Miss Netherlands is a man

[BackInTex]

https://twitter.com/i/status/1677731732815060992

Yeah. What he said.

Yes, that doctor was an evil, horrible person for putting the needs and concerns of her patients first.

But she wasn't. Neither were all those Catholic priests putting the needs and concerns of their chior boys first, though they were telling them so.

[flockofseagulls104]

https://twitter.com/i/status/1677731732815060992

Yeah. What he said.

Yes, that doctor was an evil, horrible person for putting the needs and concerns of her patients first.

Oh, My God, krox. Just OMG. I am truly sad.

[silverscreenselect]

Oh, My God, krox. Just OMG. I am truly sad pathetic.

Fixed it for ya.

[kroxquo]

https://twitter.com/i/status/1677731732815060992

Yeah. What he said.

Yes, that doctor was an evil, horrible person for putting the needs and concerns of her patients first.

But she wasn't. Neither were all those Catholic priests putting the needs and concerns of their chior boys first, though they were telling them so.

How can you possibly equate a doctor asking a patient about their gender preference with pederasty?

[kroxquo]

https://twitter.com/i/status/1677731732815060992

Yeah. What he said.

Yes, that doctor was an evil, horrible person for putting the needs and concerns of her patients first.

Oh, My God, krox. Just OMG. I am truly sad.

Sorry if I disappointed you, but as the father of 2 LBGTQ women, I am a bit sensitive about bigotry toward them.

[kroxquo]

Yes, that doctor was an evil, horrible person for putting the needs and concerns of her patients first.

Oh, My God, krox. Just OMG. I am truly sad.

Sorry if I disappointed you, but as the father of 2 LBGTQ women, I am a bit sensitive about bigotry toward them.

Actually, upon further reflection, I am not the least bit sorry.

[flockofseagulls104]

Oh, My God, krox. Just OMG. I am truly sad.

Sorry if I disappointed you, but as the father of 2 LBGTQ women, I am a bit sensitive about bigotry toward them.

Actually, upon further reflection, I am not the least bit sorry.

9 years old, krox?
What if the doctor asked that same question to your nine-year-old child, without your knowledge, and depending on the answer, put them through intense psychological, sexual and physical retraining to dispel them of any notion they disagreed with, WITHOUT YOUR KNOWLEDGE OR CONSENT? Because that doctor was concerned about the needs and concerns of the patient.

Can't you see that it is wrong? And calling me a bigot isn't solving anything.

[Spock]

Yes, that doctor was an evil, horrible person for putting the needs and concerns of her patients first.

Oh, My God, krox. Just OMG. I am truly sad.

Sorry if I disappointed you, but as the father of 2 LBGTQ women, I am a bit sensitive about bigotry toward them.

I will grant you 1, but 2!!!! Somebody screwed up as a father.

[Bob78164]

Sorry if I disappointed you, but as the father of 2 LBGTQ women, I am a bit sensitive about bigotry toward them.

I will grant you 1, but 2!!!! Somebody screwed up as a father.

This may be the lowest statement I've ever seen on this Bored. And that takes some doing.

For the record, I've had dealings with one of krox's daughters. If his other daughter is anything like the one I've dealt with, he has much to be proud of.

What truly saddens me is the likelihood that you at least attempted to pass your bigotry along to your own children, thereby perpetuating it for another generation. I hope you didn't succeed. --Bob

[Beebs52]

I actually agree that this statement was totally wrong.

[kroxquo]

Oh, My God, krox. Just OMG. I am truly sad.

Sorry if I disappointed you, but as the father of 2 LBGTQ women, I am a bit sensitive about bigotry toward them.

I will grant you 1, but 2!!!! Somebody screwed up as a father.

Spock -
I have always tried to remain civil in discussions on this board and have refrained for the most part on name calling and personal insults and attacks. I also make no claim to being a perfect father. But your statement infuriates me. How dare you impugn my role as a father because my children are comfortable sharing with me who they are. There are many things I screwed up as a father, but the fact that 2 of my 3 children are non-binary is not one of them. I raised them to be accepting of others' rights and celebrate differences. I raised them to be respectful toward others and proud of who they are. I am proud of them in so may ways and that includes their gender orientation. Shame on you.

[flockofseagulls104]

The question and the biggest controversy is the teaching of this new construct to MINORS.

