"... Pascoe's claims to Aboriginality have been publicly refuted by multiple investigators, including Andrew Bolt ..."

I laughed and cried so much it hurts. I can't possibly take this guy seriously and finish reading.

I accept that there are only two genders.
However, in practical day to day living there can be more variations.
The simple way I see it helps me understand those variations.
I see people as having three main characteristics.
Physical shape, sexuality, emotional outlook or drive.
Male shape, male sexuality, male emotional state, we have a standard male.
Female shape, female sexuality, female emotional state, we have a standard female.
Sometimes, a male body is born with female sexuality, and less than ideal emotional drive.
Similarly, a female body can have male sexuality and less than ideal female drive.
That is where the variations come in.
Female sexuality means being attracted to a male SHAPED person.
Male sexuality means being attracted to a female SHAPED person.
So a male shaped person with female sexuality will be attracted to other male shapes.
The only one who would respond to 'him' would be another male shape with female sexuality.
Similarly for female shaped persons with male sexuality.
It appears there can be various levels of sexuality and emotional state in all these people.
So many 'mixtures' result.
I hope this is not too difficult to follow.
Others can comment on the remaining assertions made by Mr O'Reilly.

On Pascoe, I think that Aries54 is one of those who want to believe Pascoe's narrative irrespective of the evidence. Genealogical evidence of non-Aboriginal origin is emphatic in cases where all ancestors can be traced to arrivals from overseas. Whatever Aries54 thinks of me or Andrew Bolt, the balance of academic assessments no longer support Pascoes thesis either.

Ipso Fatso is closer to my view than he concedes. We both agree that there are only two biological sexes/genders, which cannot be altered after conception/birth. I also agree that there can be any number of sexual orientations that a person can self identify as having. People can identify with any sexuality they like, as long as they don't interfere with others.

The point is that sexual identity is a different concept to biological sex/gender. A transsexual male person (transitioned to "female") can legitimately state that they identify as a female. This reality cannot alter the fact that biologically they remain a male

The remedy to correcting the response to the “real problem” of which becomes a question in and of itself, which is usurped by the need to bury a mistaken belief that all complaints are of a genuine nature, and need an urgent and universal solution based on correcting mistaken beliefs and negative outcomes by unproficient experts towards the arguable identification of a victim, as presented in that argument, towards a remedy which is conclusively flawed, and guaranteed to inflict broader pain than the original claimed injustice, is a crime that the broader community, bullied by one sided law-fare, submitting to the imagined facts of a fantasy, as unequivocal evidence to be acted upon, shall in future of this point of judicial change, submit noiselessly as new and real victims of official State crimes of a new morality order, dictated into agonised compliance, obediently against its better and more educated collective judgement, or be publicly vilified for similar free thought and personal moral judgements, as perceived by the original claimants.

Aries wrote: "I can't possibly take this guy seriously and finish reading."

Well since you didn't finish the article let me fill you in. The underlining theme was that we get lied to by people relying on us not seeking the truth and who fall for the yarns spun to misled them.

Like those who fell for the Pascoe malarkey and who, despite the overwhelming evidence that he (Pascoe) is a fake aboriginal who stole funding meant to help real first peoples, continue to believe the fables about him because they suit the narrative.

So fall about laughing if you wish, but just note that the joke is on you.

Oh Mhaze, it went over your head like a hear net didn't it, so let me spell it out for you. You say "... us not seeking the truth and who fall for the yarns spun to misled them." And you believe Andrew Bolt can clarify this (or any other issue)? No sunshine, the joke's on you.