I think the bigger problem is Jack p*ssing all over the toilet seats, all the time. Bad parenting, not gender. Not lifting a toilet seat when urinating is uncivilised in the extreme.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

The doctor had a look when they were born and this information was recorded and made its way on to the birth certificate. This designation should remain until such time as the person is sure they're something else, not when they hit 4 and some ultra-liberal decides to question it on their behalf.

Still, this is fortunately in the hands of the parents and I'd hope most would follow the biological approach were they to pose this question to their children, rather than placing the emphasis on the freedom to choose 'other'.

Can this be merged with my gender thread though, because the same debates prevail

So you are in favour of social engineering then. Personally, I think we're actively stupid in making 'gender rules for children' at all, and this represents our own fixations on gender.

The biological basis of gender doesn't exist, its a social conformity, that represents an observational basis, rather than individual experience, and in doing so engineers an 'accepted social norm' that's contradictory to the evidence.

Although I was being flippant, I think we shouldn't separate and divide children by gender at all. We do this because we want to define our children, rather than let them define themselves.

Is there really any reason why we treat boys and girls of this age so differently, that we are effectively conditioning and engineering them towards 'approved social roles'. Do kids really need different styles of dress, style, behaviour, toys and recreation based on whether they have a p**** or v*****. Of course they don't, we as adults are simply projecting our own 'values' onto them.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

"Schools should be teaching kids to read and write, not prompting them to consider gender swaps" Tory MP Andrew Bridgen.

Quite.

The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.

?

'The biological basis of gender doesn't exist'.

Why on earth would you say this Jamie? That is absolutely not true.

There are many hormonal, physical and hence biological differences between a male and a female. These differences are inherently designed to fit a male or to specifically fit a female.

Nature does create atypical males and atypical females as the majority output and any suggestion to the contrary is just not correct.

Edited by Stirlingsays (20 Apr 2016 12.33pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Of gender, true. Definitely wrong, from a biological perspective.

Of how people see and experience their gender, not true. Of course you can reduce the experience of male and female down to winky and v-jay-jay, but that doesn't really tell you much. I'm very much a different type of p**** owner than a lot of other p**** owners that I've met and heard of and have nothing in common really with other than we both have a p****

What I do object to though is the idea that its 'social engineering' by lefties and liberals, when gender roles are socially engineered to fit a norm anyhow.

Enforcing gender stereotypes and expectations on children is no different really than that of religion. Its entirely about the wishes and needs of the parent, rather than their children.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]