My thoughts on transgenderism, gender fluidity. See what you think.

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Nah. I know the source and I’m not interested in his unduly verbose wall o’ words. If you want to spend your time reading tons of bullshit, you go right ahead.

Then why comment? Dumbass!

 

[d0gbreath]

To those that are depressed, anxious, unhappy with their lives it's the answer. This will fix you they are told. By the time they figure out that changing sex is not the answer it's too late.

I can see some logic there. Especially since that's a good description for a certain generation. Yet, changing your sex usually isn't a drunk, spur of the moment thing. What has happened is that... magats can't diss blacks no mo. Who can we fucking annihilate now?

 

[BackAgain]

Then why comment? Dumbass!

I chose to ya fuckface.

 

[BackAgain]

Then why comment? Dumbass!

Besides, it’s possible that someday he might learn his first lesson on posting something both coherent and concise.

What’s it to you?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

II read your post.
You clearly identify yourself as a sadist.

You reserve the right to be cruel o people who've done you no harm just because you can.

"sa·dism
noun
the tendency to derive pleasure, especially sexual gratification, from inflicting pain, suffering, or humiliation on others."

If you don't like who you are the better solution is to change rather than deny.

Wrong. There is none of that in his post.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I chose to ya fuckface.

Hypocrite. Got it!

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Besides, it’s possible that someday he might learn his first lesson on posting something both coherent and concise.

What’s it to you?

I found his post long, but needed to cover the topic. You could not have as you didn't read it yet, yet commented. Hypocrite. Got it!

 

[BackAgain]

Hypocrite. Got it!

Nah. Just calling you out on your hypocrisy.

 

[BackAgain]

I found his post long, but needed to cover the topic. You could not have as you didn't read it yet, yet commented. Hypocrite. Got it!

Wrong ass breath. It obviously was long. And I didn’t comment on its substance, you moron. Your disingenuous nature is showing again.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Wrong ass breath. It obviously was long. And I didn’t comment on its substance, you moron. Your disingenuous nature is showing again.

I didn't say you commented on the substance, did I?

You are the moron and asshole!

You don't like getting called out on your hypocrisy.

 

[B. Kidd]

For the TLDR crowd, not asking you to read the entire thing, just take a point, or two, if that's all you want. No problem.

I realize modern psychology has shifted its view to accept that if someone believes one is of the opposite gender, then that person is that gender, and now the term 'gender' and 'sex', are not necessarily the same thing. However, I disagree, and for millenia this was not the case. In terms of history, this is a recent development. Now, many recent developments are now fact. but psychology is a soft science, it's not like physics when results are either there, or they are not, and physicists an reproduce the results you claim on a published paper. There is considerable more subjectivity in psychology, than the hard sciences.

Psychology is sometimes considered a soft science, but this can be a matter of debate and interpretation.

The term "soft science" is often used to refer to fields of study that rely heavily on subjective interpretation and do not typically involve precise quantitative measurement. Fields like sociology, anthropology, and psychology are sometimes considered soft sciences because they rely on observations, case studies, and interviews to gather data and often deal with complex, difficult-to-measure variables such as emotions, beliefs, and attitudes.

However, it's important to note that psychology is a broad field that encompasses many different subfields, some of which involve more precise, quantitative measurements. For example, cognitive psychology and neuropsychology use neuroimaging techniques to measure brain activity, and experimental psychology uses carefully controlled experiments to test hypotheses and measure outcomes.

In addition, psychology has made significant contributions to other fields, such as medicine, education, and business, which suggests that it is a rigorous and valuable scientific discipline.

Overall, while some aspects of psychology may involve subjective interpretation, the field as a whole is a complex and multifaceted science that incorporates both qualitative and quantitative methods. So, my point is, psychology is a kind of hybrid science, part subjective, part objective. It is on the subject of gender fluidity, in my personal opinion, there is considerable subjectivity going on. I personally don't like the word 'woke' it's a weasel word, so it won't be used here.

I am critical with my liberal brethren in some key respects on this subject, and in agreement on others.

Now then, on 'pronouns' let's get that out of the way, first.

If I use a pronoun referring to an effeminate male, and I happen to be aware that that person transfemale who dresses as a female, wears make up, etc, I would assume that that persons prefers the feminine pronoun and I have no issue obliging them on that point. I do it because it's not that big of a deal with me, and I don't want to fight, if I can avoid it. But, that I would do that is out of courtesy, not obligation.

