexes. There are no other ‘broader understanding’.

You wish to convince people there is, but won’t post the evidence. Because there is nothing that proves sex is not binary. There is plenty to show that there are a wide range of body types in each sex category.

Show quote history

The evidence is out there for the taking.

But Covid deniers will never believe Covid exists..etc etc

Helleofabore · 17/02/2023 21:49

Loving the emotionally manipulative twists… yes that is common too.

What is not common, the proven science to back the ideological thinking.

Original poster
Rainbowshit · 17/02/2023 21:50

😂😂 Nobody is threatened at all. You're making the wild assertions. You need to provide the proof.

OP posts:
landOFconfusion · 17/02/2023 21:50

Waitwhat23 · 17/02/2023 21:13

Oh, and the author of the article published in Nature (and again on the Scientific American website) which is often offered as 'proof' had this to say about the article.

Bit later than 1960...

Do you understand what the words binary and continuum actually mean?

A continuum can never be binary by simple definition.

A binary variable can literally hold only one of two disjoint values whereas a continuum is an uncountable set.

AlisonDonut · 17/02/2023 21:50

suggestionsplease1 · 17/02/2023 21:48

The evidence is out there for the taking.

But Covid deniers will never believe Covid exists..etc etc

Show quote history

You seem to be having trouble finding it. Weird.