Get it?

Why do so many people not get it - including the Secretary of the Health Department, Professor Brendan Murphy who, when asked by Senator Alex Antic to define "woman" spluttered that it was a "very contested space". Rather than upsetting adult male human beings claiming to be women, this highly paid public servant made a fool of himself.

Even a female judicial nominee of President Biden's cannot describe herself because she is 'not a biologist'.

Females outnumber woman thousandfold just like males outnumber men. Or, just like educated people outnumber intelligent & competent people.
Or, just like selfish & stupid people outnumber the good ones !

If we look at the origin and historical development
of words and their meanings the word "woman" in the
English language is usually linked with that of a
man.

For example - male - fe-male.
man - woman.

"mankind" is still associated as a he.

And even in the Bible - Eve was taken out of a man's side.

If we break down the word - WOMAN - it would be great
if it stood for -

WOMAN - Wonderful, Outstanding, Marvellous, Adorable, and Nice!

"mankind" is still associated as a he.
Foxy,
Doesn't the term kind offset this frivolous argument ?

Dear Ttbn,

Refusing to answer a question does not amount to not knowing the answer.
What happened to our right for silence?
It is indeed best to remain quiet when speaking is likely to hurt others.
Better to be seen as a fool than actually being one.

---

Dear Foxy,

Interesting: In Sanskrit, the word for "human" is NARA and a "monkey" is VANARA, in effect asking in confusion: "Is this a human?"

We are all conceived as female.
At about six weeks?, approximately half of the foetuses switch to being male.
This 'switching' is not always as complete and straightforward as we might expect.
There is partial switching, which results in humans with mixed characteristics.
Nether truly male nor truly female.
Hence the multitude of 'in between' genders we see in the community.
There is nothing wrong with this.
It is natural.
Indeed, it is probably nature's way of limiting population growth.
These 'different' genders are less likely to procreate?

But the 'unfettered' female still predominates.
And thankfully so.
She will almost certainly procreate.
She will be the hub of her family.
Someone to be admired and enabled?
With the ability to contribute in so many ways.
She will be able to be both a home maker, and work outside the family if she chooses to do so.
Her freedom to develop her personal agenda must be steadfastly recognised and protected.
A woman is physically desirable, eminently reliable, truly adorable, and altogether the best thing to happen to men. ^_^
I feel sorry for those who cannot see the value and wonder of a woman.
They are missing out on something so valuable!
Its absence will make theirs a lessened existence.

IF,

I am not talking about foetuses, but fully grown adults supposedly possessing a brain and common-sense, and able to tell male genitalia from female genitalia. About 1.7% of people are born with intersex traits (hermaphrodites), but that is an entirely different subject.

Yuyutsu,

I like the Sanskrit word - "Nemaste".
"I bow to the divine in you."

"Refusing to answer a question does not amount to not knowing the answer.
What happened to our right for silence?" Yuyutsu.

That is fine for the individual Yuyutsu, but not for one who wishes to sit in judgment of others. Their answer definitely offers an incite to how well or otherwise they are likely to discharge that duty. If they squib an answer they most definitely do not have the right to ever judge others.

Hassy,

I'm sure in your good old days you would have simply applied the thumb screws to Murphy and extracted an answer.

Ipso Fatso said- "We are all conceived as female. At about six weeks?, approximately half of the foetuses switch to being male. This 'switching' is not always as complete and straightforward as we might expect. There is partial switching, which results in humans with mixed characteristics. Nether truly male nor truly female."

Answer-

Perhaps there might be too much consumption of estrogen mimicking compounds such as soy especially in baby formula and in expectant mothers.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4270274/
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/soybean-fertility-hormone-isoflavones-genistein/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tabula_rasa#Psychology_and_neurobiology

Steven Pinker has some views on this- not sure if I agree with all of them.

Anyway we know too little to be messing around with nature here. It's interesting that many woke lefties believe in going back to nature on one hand but they tend to believe in gender reassignment on the other- maybe their views are based on projection. Even doctors and researchers have been know to make this error. Many lefties don't seem to have a good grounding in science.

The term woman is derived from the term "womb man" man being term of human species. Hence anyone with a womb is a woman, with the ability to give birth and nurture. This is evident in every mammel on the planet.

I have no trouble at all telling the difference between a man and a woman. No science of word derivations required.

When I grew up there were sufficient genders in the English language.

I.e. he, she and it.

A few more thoughts....
Long long ago, woman were, of necessity, the home makers.
There was really very little opportunity to be otherwise.
Women are the ones physically designed to produce and nurture children.
With a little help from men I should add.
Over millions of years woman have evolved to do this very well.
But times change.
Modern innovations have given woman the freedom to pursue many additional interests and activities.
And these she does very well.
Her thinking processes are far ranging and hence versatile.
A man's role has also changed.
His activities can be far more varied too.
But there is one inescapable fact.
Men and women need each other to procreate and ensure continuance of their kind.
So, though we might wrangle and wright, push and shove, argue and disagree, at the end of the day we must also pursue a workable and friendly relationship.
We must remain mutually inclusive.

In the Woke community a man with a penis can be a person of female gender and compete in woman's sports. Never in history has woman been challenged in sport as inferior as testerone trans who identify as women and the Woke community justifies this as legal. This is the reason for the question - the Woke community supported by the LGBTAAQRS have confused the reality of biological science. It was introduced when we voted for same sex marriage which introduced any gender the woke community believed must be socially accepted. Today there is no such thing as a woman in the minds of some - they are the breeders, and that is not who I am.