However, if that same effeminate male approached me as asked me my opinion as to that person's sex, I would answer as follows:

I am one who believes gender and sex are the same thing, as this was the norm for millenia and I see no reason to believe otherwise. Does that answer your question? My point is, if you don't want an honest answer to the question, don't ask it. Some might agree with your point of view, some might not, be prepared for it and respect their sensitivities, and we will respect yours, where we can. On that point, my position is as follows:

1. I do understand there is a real phenomenon called 'transgender/gender fluidity' and it shouldn't be trivialized or ridiculed or shamed.

2. On the matter of children, It is my view that adults, given that children have vivid imaginations, tend to be influenced by adults and what is on television, subject to peer pressure, get ideas with which they easily change their mind, or lose interest, as time passes, that they often pursue fads and things trendy, that we, as adults, should try and convince a child, who might be gender confused, given that it might be merely an outside influence, a temporal thing, we should try first to have the child acknowledge their biological sex is their true sex, and if they (boys) exhibit effeminate characteristics, explain to the child that it is perfectly okay for a boy to be effeminate, perfectly okay for a girl to be masculine (as in a 'tomboy'), that these conditions often fade as they grow up, and that I believe, sincerely, it is actually better for one's mental and spiritual health to be honest and acknowledge what one truly is, and that, for children, over time, their truer selves emerge from the fog of life's barrage of confusing influences.

After the age of 18, if they still are determined to be transgender, that is their right and we should respect it. If I were to counsel a young man, or young woman, I would still act in accordance to the above, given the chance they are still young, and still might change. I tell a young man or woman, it's perfectly okay to be gay, and watch out for the tendency some gay boys and girls to envy being straight, the solution of which would be to change one sex. In my view, envy would be the wrong reason to change one's sex. But doing that, is a radical change for one's biology, and can lead to serious health consequences. Proceed with the utmost caution.

But, for children, I adamantly don't believe in sex change surgery, puberty blockers, for children, no matter how apparently 'urgent a child may make it seem . As I understand it, there is no surgery going on? (is there? I hope not), but some kids are given puberty blockers, and I think this is wrong (but I'm not an expert, or a Doctor, so it comes with a caveat).

Children are children, they have powerful and fanciful imaginations (I remember vividly my own childhood--I remember in the 6th grade, I envied left handed kids. I thought being left-handed was 'cool', and since I was practically ambidextrous, it was easy for me to pretend being left handed. After awhile, the fad faded and I returned to being my normal self, predominantly right handed) and much is urgent in the life of a child. To make such an assumption for a child, leading to life altering drugs and surgery, in my view, is a mistake, and could be a tragic one, if harm comes to the child, that the child changes his/her mind, later on.

3. I believe transgenders, gays, lesbians, etc., should be treated with respect and they should not be discriminated against and have all the rights that all citizens possess and that anti discrimination laws pertain to them, as they do to race, creed, etc.

4. I am more than happy to treat a transgender with their preferred pronouns, and treat them as their gender to which they identify. However, there are limits, and those are commented on, herein.

5. I simply do not accept the concept of 'non binary'. To me, these persons are androgenous/A-sexual. Unless you are born in with a rare case of being intersex, you are either or female. This idea of not indicating sex on birth certificates is insane. This was the conventional wisdom for such persons, when I grew up and over decades. I will use he or she or him or her as they prefer, but NOT 'they'. No one has the right to change what centuries have decided meanings of words mean.True, meanings of words evolve, but it happens always organically, NEVER by 'decree'. However, if anyone obliges on that point, it is out of courtesy, not obligation. I choose not to, on the subject of A-sexual persons. Why? Because 'they/their/them' normally means plural. I understand that 'they' has been used, though rarely, when describing singular when the sex of the person being spoken of is not known, that is the only grammatical exception, i.e, 'Someone-they left their jacket on the park bench').

However, that being said.

