No, just a better person.

Are you Uriah Heep?

Is that what you wish to identify as?

Seriously, you have summed it up nicely.

It is clearly ludicrous that society is expected to dance to the tune of a tiny minority who have identity issues.

This is what happens when you let the lunatics run the asylum.

As a fellow atheist, it just adds to my annoyance when people discuss these matters in terms of religious dogma.

It just requires common sense.

Sorry, without opening up this whole can of worms again, you're confusing sex with gender. I'll give you what is essentially a dictionary definition then we can move on. 'Gender identity: A person's internal perception of their own gender and the words they use to label themselves. A person may identify as a woman, or a man, a blend of the two, or neither. A person's gender identity may or may not be the same as their sex assigned at birth.' Ok, there we are it's pretty simple really.
A lot of people think this is a quite modern issue. But even a quick flick through Greco/Roman literature throws up some pretty racy stuff. In the field of Anthropology it has been noted that virtually all Native American tribes have their own specific words for a whole range of genders which pre-date contact with Europeans.
Through work I do come into contact quite regularly with people who ask to be addressed with specific pronouns, it's not too tricky and they have names as well which is usually what I go with and, fortunately, in English we have the trusty 'they' to fall back on.
But don't worry, no-ones expecting perfection and it's polite to at least make an attempt.

No, that would be Olaf Scholz. Or was that some primitive attempt at humour?

It's well known that Reich Chancellors were big Palace fans, especially in the 1930s, and I can remember Kurt Kiesinger at Selhurst Park in the late 1960s booing Mark Lazarus.

Edited by georgenorman (30 Mar 2023 7.12pm)

Just tell me this. Do you believe that there are
more than two sexes?

I personally don't care what someone wants to call themselves, but don't expect me to believe it simply because they say it's so. That would be illogical.

Gender always used to mean sex as far as I'm aware, and just because the dictionary definition is all PC, doesn't make it so.

Words and meanings get in the dictionary these days if enough people use them, correctly or incorrectly.

SDP view - pretty sound I think.

[Link]

I watched the video and it pretty much reflects what my primitive understanding already was.

Where I have issue however is when individuals people want to mutilate their internal and external bodies to change their physical state and be recognised as to a sex which they are not, with all society then apparently having to accept this and adopt a differing reality. Sport is the biggest one for me, sexes are segregated primarily due to their physical differences not on individual's subjective opinions of themselves. Prisons equally too. A lot of efforts these days seem concentrated on removing any other opinion or factual commentary on the physical difference between the male and female sex, claiming that everything is just a matter of freedom to select whichever option you want and order society based on that, a ludicrous if not impossible task.

Furthermore, as with the introduction of 2.3 billion different genders, is this not just an exercise in sheer narcissism whereby individuals want to make their own identification of themselves the centre of all things - mainstream talking points, seemingly academic debate for discussion and an excuse to showcase themselves in whatever media, march, demonstration, act of hysteria they wish to? It also opens the door for people exploring endless avenues as to why they encounter certain problems in life such as failure, social isolation/exclusion, bullying, lack of attention, poverty etc which often distract from the issue at hand? Would explain the shocking suicide rate amongst other statistics.

The individualistic nature of people in being remarkably diverse in our personalities, interests, behaviour etc etc should not be anything necessary to think about let alone debate on end. The removal of barriers or suffering for individuals deriving from these characteristics should be focused upon IMHO and not approached as we see these days where sex and personality are conflated, promoted as the root of all things diverting attention away from where it should be directed and applied in a manner which creates a whole new systemic loophole to be exploited, often affecting the most vulnerable in society.

It just opens a gateway for grown human beings to perpetually act like teenagers hence the staggering amount of self-indulgence, hysteria, overt displays of emotion we see so endemic these days. It is also too impactful upon the fabric of society to be treated and pursued in such a revolutionary and dogmatic, logic-less way.

Now Zaha's got a bit of green grass ahead of him here... and finds Ambrose... not a bad effort!!!!

First I would say that no-one is undergoing years of hormone replacement therapy and multiple surgical treatments on a whim. This follows lengthy consultations with psychologists and doctors. I don’t think either of us really understand how much these people feel that they’re just in the wrong body. The last survey I read about said that the overwhelming majority of these people were a lot more comfortable about their place in society following the surgery. So it seems like it works.
Second, how do we then accommodate those that are going through hrt or haven’t started it yet? I know it would probably be a lot easier if we didn’t have lots of recent examples of people in positions of authority who turned out to be rapists or pedos. There’s a lot of mistrust out there.
We’re pretty much the first generation that’s had to deal with this and it does feel like we’re winging it at the moment.