IpsoFatso, I think you need a refresher on biology. Sex is determined at conception. It's a matter of chromosomes - males have XY 23rd pair of chromosome pairs, and girls xx. This is determined by the male sperm when it encounters the ova. There are rare occasions when children have both xx and xy chromosomes, or where they do not develop the genitals that normally go with their chromosome pairs. To suggest we are neither male nor female for the first 6 weeks is just wrong.

Peter O'Brien has written an article, "The Most Absurd Trans-gression Yet". It is headed by two photographs of the article's subject showing how NBC has airbrushed HIM in an attempt to make him look more feminine.

The HIM is an American calling himself Lia Thomas. No real first name mentioned: perhaps it was John:).

Mister Thomas, a U.S. swimmer, claims to be a woman, but appears to retain his male genitalia, and still dates women - making him a lesbian?

Thomas couldn't make the grade as a male swimmer, so he is now swimming against real women.

Absurd indeed. But who is to blame: Thomas or the rule- makers and officials who allow him to get away with this nonsense.

Quoting GrahamY...
To suggest we are neither male nor female for the first 6 weeks is just wrong.

I said....We are all conceived as female.
At about six weeks?, approximately half of the foetuses switch to being male.

So for the first six weeks we are female.
I am not quite sure if it was six weeks or six days, so I put a question mark.
But I have read that this the way it happens on several occasions over the past years.
If what I read was wrong or misleading, so be it.
I will find the correct sequence, and re-educate myself. ^_^
Thank you for drawing it to my attention.

Graham Y- I remember one doctor promoted the notion that children were a blank slate till 5 years old- I'm satisfied that both these doctors and Ipso Fatso have toned down their ideas- but there are still some blank slatists around. Good point on the XX, XY. Kudos.

Thanks Ipso Fatso for acknowledging that Males and Females should work together- sadly this can't really happen in the current legal environment.

This 'Lia' (real name unknown) Thomas person isn't much good good against real women swimmers either, tying for 5th. place in a U.S. 200 metre competition recently.

Just to lighten things up:

Why do men have nipples?

So they can have the breast of both worlds.

These are my (new) conjectures....

We need to remember we are two things.
An intelligence (brain/mind) and a support system to go with it. (body)

The brain runs a programme like a computer does, and can make us either male or female in outlook?
However, the developing foetus will be female, unless otherwise instructed?
I am sure it starts as female because of practicalities surrounding growth.
If you want to know exactly why, you must write and ask mother nature.

All 'instructions' for development of the foetus exist in coded form.
Any minor error in code can introduce variations to a desired outcome.
The brain is set to male or female at conception?
If the brain is to be male, the developing foetus will get a 'shot' of testosterone at about six weeks?
This will signal the necessary changes to body 'architecture'.

I see the nipples remain, so that men can have the breast of both worlds.
Thank you Foxy for that pearl of wisdom.

Generally speaking, people's bodies and minds are matched.
But errors in code can produce variations.
Errors can also affect the healthy development and subsequent physical ability of the person.
People with variations are, nonetheless, still real people.
We should never treat them badly because they suffer an uncalled for difference.

So 'the outlook' of the brain is set at conception?
The (developing) body is female for about six weeks, then a change can occur?
Due to coding errors, this does not always happen when it should.
So the body is not always a match for the brain?
This leads to a different standard for sexual activity.

Now I need to read up on stuff, to find out if my conjectures are correct.

Thomas has to get a first for being a loser: he couldn't win against men, and can only get fifth place as quite a powerful looking bloke competing against the ladies.

Wouldn't it be good if people could simply go back
in time - when they lived in communities where
love and kindness mattered. Where people practice
understanding and not judgment - where live and let
live is the ethos and not dogma. Where the focus
is not on one's gender, or sexual orientation, or one's
politics or religion. Does anyone remember times like those?

Me neither.

Wishful thinking.

Ipso Fatso, Stop! reading pseudo-science produced by Woke Universities who gain financial grants to study nonsense. There are only two genders set at conception and evident in all mammels. There are men trying to be women and women trying to be men and those that deny their one or the other, but they can either have a penis or a womb which for biological science identifies their gender. We are identifying what constitutes a woman and they do not have a penis.

Well put, Josephus. There are only two sexes, and gender relates to language, as someone reminded us recently. Google has a lot to answer for - leading gullible people up the garden path. I see awful consequences ahead if this unnatural nonsense is not stopped. The biggest offenders are not the poor fools who think that they are something that they are not - or the deliberate shysters like Thomas - but the so-called authorities who are too weak to put a stop to it. Any male claiming to be a female, or female claiming to be male, should be told firmly 'NO, YOU ARE NOT'.

I am very much afraid you are Wrong. Wrong with a capital W.
But I enjoy reading what you write anyway.
This response to you is a brief comment only.
Not part of a continuing debate.

"Only the true Messiah denies their sexuality."

"I am NOT a woman, I am a MAN."

"HE is the Messiah!"

"I an NOT the Messiah, I am a WOMAN."

"SHE is the Messiah!"

This says it all:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFBOQzSk14c

Good one SM, I'll pay that, one of funniest scenes from the funniest movie ever. I've only seen it about 10 times and it's still funny.

A few further thoughts.

Shall we be logical?
Then consider this.

A red blooded male enjoys the company of woman, but early in life decides to forego this pleasure.
He decides, instead, to seek the company of men.
He will seek sexual intimacy with some of them.
And he does this because he wants to do something different with his life?
Or to seek attention?
Or perhaps notoriety?
He lives his new life fully, day after day, year after year.
He is totally absorbed in it.