1. I believe that heterosexuals have the right to date only other heterosexuals. If they date transgender, that is their willful choice, but for a heterosexual who claims he or is only willing to date, marry, fall in love with, only other heterosexuals that this does NOT constitute discrimination against transgendered persons. One cannot help who one is attracted to. I warn transfemales who might be considering surgery but only in order that they perceive they might be able to attract straight males. I say, hold on! While there might be some straight males who see you as a woman, myself, being a straight male, I must say, no, they will probably see you as a gay man, and you will have a tough time finding a straight man. In fact, transfemales would be much better off not getting surgery, and I strongly suspect there are far more gay men (for some I've talked to about it, anyway) that prefer well endowed transfemales, than there will be straight males who are so liberated they will accept you as they would any woman, and I advise them strongly not to go through it it. It would be an irreversible decision and I don't see how it could improve one's libido, it seems logical that it would kill it, but I just don't know. That's my position, anyway. If there is research on this, then point me to it.

2. I believe that heterosexuals (or anyone, for that matter) have the right to use whatever pronouns they prefer with regard to transexuals, non binary persons, and any heterosexual who uses a transgendered or non binary person's prefered pronoun is an act of courtesy but such cannot be forced or legislated.

3. Sports, this is a problem. I understand that women are complaining, and they have a valid point. I'm not a sports enthusiast so I will let the professionals duke it out on this subject. I'm with the ladies, though, that's my leaning, unless someone can convince me of otherwise.

4. Restrooms. No one with a penis should be allowed to use a woman's facility, and vice versa. End of argument. Post op, I haven't figured that one out. Help me out.

I invite challenges, comments, discussions, affirmations, etc., as long as it is civil. If it is otherwise, such comments will be ignored.

I'm not asking anyone to read this post in it's entirety, feel free to discuss portions, those which you care to address, or add to the discussion.

Modern psychology and the DSM sold out years ago to Marxist progressives as those responsible for treating mental health became unhinged themselves!
And now we have the medical community following suit.
Our experts even succumbed to INDOCTRINATION!!

 

[Rumpole]

Modern psychology and the DSM sold out years ago to Marxist progressives as those responsible for treating mental health became unhinged themselves!
And now we have the medical community following suit.
Our experts even succumbed to INDOCTRINATION!!

Well, let's see now, yes, there are multiple flaws your argument.

Firstly, the argument relies on a baseless and unfounded claim that modern psychology and the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) have "sold out" to Marxist progressives. This claim is not backed up by evidence or reasoned argument, but is rather a blanket assertion.

Secondly, the argument employs an ad hominem attack on those responsible for treating mental health, claiming that they have become "unhinged." This type of personal attack is not a valid form of argumentation and does not address the substance of the issues at hand.

Thirdly, the argument suggests that the medical community has "succumbed to indoctrination" without providing any evidence or reasoning to support this claim.

Finally, the argument presents a false dichotomy by suggesting that there are only two options: either modern psychology and the medical community have sold out to Marxist progressives or they have become indoctrinated. In reality, there are many factors that contribute to changes in psychology and medical practice, and it is unlikely that any one ideology or perspective can be solely responsible.

In conclusion, the argument presented is flawed because it relies on baseless claims, personal attacks, and false dichotomies. Valid arguments should be based on evidence and reasoned analysis, rather than unsupported assertions and ad hominem attacks.

 

[BackAgain]

I didn't say you commented on the substance, did I?

Say it? No. Imply it? Obviously.

You are the moron and asshole!

No, swabby. That’s you. You’re very confused.

You don't like getting called out on your hypocrisy.

I’m not concerned with the opinion of a pompous asshole such as you. And again, you identified no hypocrisy. Damn, but you’re stupid.

 

[B. Kidd]

Well, let's see now, yes, there are multiple flaws your argument.

Firstly, the argument relies on a baseless and unfounded claim that modern psychology and the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) have "sold out" to Marxist progressives. This claim is not backed up by evidence or reasoned argument, but is rather a blanket assertion.

Secondly, the argument employs an ad hominem attack on those responsible for treating mental health, claiming that they have become "unhinged." This type of personal attack is not a valid form of argumentation and does not address the substance of the issues at hand.

Thirdly, the argument suggests that the medical community has "succumbed to indoctrination" without providing any evidence or reasoning to support this claim.

Finally, the argument presents a false dichotomy by suggesting that there are only two options: either modern psychology and the medical community have sold out to Marxist progressives or they have become indoctrinated. In reality, there are many factors that contribute to changes in psychology and medical practice, and it is unlikely that any one ideology or perspective can be solely responsible.

