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

[Rainbowshit]

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

I am asking you why your definition and logic does not encompass all human beings, see my reply to @Igneococcus

Still no info on the mysterious third gamete? OK then.

If all humans on the planet were created with sperm and egg, how does that make any of them not human? They are literally human beings created by sperm and egg. I mentioned humans beings at the 21:19 post earlier. Are you talking about something else?

Unless they want to exclude some human beings?

Reasons for infertility are still specific to one or the other sex, I very much doubt anyone of the posters here would exclude someone from being human or being a human of a certain sex because of infertility.

Ok ladies and germs, we all know how this is going to go... you will spend ages going over the links that I have posted to rubbish them, yada yada , you will congratulate yourselves and do some high fives long into the night....I will go to bed and this will be evidence of my abject humiliation and my refusal to engage, address and counter your supreme points of logic...

blah blah blah. so it goes. Night night!

LGBTQ+ is not a community. Stop this jargon.

LGB is an orientation based on ‘sex’ . It is based in biology. It is homophobia when a potentially gay person is given they idea they are transgender and led to
wreck their healthy body.

T doesn’t believe in the sex of the body and wants it destroyed.

Q wants boundaries removed which we as humans build on purpose to form society.

TQ are appropriating and piggybacking.

Well it's not looking good so far is it? Most from my brief reading so far deal with gender rather than sex and do not prove your assertion that sex is not binary.

I will go through them in more detail tomorrow

'Sex classes' do encompass all human beings. What makes you think they don't?

What's with the obsession of creating an infinite number of new categories and sub categories of human?

The people on this thread...they're not for real, are they?

Youre going to have to be slightly more descriptive im afraid

ive no idea which people you are referring to

Well mainly suggestions please. I mean...he or she is a bored teen, right?

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8955456/

We have seen this one. It is interesting. But it proves nothing already known.

It was already known that hormones (even artificial hormones) and activities will create ‘brain’ pathways that are similar in male and female. This one excluded males undergoing hormonal treatment.

However. If this were robust and conclusive, don’t you think they would be using this to test for trans gender identity?

They don’t. It is still a theory and this proves nothing despite you wishing that it did. Otherwise the testing would be done and would be conclusive.

We asked for evidence not theories. This one is a theory.

I'm working from the the bottom up of those links and the last one even says that transgender people report discomfort with their birth sex and have a strong identification with the OPPOSITE sex.

Two sexes. Binary.

Thanks cherry

im afraid its all real 😩

No alison

those links are not unmitigated dross that don’t say what suggestions says they say…

they are irrefutable evidence of lots of different sexes…fact

(disclaimer….i havent read them cos im fed up of following links that dont say what ive been told they say)

To be fair, they did go to the trouble of posting links before flounce got. So, kudos for that. And, they didn't come right out and call us bigots, although I suppose the implication was there if you were looking for it.

Very true icake

What I want to know is did suggestions go through these before posting.

Is this a dump from google?

Seriously. If you think suggestions that plopping down links with no commentary is some kind of ‘gotcha’ , it really shows just shows your own low bar for evidence.

And it is fine that you go down the route of ‘you will all just pull them apart.’

Yes. Because conclusive research stands up despite people pulling it apart.

Just like Harper’s review of the same studies reached the same conclusions as Hilton and Lundberg.

That is how it works.

Sorry, *flouncing off. Can't even blame autocorrupt for that one.

@RufustheFloralmissingreindeer Well it's weird. I can accept that a lot of the bollocks that the telegraph writes about trans issues is just Tory talking points to distract from the rest of the disaster of the last 6 years, and a lot of that is unhelpful and can be pretty biased and simply conservative. But there are just so many people who seem to believe things that are not biological truth, it's a bit depressing. It's like we're slowly travelling back to the middle ages and shortly going to start burning witches.

Nah icake, I had this with a different posted not long ago, plopped down 6 links and flounced and never came back to review the comments after the links were discussed.

This is a predictable tactic

And I really think that Suggestions did a hasty search and plopped something down.

I feel a Princess Bride reference coming on @Helleofabore, the bit where Fezzig is fighting the man in black. I just don't want them to be discouraged

Just post something that says what you’re claiming. Which is that there are more than two sex, and that most scientists think this.

It’s really simple.

Why can’t you do it?

I've tried to read a number of the links which were posted as proof of sex not being a binary to find only abstracts, with no access to the full research unless through institution or subscription access. I no longer have Shibboleth access and I'm not going to take out a number of subscriptions just to read single links so perhaps suggestionsplease could link to the full research if this is the evidence they are using to back up their statements?

The links on that list I have been able to read are mostly around the subject of brain scans to identify whether transgender people have a similar brain structure to the gender they identify as. There's a number of methodological issues in the research and unanswered questions so I'm going to take current findings with a pinch of salt until the emergence of any further research

So far there has been nothing conclusive at all. It really is theory. Including a theoretical essay.

This one:

journals.publishing.umich.edu/ptpbio/article/id/2096/

I doubt that Suggestions has read this, but I hold out hope they have. And will come and explain to us what they found conclusive about sex contextualisation.

i look forward to it.

Because the way this plays out, is that if Suggestions doesn’t write analysis on these links, they then cannot complain when others do. They cannot say ‘oh you were always going to disagree’. That is not the way scientific discussion works. If you plop down any study, you have to discuss why you feel it supports what you claimed.

Otherwise, it is simply seen as an empty plop .