Those who know him say they are indescribably disgusted.
The call him names.
They even beat him.
Or perhaps shun him.
And he endures all of this because, on a whim, he decided to do something different with his life?
And you want me to believe all this really happens?
That someone is willing to live a fake life on a whim?
I don't!

I believe a man like that would be genuine in his thoughts and feelings.
He would not be trying to live a false life.
And when someone is harshly antagonistic towards him, I begin to question their motivation.
Why are they so angry?
Why are they so uncomfortable?
I start to wonder if there is not a little bit of "methinks thou protesteth too much' lurking somewhere in the background?

I think those who are so ready to condemn another human being really need to start questioning themselves?
For it is the truth of the matter which is significant.
And we can only find that by being logical.
NOT by running on hyped-up and erratic emotion.

We can reverse the 'gender' in this scenario, and apply most of these ideas equally to women who seek women.

The gender of a person is formed at the time of conception and is determined by the gamete chromosomes in the male sperm, as wether the gamete chromosome is XY or XX. And whether the particular gamate survives in an acidic or alcaline environment to combine with the ova. which gamete reaches the ova first. This happens at conception.

http://www.bing.com/search?q=Gametes&filters=ufn%3a%22Gametes%22+sid%3a%22e3a3a64d-b87e-3dbe-0f12-94249e508c7c%22&FORM=SNAPST

Gametes are an organism's reproductive cells. They are also referred to as sex cells. Female gametes are called ova or egg cells, and male gametes are called sperm. Gametes are haploid cells, and each cell carries only one copy of each chromosome.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamete

Humans and most mammals use the XY sex-determination system in which a normal ovum can carry only an X chromosome whereas a sperm may carry either an X or a Y, while a non-normal sperm cell can end up carrying either no sex-defining chromosomes, an XY pair, or an XX pair; thus the male sperm determines the sex of any resulting zygote. If the zygote has two X chromosomes it will develop into a female, if it has an X and a Y chromosome, it will develop into a male.

Ipso Fatso, We are not defining male pleasure, we are detrmininng what constitutes a woman.

Dear IF,

I watched "Insight" yesterday afternoon.
The program was on "forbidden love."
It made me see things from the viewpoint
of the what some people had experienced in
their lives. The traumas that they had to
live through because they did not fit into
the norm of what was considered "acceptable
behaviour."

There was a former nun ( a cousin of Cardinal
Pell) who spoke about her relationship with
another nun. It was very emotive and moving.
Then a man from Saudi Arabia who fell in love
with another man.

It's made a deep impression on me.

Foxy, these are emotional bondings, not gender identities. These fall into the same catagories as all sexual bondings.

"And even in the Bible - Eve was taken out of a man's side."

Jesus Indy, was it a caesarean delivery that went wrong. Would that be covered by Medicare?

I read an interesting article in The Atlantic.

It asked - "Should we allow for a broader range
of personal expression?" For example, - should
men be able to enjoy ballet, poetry, child rearing,
without being cast as effeminate and unmanly?
Just as women who pursue masculine activities -
are still women?

From what I can gather from some of the posts in
this discussion we seem to regard a man or a woman
simply as one who possesses male or female chromosomes
with the corresponding sex organs.

But what of transgender?

Can a biological man have a female brain (or soul) or
vice versa?

How do we reconcile these contradictions?

Is gender a mere social construct or is it biological?
And can it be changed?

Foxy,

I am a believer in live and letting live. I don't care if a man wants to live and be called a woman, however, the extremists of this trans movement want to insist that someone simply declaring that he is a woman that he is now female and can not only compete in women's sports events but have full access to facilities normally reserved only for women.

There has to be some reason applied to this fanaticism.

shadowminister,

I agree.

However, I believe that medical professionals
have a very strict assessment of sifting the
genuine from the phonies. There are strict protocols
involved.

This is my six penn'oth.... from a man's point of view....

A 'woman' is a human who is mentally and physically female?
A woman is incomparably desirable to men.
Nothing can replace the warmth, softness, understanding, reliability, and downright usefulness, of a woman.
She can inspire a man to do great things.
She can bring out the best in him.
She can be extremely complementary.

A woman can be one half of a male/female pair.
She is a vital and necessary part of such a pairing.
She differs physically from the man in having the ability to bear children.
She differs mentally in that she is programmed to respond sexually to a male shaped person.

There are humans who are born with a female body.
They have reproductive ability.
But mentally they are programmed to respond sexually to a female shaped person.
Do we consider them to be true women?
How are we supposed to think about them?
As a woman 'gone-wrong'?
Or as what?
It can be confusing sometimes.

Ipso Fatso, Bonding! it is bonding, not gender. A woman can bond to another woman - it does not change their gender - they remain women. Even as a man can bond to another man does not change their gender - they are still men. Social conditioning and parential bonding can influence bonding in childhood - the absent or abusive father or mother or the overprotective mother, or older siblings all contribute to the bonding of gender relationships of children.

Foxy,

Given that many sporting records are now held by transwomen that were athletic unknowns as males would indicate that the protocols are not working.

shadowminister,

Why would you think that the protocols are not working?
You are making your own judgement call here. They are
working because it means that these people have been
found to be genuine - not phonies.

I am repulsed by this transgenderism, but it has no affect on me or my life in any way whatsoever. The only people who can do anything against these weirdos intruding on their sporting activities are real women themselves. As men have been accepted into women's sport by 'authories', all they can do is refuse to participate in any sport where men are also competing. The usually loud feminists are silent, and the ordinary women, like all people, expect someone else to 'do something about it'. So, girls: put up or shut up and learn to knit.