In conclusion, the argument presented is flawed because it relies on baseless claims, personal attacks, and false dichotomies. Valid arguments should be based on evidence and reasoned analysis, rather than unsupported assertions and ad hominem attacks.

So you believe esteemed medical centers aiding juveniles transition IS NOT succumbing to indoctrination??

So you believe that Fed agencies like NIH and NIMH and SAMSA have not offered Fed payments to mental health providers if they towed the line on new mental health disorders and diagnosis?

You're outta your lane you know nothing Wombat!!

 

[EvilCat Breath]

I can see some logic there. Especially since that's a good description for a certain generation. Yet, changing your sex usually isn't a drunk, spur of the moment thing. What has happened is that... magats can't diss blacks no mo. Who can we fucking annihilate now?

The error is in not annihilating anyone.

 

[Rumpole]

I’m not concerned with the opinion of a pompous asshole such as you. And again, you identified no hypocrisy. Damn, but you’re stupid.

Though not addressed to me, you've called me as bad.

Say, did anyone abuse you as a child? Not that I want to know, or should you ever admit it on an internet forum, and really I don't know why you are so toxic, but I'd be lookin' for a chill pill, if I were you, there's a lotta bitterness in your soul.

Of what poisoned tree were you it's born fruit? I wonder?

 

[Rumpole]

So you believe esteemed medical centers aiding juveniles transition IS NOT succumbing to indoctrination??

While I do have a reply to that question, there is nothing in the comment to which you are replying mentions or acknowledges anything in your question. So, please address a point raised or stated in the comment, and I'd be happy to engage. But, I will add the following:

And while it is true that there are some medical centers that offer gender-affirming care for transgender youth, this does not necessarily mean that they have "succumbed to indoctrination."

The decision to provide gender-affirming care is based on extensive research and is supported by many professional organizations, including the American Academy of Pediatrics and the World Professional Association for Transgender Health. These organizations have published guidelines for the care of transgender individuals, based on years of research and clinical experience.

Additionally, it is important to recognize that individuals have the right to make decisions about their own healthcare, including decisions about gender-affirming care. It is not the role of medical professionals to impose their personal beliefs or ideologies on their patients.

So you believe that Fed agencies like NIH and NIMH and SAMSA have not offered Fed payments to mental health providers if they towed the line on new mental health disorders and diagnosis?

You're outta your lane you know nothing Wombat!!

It is true that federal agencies like the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) provide funding for research on mental health disorders and diagnosis. However, this funding is typically awarded through a competitive grant process based on the merit of the proposed research.

Furthermore, the researchers who receive these grants are expected to adhere to strict ethical guidelines and scientific standards, regardless of their personal beliefs or political affiliations. The goal of this funding is to support high-quality research that can improve our understanding of mental health and lead to better treatment options for patients.

In conclusion, while it is important to critically evaluate the sources of funding for research, it is also important to recognize that federal agencies are guided by ethical principles and scientific rigor. Accusations of bias or political influence should be based on concrete evidence rather than unfounded assertions.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Say it? No. Imply it? Obviously.

No, swabby. That’s you. You’re very confused.

I’m not concerned with the opinion of a pompous asshole such as you. And again, you identified no hypocrisy. Damn, but you’re stupid.

Imply? Implication is the eye of the beholder and you are blind.

You are a hypocrite. That's why you don't see it.

Put me on ignore unless you have a valid response to my points made.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

While I do have a reply to that question, there is nothing in the comment to which you are replying mentions or acknowledges anything in your question. So, please address a point raised or stated in the comment, and I'd be happy to engage. But, I will add the following:

And while it is true that there are some medical centers that offer gender-affirming care for transgender youth, this does not necessarily mean that they have "succumbed to indoctrination."

The decision to provide gender-affirming care is based on extensive research and is supported by many professional organizations, including the American Academy of Pediatrics and the World Professional Association for Transgender Health. These organizations have published guidelines for the care of transgender individuals, based on years of research and clinical experience.

Additionally, it is important to recognize that individuals have the right to make decisions about their own healthcare, including decisions about gender-affirming care. It is not the role of medical professionals to impose their personal beliefs or ideologies on their patients.


It is true that federal agencies like the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) provide funding for research on mental health disorders and diagnosis. However, this funding is typically awarded through a competitive grant process based on the merit of the proposed research.

