Colinjb

Bless.

It's not my taste, but the fan base is not just middle aged blokes who should have better things to do then worry about kits. So, whatever. My daughters like it.

Save yourself from that idiot. Just let him roll in the mud he needs.

Why do you need two quotes to ask a point? You points are irrelevant to me now.

I'll be fair, it's a simplification, albeit one I can rationalise. I need to communicate this to children and it's a starting point. The self identification point. Alas, it's where we are.

I'm not entering into this rabbit hole again. Go outside you sad sack and stick that non-sequitur up your arse. (Yeah, look that up, you need to.)

On the contrary. The definition of sex and gender we work from in teaching is that you have biological sex and gender identity. So, Gender, by definition is all about social convention. What society expects a girl or boy to be. The biology of the situation, which has been the hill to die on here, is actually 'sex.'

Better then "Bike." Depending on your perspective.

I remember her at school, we were learning about the seven life processes. 'MRS GREN,' one of them is reproduction. Her hand went up immediately bless her. 'Sir, I cannot reproduce, does this mean I'm not alive!?' Even when it comes to determining what is alive or not it's not clear cut..... Never mind something like biological sex.

A friend of mine was born without everything from the cervix up. But very clearly female. One of the recent contestants on Race Across the World had the same condition. Just shows, it's so difficult to do.

To me. This debate exists and causes issues precisely because it's difficult to provide an ans.... Here we go again. It is the arguing with an idiot scenario I mentioned earlier.

It's one of the areas where a single universally accepted description would clearly be helpful. Is this where you go on a moral crusade now because I didn't explicitly say 'Of course they should be' women only?' They need to be safe for the victims, regardless of gender.

Thankfully, for 99%+ of the population, social convention is enough.

No, life is full of paradoxes.

I suspect both.

It's understanding that the true answer may not be within your own capability to adequately answer for all to grasp. I'm quite happy to accept my limitations on this. That this issue is not able to definitively solved in a fair and just way yet shows it's nowhere near as simple as the arguments many throw. They can be dangerous.

My answer was given earlier. You dimwit. Your inability to accept things cannot be answered within your limited terms is idiotic.

What was your GCSE Science grade?

I've given you my answer. Your lack of ability to get your head around it is not my concern. What was your GCSE Science grade?

What was your GCSE Science grade? Unlike the gender debate, this is definitive.

I've said it's not as simple as providing a difinitive explanation. The more is learned about Humanity, the more cloudy it gets. So. What GCSE grade did you get? Or was it so painfully poor you fear it would undermine you?

What Science GCSE grade did you get, out of interest?

It's a good debate, because people far more intelligent then me cannot either. But one certainty we can have, is that your simple starting point is as incorrect as any more educated viewpoint I could present. But your need for something difinitve rather then a more nuanced perspective does you no credit at all.

So, you accept your view is too simplistic. Then you take it back to me wanting to address it directly again. Simplistic is the word.

Read what has already been posted and build on the opinion you have just said is flawed. I'm not refusing to answer, i'm just ahead of you in already realising it's a shade of grey, not black/white.