There's quite a few men who knit.
They find it therapeutic.
Might be worth a try.

You’ve probably heard that, with your support, I’ve presented my Save Women’s Sport Bill to parliament – thank you!
And the good news is that Prime Minister Scott Morrison is supporting this action to champion women and girls, saying it’s “terrific”.
But Labor and The Greens are fighting to kill this bill.
And the mainstream media is misrepresenting it.

So, I’m asking for your swift support today to send a powerful message to as many Australians as possible.
You can stand up and protect the rights of women and girls by getting the word out so more Australians demand MPs and Senators back my Save Women’s Sport Bill.

This is your chance to push back on the radical activists pushing their gender-fluid ideology and silencing women.
Australians need to know why it’s so vital to support my Save Women’s Sport Bill to change the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 to protect women and girls in sport.

Your support today will help stop the threat of the Labor-Greens grabbing more power and dismantling women’s sex-based rights.
But you and I have only a small window of time to alert Australians to the truth.

Thank you for your support today!
Yours sincerely,


Senator Claire Chandler
Liberal Senator for Tasmania


I'll help get the word out to protect women and girls &#9658

Hi Foxy,

Some Old Farts can knit, and some are quite the wit, that makes them knit-wits.

"There's quite a few men who knit. They find it therapeutic."

Very true, they have just introduced knitting down at 'The Shady Pines Retirement Village' for Old Farts as therapy. Remember the village motto; "No CHICKS Allowed" in the interest of equality the lads have now added "And That Includes Tranny CHICKS As Well."

"I am repulsed by this transgenderism" they should bottle the stuff and label it 'Old Fart Repellent', its better than Baygon?

Jose'; "I'll help get the word out to protect women and girls &#9658" What was the &#9658 bit? Did it start with F and end with U.

Hi Paul,

I feel sorry for these haters. The world has so much
more for them to be mad at. They should just be patient.

Kudos Josephus.

Ipso Fatso- If the socialists hear you saying that gender fluidity is related to an "error" (or sickness) they'll hang you from the nearest tree. The Socialists are at least as bigoted as the Traditionalists.

I respect your attempt at existentialist objectivity but I feel you've been misled. People often don't think for themselves and need to be helped in finding what is good for them. Existentialism talks about living a genuine life but it also talks about subjectivism. There is the nature nurture question- it takes many forms- people need to fit in to their communities in a sense but they also need to follow their individual path- balance. It is the view of many that parents need to be the ones to teach values to their offspring. Nihilists weaponize ideology to destroy society- in the name of rebuilding- Dostoevsky, Arthur Schoepenhauer, Ayn Rand talked about this. There is much said about the radicals of history but little about those that guard the system to maintain stability- and life.

Existentialism teaches us that members of communities see the world through those eyes- but there is no objective view- the Nihilist or CRT view is just another view- but all communities and cultures need stability in order to survive- the individuals within the communities need to decide on what they believe is best for themselves- this relates to sovereignty.

Marxist lawyers trying to bring about equality of genders are damaging women and their role in society. It is those that believe real women are lesser than mam rather than complementary. It is a backlash against binary science.

Real women might be pleased to know that Scott Morrison has backed a campaign to ban transgender "women" (they are not women, of course) from competing in in women's sports. He 'could' push through legislation if elected. (SBS today)

Foxy,

These people are being found to be genuine by whom and against what standard?

The reason that women's sports are separate from men's sports is that men are typically faster and stronger. The result of allowing "trans" women that have developed as men are that a handful of "trans" women are cleaning the table of awards in women's sports.

What this means for real women is that no matter how hard they try they can never win and women's rights are taking a back seat.

Proud Boy Jose'

Name just one of these "Maxists Lawyers" you like refering to. Anyone with a different opinion to your world view is in your words a "Communist".

".. men are typically faster and stronger".

That didn't help Thomas, who came fifth in a women's swimming race.

The only genuine women are those with female genitalia. The only test is looking. Anyone falling for this transgender lunacy needs testing - for sanity.

It would appear I triggered a challenge to Paul's marxist ideology by suggesting Marxist lawers were trying to bring about sexual equality by allowing men to be considered women.

I was wrong assuming legal minds in the Greens were defining these equality clauses in law. But no, it is the rank-and-file members of the Greens, that is why the level of intelligence in undestanding science is lacking.

Transgender football star Hannah Mouncey has hit out at Scott Morrison for endorcing Liberal Warringah candidate Katherine Deves' efforts to ban transgender women from female sporting contests.

Josephus,

Talking about denying science?

To which political spectrum do climate change deniers
belong?

Foxy,

Climate "deniers"? Are there really people who deny that there is a 'climate'? Do you mean people who deny that the climate change is actually happening, or people who accept that it is changing, but deny the human-cause theory?

It's not like you to resort to such lazy thought-terminating cliches - dare I say, cancelling?

ttbn,

Denying the science of human cause.

Foxy,

I jumped the gun. You did say climate change deniers. But the rest still stands. I don't know of anyone who denies climate change. This one has been done to death over many years. It is the cause of climate change that is in question. The science (if it can be called that) is never "settled", as any real scientist will tell you. You need only to reflect on the changes that have been revealed and admitted by scientists themselves, in many areas, over time, as science continues to evolve.