Furthermore, the researchers who receive these grants are expected to adhere to strict ethical guidelines and scientific standards, regardless of their personal beliefs or political affiliations. The goal of this funding is to support high-quality research that can improve our understanding of mental health and lead to better treatment options for patients.

In conclusion, while it is important to critically evaluate the sources of funding for research, it is also important to recognize that federal agencies are guided by ethical principles and scientific rigor. Accusations of bias or political influence should be based on concrete evidence rather than unfounded assertions.

It is illegal in my state and that was a possible motive for the transgender shooter at the Nashville school.

 

[yidnar]

For the TLDR crowd, not asking you to read the entire thing, just take a point, or two, if that's all you want. No problem.

I realize modern psychology has shifted its view to accept that if someone believes one is of the opposite gender, then that person is that gender, and now the term 'gender' and 'sex', are not necessarily the same thing. However, I disagree, and for millenia this was not the case. In terms of history, this is a recent development. Now, many recent developments are now fact. but psychology is a soft science, it's not like physics when results are either there, or they are not, and physicists an reproduce the results you claim on a published paper. There is considerable more subjectivity in psychology, than the hard sciences.

Psychology is sometimes considered a soft science, but this can be a matter of debate and interpretation.

The term "soft science" is often used to refer to fields of study that rely heavily on subjective interpretation and do not typically involve precise quantitative measurement. Fields like sociology, anthropology, and psychology are sometimes considered soft sciences because they rely on observations, case studies, and interviews to gather data and often deal with complex, difficult-to-measure variables such as emotions, beliefs, and attitudes.

However, it's important to note that psychology is a broad field that encompasses many different subfields, some of which involve more precise, quantitative measurements. For example, cognitive psychology and neuropsychology use neuroimaging techniques to measure brain activity, and experimental psychology uses carefully controlled experiments to test hypotheses and measure outcomes.

In addition, psychology has made significant contributions to other fields, such as medicine, education, and business, which suggests that it is a rigorous and valuable scientific discipline.

Overall, while some aspects of psychology may involve subjective interpretation, the field as a whole is a complex and multifaceted science that incorporates both qualitative and quantitative methods. So, my point is, psychology is a kind of hybrid science, part subjective, part objective. It is on the subject of gender fluidity, in my personal opinion, there is considerable subjectivity going on. I personally don't like the word 'woke' it's a weasel word, so it won't be used here.

I am critical with my liberal brethren in some key respects on this subject, and in agreement on others.

Now then, on 'pronouns' let's get that out of the way, first.

If I use a pronoun referring to an effeminate male, and I happen to be aware that that person transfemale who dresses as a female, wears make up, etc, I would assume that that persons prefers the feminine pronoun and I have no issue obliging them on that point. I do it because it's not that big of a deal with me, and I don't want to fight, if I can avoid it. But, that I would do that is out of courtesy, not obligation.

However, if that same effeminate male approached me as asked me my opinion as to that person's sex, I would answer as follows:

I am one who believes gender and sex are the same thing, as this was the norm for millenia and I see no reason to believe otherwise. Does that answer your question? My point is, if you don't want an honest answer to the question, don't ask it. Some might agree with your point of view, some might not, be prepared for it and respect their sensitivities, and we will respect yours, where we can. On that point, my position is as follows:

1. I do understand there is a real phenomenon called 'transgender/gender fluidity' and it shouldn't be trivialized or ridiculed or shamed.

2. On the matter of children, It is my view that adults, given that children have vivid imaginations, tend to be influenced by adults and what is on television, subject to peer pressure, get ideas with which they easily change their mind, or lose interest, as time passes, that they often pursue fads and things trendy, that we, as adults, should try and convince a child, who might be gender confused, given that it might be merely an outside influence, a temporal thing, we should try first to have the child acknowledge their biological sex is their true sex, and if they (boys) exhibit effeminate characteristics, explain to the child that it is perfectly okay for a boy to be effeminate, perfectly okay for a girl to be masculine (as in a 'tomboy'), that these conditions often fade as they grow up, and that I believe, sincerely, it is actually better for one's mental and spiritual health to be honest and acknowledge what one truly is, and that, for children, over time, their truer selves emerge from the fog of life's barrage of confusing influences.

