Gender theory is exclusively based on what some supposed those with a certain genitalia were prone or actually engaged in. Females are supposed to be weak and submissive and males strong and dominant which is supposed to identified their genders. It is this theory that is ruining the lives of thousands who are not secure in who they are supposed to be; so we have a whole industry producing hormones and surgeons performing surgery on perfectly healthy bodies.

The campaign for SSM was pushed by the LGBTQQ people confused and not sure of their gender roles defined by some pseudo psychologists. Supposed gender roles is a construct and genitalia is a biological reality. The fact is true marriage is not based on gender roles but on genitalia, something that transitioning people want to change. SSM voted on by YES is two persons with male genitalia or two persons with vaginas it also incorporates all in the LGBTQQS, it is defined as two persons who love each other. A nonsense definition! It does not define the original meaning of marriage being an exclusive sexual relationship violated by adultery; by a woman adulterating her body by sperm from one outside her relationship.

I have been on Jury duty of a couple determining if a child born was produced by rape as she claimed, or consent while the husband was away for three months during the time of conception. The marriage was violated by a consenting sexual act and not because they did not love each other.

Josephus,

Gender theory developed as a framework with which to view the roles of the two main biological sexes, through the lens of masculinity and femininity.

<<Gender theory is exclusively based on what some supposed those with a certain genitalia were prone or actually engaged in. Females are supposed to be weak and submissive and males strong and dominant ...>>

No, gender theory does not suppose anything. It, instead, analyses how various cultures collectively think about the roles of men and women and what masculinity and femininity mean to those cultures. Gender theory also analyses how and why these views and roles have changed over time.

http://www.encyclopedia.com/international/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/gender-theory

You are making it up as you go, to maintain the rage. Apparently, you need to believe that gender is the product of a sinister plot by Marxists to bring down society.

Or some such nonsense.

<<It is this theory that is ruining the lives of thousands who are not secure in who they are supposed to be ...>>

How arrogant of you to presume to know who transsexuals should be, and how to determine that.

Gender theory is not ruining lives. It does not dictate to others who they should be. If anything, it should liberate them by helping them to feel less like freaks for not conforming to their culture’s stereotypes. Going by the studies it’s spawned, at least.

Again, you are making this up as you go.

<<The fact is true marriage is not based on gender roles but on genitalia …>>

No, marriage is based on whatever a society wants to base it on. There is no objective standard to which it must conform.

But, look, how about you just go back to believing that children are being taught my “Marxists” *snigger* that they can change their biological sex by believing they are something different to what they were born. Some of us just need an evil to fight, I suppose. Or perhaps your religious beliefs compel you to believe that the world is going to pot because that’s what the Bible predicts should happen?

"No, marriage is based on whatever a society wants to base it on. There is no objective standard to which it must conform."

As in India, AJ, where it is firmly based on family economics.
Caste, religion, and a favourable horoscope can come into it but it's usually the money value that settles things.

I have, among my many friends in India, a couple who joyously discovered that they were in love, some months after they were married.

Dear AJ,

The January -
2018 issue of The Australian Women's Weekly on relationships,
entitled "For The Love of A Woman". We're told that it can
take decades for a woman to determine who she really is
and what truly makes her happy. And when she does - even after
marriage and children - that discovery is sometimes found in
the arms of another woman.

Apparently there is a growing number of women partnering
with other women in middle-age. In the past, such unions may
have been conducted in secrecy but with the passing of
ground-breaking same-sex marriage legislation in late December,
there is a new sense of social acceptance. In turn, this may
give some women the confidence to embrace their feelings in a
way that was not open to them previously.

The facts are that women, according to recent psychological
research in the US, are more open to gender fluidity,
especially as they become older. In short, there is now
evidence that supports a growing trend to late in life change
around sexual preference for women, many of whom have had
children, marriages, and in fact lived whole other lives.

Attitudes are definitely changing. "Data from the Australian
Longitudinal Study of Women's Health reveals striking evidence
of social change in this regard," says Dr Paco Perales, from
the Institute for Social Science Research at The University of
Queensland.

Dr Lisa Diamond, from the University of Utah, recently released
a study saying, "it's a complicated dynamic between hormonal
changes, physical experiences, and, certainly sexual desires.
We don't know if sexual fluidity is more likely at certain
life stages than others. But one of the things we have
observed is that individuals, especially women, go through
changes that give them a little more freedom around middle-age."

Although there has not been a lot of
research in Australia, where older and lesbian
women are largely invisible, Dr Catherine
Barrett, director of Celebrate Ageing, says she and her
colleagues "have noticed a trend in women coming out late."

There are increasing stories of women leaving heterosexual
relationships to be with a woman.

OK Philips, I it is not for you to dictate what one culture or another does or doesn't do. I choose to go with the accepted and traditional European, Christian standards as laid down through history.

It also happens to be the basis of the majority Australians culture and tradition.

If there is to be a culture change it has to be based on a much greater premise than a few queers 'feeling uncomfortable' about how they were created.

You and your mates have decided to use words like, culture, gender and tradition to enforce your selfish SSM agenda.

These words have been around for ions, but never have they been pushed so hard as they have lately by the SSM clan.

If your case had any cred we would have been debating these issues decades ago and the words and your adaption to your cause would have been argued down back then.

As for transsexuals, how arrogant of YOU to presume also to know anything about them and question Josephus on his comment/theory.

So now you are also an expert and a spokesman for the queers and the gender debate.

Yes there has always been an objective standard on marriage and queers do not conform to that standard so they set about to find holes in the standards to try to justify their sick case.

How about you go back and tell your mates to stop this divisive and destructive agenda.

And if you want proof of that statement I will quite happily and in fact eagerly direct you to the USA Massachusetts social disaster that is occurring as we speak.

If you still believe this SSM crap to be a good thing for 'everyone' after reading about Massachusetts, then you are, at the very least, lacking a social and moral conscience and are not in sync with ALL Australians and their family values.

Foxy, just a thought but there seems to be a case for some mental analysis for these women. Let's not forget that now, it seems, we are taking mental and social advise from none other than 'Women's Weekly'.

How many more ridiculous examples are we going to have to endure before everyone accepts that when it comes to womens emotions, reason and logic are lost somewhere between periods and menopause.

We must not keep facilitating these 'freaks', it only confuses the younger generation and is a threat to their very own mental health and stability.

All this SSM rubbish was not around before these sick queers started their, totally unjustified, equality push.

I will make a prediction of my own. In the future we will see all these different groups. There will be all kinds of humans with all kinds of identities. There will be male, female, neuters and I can't even dream up the rest.

Marriage will be a thing of the past. Everyone will have their own life. Children will become almost extinct because it is inconvenient for these precious little Nancys to have children because 'they too have a life'.

So the smart arse European species will die off to critical levels. Not the Asian or Middle Easterners. They stuck to a mature doctrine and although their level of procreation is far too excessive for society and world resources to sustain, ignorance and religion will push them to become a dominant force in the world.

Men and women will live separately and come together socially or when the female wants sex. Not the male, he will adapt to raping because he will be denied the usual sexual frequency because the woman is now in control of 'her body and space' and part of this paradigm is the power to control men which is what they have always sought.


By attacking the women and physically taking them by force as they did thousands of years ago and in doing so remove any peripheral definitions of homo-sapien returning it to it's original form as originally created and developed from.