Foxy

You are quicker than I am but, as far as I am aware, there is no such scientific discipline as "human cause".

ttbn,

This may help:

http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

I believe that Adam Bandit is transitioning to become a man following in Sarah's footsteps.

Too rude!

Foxy,

Sorry. No help at all. Same old same old, by the same old people. No mention of a your 'human cause' branch of science either, which sounds more like psychology than climatology.

Foxy, which branch of science do you follow? Flannery and Gore or Plimer? I deny Flannery science every time as scare mongering, deserves to be in prision for the damage he has caused. Warragamba Dam will never be full again - people believed him and built-in flood plains.

ttbn and Josephus,

I follow the findings of reputable world scientists and
reputable scientific organisations. These are
available on the web and are too numerous to
list here.

Of course it's your choice what you choose to believe.

The same as it is mine.

Foxy, you have not named a scientist - just a unsupported claim. Give us some evidence of your position since you follow their science.

Josephus,

Here's a few names for you:

Julie Arblaster

James E. Hansen

Michael Oppenheimer

Corinne Le Quere

There's so many of them.

Wasn't Oppenheimer initially a believer in nuclear power?

ttbn,
That sort of climate change denier certainly does exist - we used to have one on this board insisting there'd been no arming since 1998 or something. But people who deny that a 50% increase in atmospheric CO2 levels changes the climate are also climate change deniers.

Whether the science is settled depends on what you mean by "settled". Everything's always under review but there's a strong consensus on the basic facts, even though a few people (generally not scientists) reject them for ideological reasons.

__________________________________________________________________________

Josephus,
Plimer's side seem to feel the need to obfuscate and lie, and you're no exception. Flannery is not responsible for anyone building on flood planes. Most of the building on flood plains was done before everyone had even heard of him. And he didn't say Warragamba dam would never fill again; he said the rain might not come before it's empty, and that normally drought breaking rains wouldn't be enough to fill the dams because the ground was so dry.

Josephus,
Yes, Flannery got it wrong; he underestimated the amount of rain that would come at the end of the drought. But he didn't claim the dams would never fill again, and he's certainly not responsible for building on flood plains.

Flim Flannery didn't say those exact words, but he certainly blamed climate change for the drought and indicated that rainfall would steadily decrease.

Flannery is not responsible for people building on flood plains, but neither is the federal government, but town councils are.

Got to give it to Jose'. He only believes in scientific facts when it comes to climate change.....like Noah and his ark, plenty of science behind that one.

Climate change gets blamed for everything. Albo has even blamed the CCP/Solomons pact on how we have handled climate change.

That is the halfwit who could be our next PM.

I wonder if these slaves to science remember that our CHIEF SCIENTIST said not so long ago that Australia's beggaring of itself by going to unreliable, expensive, subsidised alternative energy would NOT make ONE IOTA of difference to climate change.

Here's what Australia's Chief Scientist has done and
said:

" Australia's Chief Scientist Dr Cathy Foley has cosigned
a statement with international science advisers reinforcing
the need for action to address climate change and
emphasising that science and innovation will play a continuing
and essential role in our future."

"Dr Foley joins science advisers from across the international
community - including Canada, UK, USA, India, Italy, Japan,
New Zealand. and the EU ..."

"The need for climate change is urgent and international
collaboration will be crucial if we are to address this
challenge." said Dr Foley.

"Working together on research and innovation will result in
the accelerated application of existing technological
solutions and the development of new ones."

"Uniting as a scientific community sends a vital message
and affirms our support for the next steps to limit global
warming," she said.

http://chiefscientist.gov.au/news-and-media/science-and-innovation-vital-address-climate-change

Oooops. Once again my mistake of a typo.
Here's the link again:

http://chiefscientist.gov.au/news-and-media/science-and-innovation-vital-address-climate-future

Foxy,

I don't suppose even you, with all the time you have to dig out websites, could find anything on Finkelsteins answer of 'none' to a single reporter's question about what difference would it make to the climate change if Australia ceased to exist. It was well aired and discussed at the time; any record would have been erased by the climate crooks since, relying on most people's goldfish memories to keep it buried.

ttbn,

Dr Alan Finkel was Australia's Chief Scientist from
2016 to 2020. In December 2020 the PM appointed Dr Finkel
as Special Adviser to the Australian Government Low
Emissions Technology which later produced "The Finkel
Review," making his position on climate change quite clear.

This information is available on the web if you're interested
in the topic.

Two inmates in a New Jersey prison have become pregnant by a transwoman who shares the same area. the women say their pregnancy was consentual.

I guess that can be called "multi-tasking?"

So a man is convicted, claims to identify as a woman and gets put with bunch of sexually deprived women and knocks up a few of them.

So this is the piece of crap that pedogreen social justice worriers want to protect.

No shadowminister.

No more than condemning all religion because of the
actions of some sexual abusers.

Could be worse, children could be locked up with a Catholic Priest, a Scout Master and shadowminister.

Foxy,

Locking up a man in a woman's prison is pure negligence with predictable results. The blame is with the authorities.

Pauliar

Or even worse than Catholic priests are senior Greens.

shadowminister,

Why allocate blame if it was consensual?

Why not try understanding and empathy?

shonky,

A very poor response, not even mildly amusing. You MUST do better! All I can say old chap is get a grip, and you never know inspiration might come your way.....or it will fall off, one of the two.

The prison houses over 800 women, and 27 inmates at the prison are transgender. The prison does not require transgender inmates to have undergone gender reassignment surgery to be housed there.

Foxy,

Following your logic, there is no reason men and women shouldn't share prisons.