After the age of 18, if they still are determined to be transgender, that is their right and we should respect it. If I were to counsel a young man, or young woman, I would still act in accordance to the above, given the chance they are still young, and still might change. I tell a young man or woman, it's perfectly okay to be gay, and watch out for the tendency some gay boys and girls to envy being straight, the solution of which would be to change one sex. In my view, envy would be the wrong reason to change one's sex. But doing that, is a radical change for one's biology, and can lead to serious health consequences. Proceed with the utmost caution.

But, for children, I adamantly don't believe in sex change surgery, puberty blockers, for children, no matter how apparently 'urgent a child may make it seem . As I understand it, there is no surgery going on? (is there? I hope not), but some kids are given puberty blockers, and I think this is wrong (but I'm not an expert, or a Doctor, so it comes with a caveat).

Children are children, they have powerful and fanciful imaginations (I remember vividly my own childhood--I remember in the 6th grade, I envied left handed kids. I thought being left-handed was 'cool', and since I was practically ambidextrous, it was easy for me to pretend being left handed. After awhile, the fad faded and I returned to being my normal self, predominantly right handed) and much is urgent in the life of a child. To make such an assumption for a child, leading to life altering drugs and surgery, in my view, is a mistake, and could be a tragic one, if harm comes to the child, that the child changes his/her mind, later on.

3. I believe transgenders, gays, lesbians, etc., should be treated with respect and they should not be discriminated against and have all the rights that all citizens possess and that anti discrimination laws pertain to them, as they do to race, creed, etc.

4. I am more than happy to treat a transgender with their preferred pronouns, and treat them as their gender to which they identify. However, there are limits, and those are commented on, herein.

5. I simply do not accept the concept of 'non binary'. To me, these persons are androgenous/A-sexual. Unless you are born in with a rare case of being intersex, you are either or female. This idea of not indicating sex on birth certificates is insane. This was the conventional wisdom for such persons, when I grew up and over decades. I will use he or she or him or her as they prefer, but NOT 'they'. No one has the right to change what centuries have decided meanings of words mean.True, meanings of words evolve, but it happens always organically, NEVER by 'decree'. However, if anyone obliges on that point, it is out of courtesy, not obligation. I choose not to, on the subject of A-sexual persons. Why? Because 'they/their/them' normally means plural. I understand that 'they' has been used, though rarely, when describing singular when the sex of the person being spoken of is not known, that is the only grammatical exception, i.e, 'Someone-they left their jacket on the park bench').

However, that being said.

1. I believe that heterosexuals have the right to date only other heterosexuals. If they date transgender, that is their willful choice, but for a heterosexual who claims he or is only willing to date, marry, fall in love with, only other heterosexuals that this does NOT constitute discrimination against transgendered persons. One cannot help who one is attracted to. I warn transfemales who might be considering surgery but only in order that they perceive they might be able to attract straight males. I say, hold on! While there might be some straight males who see you as a woman, myself, being a straight male, I must say, no, they will probably see you as a gay man, and you will have a tough time finding a straight man. In fact, transfemales would be much better off not getting surgery, and I strongly suspect there are far more gay men (for some I've talked to about it, anyway) that prefer well endowed transfemales, than there will be straight males who are so liberated they will accept you as they would any woman, and I advise them strongly not to go through it it. It would be an irreversible decision and I don't see how it could improve one's libido, it seems logical that it would kill it, but I just don't know. That's my position, anyway. If there is research on this, then point me to it.

2. I believe that heterosexuals (or anyone, for that matter) have the right to use whatever pronouns they prefer with regard to transexuals, non binary persons, and any heterosexual who uses a transgendered or non binary person's prefered pronoun is an act of courtesy but such cannot be forced or legislated.

3. Sports, this is a problem. I understand that women are complaining, and they have a valid point. I'm not a sports enthusiast so I will let the professionals duke it out on this subject. I'm with the ladies, though, that's my leaning, unless someone can convince me of otherwise.

4. Restrooms. No one with a penis should be allowed to use a woman's facility, and vice versa. End of argument. Post op, I haven't figured that one out. Help me out.

I invite challenges, comments, discussions, affirmations, etc., as long as it is civil. If it is otherwise, such comments will be ignored.

I'm not asking anyone to read this post in it's entirety, feel free to discuss portions, those which you care to address, or add to the discussion.