Ah Col, pixies you say. When you have dealt with small children already showing signs of being misfits with an overdeveloped sense of importance then maybe you would find a reply.

How does one tell a four year old to conform to their gender? When you see how other adults treat them you may even be inclined to stand by this:

“I consistently defend the universal right of people to be different…”

Hey Holle, I know – often my husband has the same problem, and as I have been heard to mutter often in my life “bloody Maori’s”.

"Yes, I regard these “Third Gender” misfits as people who have an overdeveloped sense of self importance, which they feel entitles them to ignore their responsibility to conform to their the gender of their birth."

Col,

The self understanding that I have heard expressed has made me believe that they are potentially more fluid than a homosexual. Indeed if social scientists ever become less liberal and open to investigating that possibility the g, b & l component of the GBLT might discover that the GBLT term is a political liability and regret it. (People might jump to the conclusion that the rest in the group are just as potentially fluid.) I have never encountered a transgender person who hasn't already had the chop and I have never been comfortable discussing my guess with people who have already had the chop so it is hard to explore further. After keeping that guess to myself, the study I referred to earlier was fascinating as it was consistent with my guess. Therefore I do not buy into the 'born into the wrong body' thing as a biological phenomena which is of course the relevant liberal anthem. I consider transgender to be a state of mind just as you seem to when you use the unflattering term "misfit".

Nevertheless, these people genuinely believe that they are the opposite gender. The projected "overdeveloped sense of self importance" may be just an artifact of the caricature image they have of the opposite sex which they shelter behind. Have you considered the possibility that the overdeveloped sense of importance might be a mask behind which they shield from their own inner struggle commencing in childhood and the unkind words which are used by some people to describe them rather than an ego trip? - perhaps an in the face bluff like reverse snobbery but more deep and painful. As someone anecdotally observed earlier many of them have had horrible things happen in their childhood. With respect I think you are oversimplifying and being unfair to the people concerned.

Gender identification is not just "all in the mind", as Col states so viciously and MJPB suggests far more compassionately. The most obvious cases of gender ambiguity are those little babies born with dual or indeterminate genitalia, while other people may have clear physical gender distinction, others may not.

Col, people no more choose to be gay or transgender than you chose to be heterosexual - your attitudes towards people who are different or hold different opinion from you is reprehensible - and you actually claim to be a libertarian. Your claims for individual freedom only applies to yourself - to everyone else who dares to differ, you are markedly authoritarian.

One of the most sincere and openly honest people on OLO, is Pied Piper and even she is not spared your venom.

I suggest you read the following articles and do something you have not done in many a year - learn something.

http://www.gendercentre.org.au/ambiguous_genitalia.htm

"When gender is unclear at birth.

We're born, someone looks at our genitals, and instantly we're categorised. "It's a boy!" "It's a girl!" And from that one announcement, many things are determined. Whether we're issued a blue or pink blanket. Our name. To some extent, what toys and games we'll likely be given. Our future roles in reproduction.

But some babies are born with ambiguous genitals – it's not clear from just looking what their gender really is. And how gender is determined in such babies tells a lot about what actually makes someone male or female.

......"Whatever the cause, what's important to understand is that ambiguous genitals are not an oddity of nature. These are simply parts of the body that are only part-way developed," Dr. Zimmerman explains. "It may be unclear at birth what was intended – a penis or clitoris. At that point, we have to look at several factors to determine gender."

Fractelle “Col, people no more choose to be gay or transgender than you chose to be heterosexual - your attitudes towards people who are different or hold different opinion from you is reprehensible - and you actually claim to be a libertarian.”

Ah fractelle, she who never misses an opportunity to hurl an ill conceived and intellectually unsound judgment at others.

To third gender, me and my liberation values

Me and my libertarian values I have no problem with peoples abnormalities, but in the context of this debate, I see no reason to pander to misfit demands of some supposed abnormal “third gender”..

If you had the wit to actually comprehend what I write, fractelle (which is probably pushing intellectual limits beyond the possible) you would realize that whilst liberation values accept diversity and abnormality, libertarianism does not seek to provide any “special dispensation” for them.

Thus, we have two primary genders, male and female and admittedly some aberrations like hermaphrodites

but the number of hermaphrodites is so insignificant that they don’t qualify for “special toilet block or other treatment”, likewise this stupid myth of some mystical “third gender”.

Your comments, to my reading and learning habits are naturally ignored, what possible use could the likes of me have for the bleatings of the patently ignorant.

Excellent posts Jewlley and Fractelle ;^)

Col - what a nasty hypocrite you are.

I do think that some homosexuals are born and some choose to have same sex partners, and that's ok. I could never come at sex with another female myself. However, that's why I think that sexuality exists on a continuum.

Some reasons to support other's choices:

1. The many sad cases of men marrying to try and live as (current, but not historical) social pressure dictates, resulting in unhappy people, gay affairs on the side and late life marriage dissolution as those people finally strike out to live the way the should have from the start, leaving confused and broken hearted women and children bhind.

2. Every manner of therapy and even exorcism has been tried to change people's sexual orientation, to no avail.

3. Homosexuality can't be bred out. In every society known there has been a proportion of homosexual people - estimated at from 2 to 10 % of population. Homosexuality also exists amongst animal populations.

4. Considering point 3., I have a theory developing for those who are fond of biological determinism. Homosexuality must serve a purpose or evolution would have left it behind. Imagine the benefit of having some of the male population who had no interest in having sex with females. Those males could have stayed as protectors and helpers (considering their strength and speed) to group females and children, while other males were off hunting ad warring.

Dear Col,

A correction - It wasn't Richard Nixon.
It was Lyndon Baines Johnson.

The Vietnam war came to an end largely as a result
of the antiwar movement, a social movement that
consisted disproportinately of young people, including
many college students. When the antiwar movement first
challenged the war, it received little support
from politicians or the press, and its goals seemed
almost hopeless. But the tide of public opinion gradually
began to shift. In the 1968 primaries, an anti-war
candidate backed by student volunteers did unexpectedly
well and President Johnson decided not to run for
re-election (not Richard Nixon as you thought).

From that point on, political debate on the war focused not
on how to stay in it, but how to get out of it.

Through collective action, ordinary people with few
resources other than their own determination had changed
a national consensus for war to a national consensus
for peace.

A fundamental insight of sociology is that once people no
longer take their world for granted, but instead
understand the social authorship of their lives and
futures, they can become an irresistible force in history.