However, there are many cases where women in prison are raped and/or assaulted by trans men.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/oct/11/transgender-prisoner-who-sexually-assaulted-inmates-jailed-for-life

https://news.wttw.com/2020/02/19/lawsuit-female-prisoner-says-she-was-raped-transgender-inmate

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/seven-sex-attacks-in-womens-jails-by-transgender-convicts-cx9m8zqpg

I rest my case.

shadowminister,

I can't understand your reasoning.
I have never advocated for men and women
sharing prisons - it seems that you're
simply diverting once again. And you're
resting a case that I never brought up.

Mo0ve on.

Foxy,

Yet you are happy for men calling themselves women to be in the same prison as women?

shonky,

You would have no problem, fellas like you they put in isolation, a cell all to yourself.

shadowminister,

Men who have transitioned into being women by
medical means and have been pronounced to now
be women - are no longer men. And they can't legally
be placed in men's prisons.

Prisons and the Justice Systems have to deal with
these situations - which by the way are in a
minority.

shadowminister,

What do you have against trans-people?

Why does it concern you so much that such a
small minority of people should prey on your
mind? Organisations, sports scientists and
researchers are trying to deal with
the issues as more data becomes available
and they can they try to advise on what the
best steps forward will be.

It's almost as if you feel threatened and
fear is fueling your viewpoint.

Personally, I prefer to leave this issue to the
sports scientists and researchers, and medical
experts to advise on these issues.

Seems the Liberal candidate for Warringah Katherine Deves, likes to hang out with NAZIS, attending rallies and chating with the lads, no doubt to see what they have in common. A few tips, things she can discuss with the voters of Warringah, the Fuhrer, "Voter, have you read Mein Kampf?", concentration camps, government overthrow, what to do with Blacks, Muslims and others. Things the voters in Warringah are vitally interested in. With that Bill The Bookie, just blew her odds from 50's to a 100's.

Foxy,

What do you have against women sportswomen? I see that because you are losing the argument you are trying to play the transphobia card. I have said nothing against trans people other than they cannot compete fairly against women and you should be ashamed of yourself.

I actually know 2 transgender (now female) friends/colleagues. Neither of them believes that this is fair, and the problem is not with trans people but the zealots most of whom have bugger all to do with the cause.

Hi Paul,

This issue of trans-gender and sport is a complicated
one with very strong feelings for and against.
I think it's something that's not going to be easily
resolved for a while yet.

shadowminister,

You protest too much !

To quote Albozo:

"Anthony Albanese has weighed in on the debate over whether transgender people should be allowed to compete in single-sex sports, declaring that “girls should be able to play sport against girls and boys should be able to play sport against boys”.

Women's rights activists are now taking up this issue.

From the guardian.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2022/apr/20/katie-archibald-claims-ioc-unfair-to-female-cyclists-and-trans-women

"The double Olympic champion Katie Archibald has sharply criticised the transgender policies of the International Olympic Committee and other sports bodies – saying they have not only let down female cyclists by underplaying biology but left trans women, such as Emily Bridges, facing intense scrutiny.

Archibald, who won the second of her cycling gold medals in Tokyo last year alongside Dame Laura Kenny in the Madison, said it was wrong for governing bodies to ignore the science that shows trans women who have gone through male puberty have a retained advantage in strength, stamina and physique.

However she also expressed deep sympathy for Bridges, who broke the junior men’s 25-mile record before transitioning in 2020, saying she was only following the rules of cycling’s governing body, the UCI, before it decided to block her racing as a woman last month."

Pauliar,

The Greens are the ones playing with children.

Actually, a woman is not an adult female just as a man is not an adult male if the mentality to be a woman or a man is not in place.

Kudos Shadowminister- I suspect that Foxy's underlying motivation is the deconstruction of British Australian culture and society so she actually doesn't care if Australian XX Women are being raped by those with XY chromosomes (claiming to be women) in prison. Perhaps she feels that her particular sub-cultural-social group has attributes that prevent their susceptibility to such a fate- by having resources in the legal profession- by being financed up- or having political pull- or otherwise.

If Foxy can convince her enemy to put down their defensive/ offensive capabilities she wins.

Things that actually endanger girls' and
women's sports:

1) Underfunding.

2) Lack of cultural respect.

3) Predatory coaches and doctors.

4) The stubborn inaccurate belief that athleticism
is incompatible with femininity.

Do Trans people endanger girls' and women's sports?

As I stated earlier - there's not very much information
out there and even less that is really specific to
trans athletes. People have to make the best decisions
they can with the data that is available now.

The trans gender issue is important but so is protecting
the women's category in sport is also very important.
They have fought long enough to have fair competition in
sport.

In the meantime, sports scientists and researchers will
continue to debate and try to advise on what the best steps
forward will be.

Experts seem to agree that the current regulations should
be determined on a sport by sport basis, especially where
safety is a factor - like in rugby.
Feb experts support a blanket ban on trans-gender athletes.

The science is established, in every sport that men compete in there is advantages over women, even the individual sports of tennis and golf. The only sport that both boys and girls can compete in equally is junior sports - prepuberty.

The debate is still ongoing however few experts
support a blanket ban on trans gender athletes.

Foxy, there's something I've noticed in a lot your posts over time. You often appear to give the impression that experts should be in charge.

However, we don't live in a technocracy but rather a representative democracy. In our system it's not up to scientific experts to decide whether something is right or wrong. It's their job to identify facts. The general public via the parliamentary system decides whether something is to be considered moral/good/right etc. It doesn't matter at all whether the experts support or don't support an action, as soon as they've presented the facts of the situation then that's their job done.

Take the trivial example raising children. On the whole the population considers it morally good/desired to raise healthy children. This moral is *not* mandated by expert opinion. The experts job here is to provide the facts to enlighten society on the expected consequences of raising healthy kids v's unhealthy ones (eg: a healthy child has greater likely hood of contributing more wealth to society when working age). But it is up to society as a whole to consider these facts and decide whether it is moral to raise healty v's non-healthy kids. These morals can then be enforced by the creation of laws.

Also the scientific experts can provide facts about how to achieve society's desired goals. Returning to the healthy kids example, they can provide food facts about what constituents a healthy diet. But it is up to society to then take these facts and create and apply programs that achieve society's goals. It's not the scientists/researchers job to forcefully deploy such programs.

So how does this apply to the case at hand here in the thread? It is up to the experts to state the facts about the advantage of being trans in sports. But it is up to society to decide whether these advantages correspond with what society considers to be fair or not.

Kudos Thinkabit.

Hi thinkabit,

As I stated in my posts earlier - there's not very much
information out there that's really specific to
trans athletes. And the question of their having a
sports advantage is still being debated. It's not
settled. Opinions vary. Hence my references to sports
scientists, researchers, and experts.

I did state quite clearly that the trans gender issue is
important but that protecting the women's category in
sport is also very important. They have fought long enough
to have fair competition in sport.

In the meantime, sports scientists and researchers will
continue to debate and try to advise on what the best steps
forward will be.

I trust this clarifies things for you.
I can only be held responsible for what I actually said.
Not what someone thinks I said.

The differences in strength between men and women is well and truly settled; has been since Adam and Eve. No 'science' needed. All this fuss about approximately 1200 people in the whole of Australia is not needed either. Some Australians are given to obsessing over tiny minorities - who should be living their own lives - to the detriment of the important things threatening the lives of 25 billion people in the most dangerous time for 80 years.

Bloody grow up!

This week-end is the Orthodox Easter.
We celebrated ours last week-end -
however perhaps we can still think
about the message that Easter is
supposed to bring, that of joy, love,
kindness, and tolerance.

We all need safe spaces from intolerance.
Unfortunately there are still people - including
Christians who are quick to judge others and
tell us about what they're against.

We all know people who express their
disapproval of various groups, and
sections of our society and communities.
Dislike of differences and ignorance are
human problems. To embrace and accept those
who are different does not appear easy which
I guess is true for any of us - but it is something
on which we can all work on instead of congratulating
those who have the wisdom to see things our way.

Enjoy your week-end.

Foxy: This is what you said in your previous to previous post- "The debate is still ongoing however few experts *support* a blanket ban on trans gender athletes." [Note- I've singled out the word *support*]

And as I said in my last post, it matters not one iota whether the experts support it or not. It's not up to them to decide whether there should be bans! It's not their job to, as you put it, "advise what the best steps forward will be". Rather it's up to the community to decide what sorts of bans (if any) should be applied. The job of the experts is simply to establish what the factual consequences are of being trans in terms of performance.

Hi thinkabit,

We seem to arguing at cross-purposes here.
Ask yourself who makes the rules concerning
our sports and who can and can't participate
in them? You just may find that the public
in reality has very little say. It is the
sports organisations, et al who govern and they
do listen to the advice they're given by experts.
Just as governments listen to the advice given
to them by medical experts on COVID-19.

thinkabit,

It may also help if you went into the
SportAustralia website and read what the law
has to say on the subject.

http://sportaus.gov.au/integrity_in_sport/transgender_and_gender_diverse_people_in_sport

If you had watched SBS "Insight" program on transgender women in Sport, there were three sports health researchers present including a trans therapist. The law may say one thing, but it needs to change, in one overseas case transwomen play in their own competition. There are about 700,000 trans women in the USA according to Marieclaire.

There is a bill before Parliament identifying what constitutes women's sport yet to be debated.

http://www.cnsnews.com/blog/craig-bannister/study-trans-women-continue-outperforming-female-athletes-least-2-years-after

Compared to biological females, the study finds that:

Trans women are 12% faster in the 1.5 mile run even after two years on hormones
Trans women can do 10% more pushups for at least their first two years on hormones
Trans women can do 6% more situps during their first two years on hormones
States seeking to ban transgender athletes from competing against biological females in school sports are citing the study to document those athletes born as biological males have an unfair advantage over biological females.

Idaho was the first state in the nation to pass such a law, the Fairness in Women’s Sports Act, which was signed into law by Republican Gov. Brad Little – but the law is blocked from taking effect as a challenge to it is currently being considered by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Things that actually endanger women's sports:

Transgender athletes,
Transgender activists,
Virtue signallers,
Left whingers.

The United States is different to Australia in many
areas.

Our Australian Sports Commission and the Australian
Institute of Sports are committed to promoting an
inclusive environment and supporting participation
at all level of sport on the basis of the gender
with which a person identifies.

The issue of trans gender inclusiveness in sport is
not isolated to Australia. There continues to be
dialogue around the world.

It appears important to Australian sports to weigh
up the rights of all athletes.

The Australian Institute of Sports provides guidance
on trans gender participation in sport and encourages
all sporting organizations to develop clear guidelines
around what makes an inclusive sport taking into account
the duty of care we have to all athletes. Laws vary
from state to state. And then we also have the Sex
Discrimination Act to which Anthony Albanese referred in
the debate.

It's certainly a complicated issue and the debate will
continue for sometime yet.

shonky,

I believe YOU are doing very well in this years nongball competition, play for the Galaganbone Girlies, under your new name of BABS IRONBALLS. What's your position again? OH! YES, Left Right Out.

ps. Do the girls still make you change outside behind a tree?

Love and Kisses
Your Adoring Fan
Pumpkin.

Two points-

1. It's interesting that famous Australian and now British feminist Germaine Greer is a Terf- Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminist and based on this is seemingly against Trans in Women's Sport and Toilets and Prisons.

2. Foxy said- "Ask yourself who makes the rules concerning our sports and who can and can't participate in them? You just may find that the public in reality has very little say. It is the sports organisations, et al who govern and they do listen to the advice they're given by experts. Just as governments listen to the advice given to them by medical experts on COVID-19."

Answer- One has to ask why is Foxy supporting a system of institutions that seem to be so dictatorial despite her elevation of equality in other contexts. Also it raises the question-Is equality possible?

In my view stability is more achievable with control of complexity.

I believe that it's possible if you link the interests of the rulers and institutions with the interest of the public then this could be the best way of creating a society where the different strata are included. Any society seems to require tests of loyalty from the public to ensure it's own survival. A family through multiple generations throughout history can rise through the ranks through displays of loyalty to the group.

Foreign groups will always try to destabilize local groups by playing internal groups against each other in order to bring them under their sphere (Machiavelli). Often individuals engage in subversive activities against the national group in order to benefit their lower level group structure- such as their family- in this case their own punishment is seen as a necessary/ useful/ overall positive sacrifice. In the past one way of controlling this individual subversion was by using group punishment against the perceived beneficiaries- which in modern society has been seen as bad form- which can undermine the stability of those nations that seek to portray themselves as "modern" or "good".

It's interesting to consider the different orders or levels of thinking (double thinking) in perspicacity and internecine negotiation.

"Expert" and "complex" - the two favourite words used by those trying to shut down people whose opinions they don't like. There is no 'expertise' needed to pick a male from a female, and the differences in their abilities to perform certain tasks.

We all have our share of different opinions on these
issues. They continue to be debated around the world.

It does seem important to Australian sports to
weigh up the rights of all athletes. The Australian
Institute of Sports provides guidance on trans gender
participation in sport. It encourages all Australian
sporting organizations to develop clear guidelines around
what makes an inclusive sport taking into account the
duty of care they have to all athletes.

Unsurprisingly, given the treatment she has received, the only candidate running a campaign on the protection of women's and girl's sports from biological males masquerading as females, Catherine Deves for Warringah, has banned the media from a forum at a Sydney RSL club.

The sitting member, Ms. Stegall - whose contribution to Australia and politics is snow skiing - got a few activists in, one of whom had to be ejected for violent behaviour.

The forum was open to the public, who were given the chance to make up their own minds, without the help of the media's recommendations and personal bigotry of reporters.

Good on her! There should be more of it.

Katherine Deves sounds like she is offering a different perspective on the debate. Thanks for highlighting her contributions ttbn.

"The fastest female college swimmer in #America is Lia Thomas, a man. The highest-profile female weightlifter in #NewZealand is Laurel Hubbard, a man. One of the best female BMX riders in the #USA is Chelsea Wolfe, a man. The 2020 Miss Intercontinental New Zealand Arielle Keil, is a man."

Top Australian swimmers are speaking out against having to compete against trans-women as a discouragement to future women swimmers.

Australian Swimmer Emily Seebohm has weighed into the transgender sporting debate saying there's nothing worse than training for years only to have it thrown away because "someone was biologically fitter, stronger (and) faster than you".

Dawn Fraser has also spoken out in defense of female swimmers

Foxy is a bigot and can only accept Woke political opinion. Trans-women need their own category when it comes to sport, I saw a 160 cm 70 kg woman playing rugby trying to bring down a 110Kg 180cm player without a hope.

Kudos Josephus.

Australian Swimmer Emily Seebohm, who is actually a third cousin of mine on my mother's side, is having 5 bob each way. Yes, she doesn't want to swim against men, but she says that she wants them "in my sport" - which means special competitions for 0.0048% of the Australian population posing as being of a different sex than they really are. Dear, warm-hearted Foxy, who wants to be kind to everybody, has suggested 'transgender games'. Good Lord! Just imagine the cost and organisation needed to pander to a micro group making up O.0048% of the population. Bat shite crazy! I can't believe even the barking mad Greens would go for that.

Well according to nbc, forbes, healthline.com and people magagine
(as well as a whole host of others narrative pushers)

Men can have periods too ttbn
I guess you're just not keeping up with progress.

http://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/transgender-men-pain-menstruation-more-just-physical-n1113961

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamiewareham/2020/07/09/new-campaign-wants-you-to-know-transgender-people-have-periods-too/?sh=2d0b9451b055

http://www.healthline.com/health/do-men-have-periods

http://people.com/health/transgender-activist-freebleed-men-can-menstruate/

Take a good hard look at that last links picture ttbn
Obviously someone has been misleading you about things...

Josephus,

Here's a joke about bigots for you:

A liar, a cheat, and a bigot walked into a bar ...

"Let's make America great again!" he said.

And I thought the last line was going to be "Hi my name is Foxy!" I guess that evil always sees itself as good.

CM,

Could have been any greenie either.

Snarl, growl, bark and bite
That's what bad dogs do
The best way to set things right
Is to keep them in a zoo

It's in the genes they can't control
The evil in their hearts
So to calm them down, soften their moods
Remove their private parts!