It is NOT the place of the public schools and/or the state to adopt and disseminate the transgender agenda of the day above and superseding the authority of the parents. If your two children decided, after they were of majority age, to pursue this on their own, I have no problem with it. If you, as a parent, after they achieved puberty, decided that was what was best for them, that is your right. But if they were influenced, supported, or encouraged into that decision by teachers or school officials in any way, that is completely and irrevocably WRONG. And ESPECIALLY if you, as their parent, were not informed.

It is the school's role to educate our children, if we choose to send them there, in subjects that will help them be a productive member of our society, not to groom them in the sexual constructs of the day. To ANY school, the students are and should be treated as male or female, based on their biological sexes. Period.

And your two children will have to accept the reality that they are biologically male, and they will always be biologically male regardless of how well they present themselves as female. There will be biological restrictions and limitations and there will be societal and cultural restrictions and limitations based on their decision. They need to understand that there are good parts and bad parts to their situation. Hate should not be one of them. Unfortunately, hatred is very difficult to eliminate in our world. We all have to deal with it in one form or another.

Just to note, your calling me a bigot because I disagree with you on this issue is a form of hatred. I deal with it, because, at least on this bored, I am used to it. To me it means that some people just can't deal with someone questioning their stand on an issue, and they have no other answer.

[silverscreenselect]

And your two children will have to accept the reality that they are biologically male, and they will always be biologically male regardless of how well they present themselves as female. There will be biological restrictions and limitations and there will be societal and cultural restrictions and limitations based on their decision.

Unless I"m mistaken, Krox's two daughters are biologically female, not that it should be any concern to you or me.

For many people, there are "societal and cultural restrictions and limitations based on their decision" of what religion to practice. And in large parts of this country, there were social and cultural restrictions and limitations not all that long ago based on their race. But let's call these "restrictions and limitations" what they are: bigotry. Regardless of whether it's based on race, religion, sexual preference, or gender identification.

Children begin to decide their gender identification as soon as they are capable of understanding the differences between the genders. Notice I said genders, not sexes. Depending on how much exposure to sexual materials and observing other children and adults they do, they will probably understand the difference between the sex organs at a fairly young age as well. Parents can't force gender identification on their children any more than they can "force" them to have blue or brown eyes. All they can do with these types of tactics is traumatize the children.

[kroxquo]

And your two children will have to accept the reality that they are biologically male, and they will always be biologically male regardless of how well they present themselves as female. There will be biological restrictions and limitations and there will be societal and cultural restrictions and limitations based on their decision.

Unless I"m mistaken, Krox's two daughters are biologically female, not that it should be any concern to you or me.

For many people, there are "societal and cultural restrictions and limitations based on their decision" of what religion to practice. And in large parts of this country, there were social and cultural restrictions and limitations not all that long ago based on their race. But let's call these "restrictions and limitations" what they are: bigotry. Regardless of whether it's based on race, religion, sexual preference, or gender identification.

Children begin to decide their gender identification as soon as they are capable of understanding the differences between the genders. Notice I said genders, not sexes. Depending on how much exposure to sexual materials and observing other children and adults they do, they will probably understand the difference between the sex organs at a fairly young age as well. Parents can't force gender identification on their children any more than they can "force" them to have blue or brown eyes. All they can do with these types of tactics is traumatize the children.

Just to clarify, my daughters are not trans. One is pansexual, one is cis and one is bi.

There was no decision on their parts. That is who they are. I could ask the question of Flock, Spock, or others who believe as they do - When did you decide to be heterosexual? If gender is a decision to be made, then there must have been a moment that you made that decision.

[flockofseagulls104]

And your two children will have to accept the reality that they are biologically male, and they will always be biologically male regardless of how well they present themselves as female. There will be biological restrictions and limitations and there will be societal and cultural restrictions and limitations based on their decision.

Unless I"m mistaken, Krox's two daughters are biologically female, not that it should be any concern to you or me.

For many people, there are "societal and cultural restrictions and limitations based on their decision" of what religion to practice. And in large parts of this country, there were social and cultural restrictions and limitations not all that long ago based on their race. But let's call these "restrictions and limitations" what they are: bigotry. Regardless of whether it's based on race, religion, sexual preference, or gender identification.

Children begin to decide their gender identification as soon as they are capable of understanding the differences between the genders. Notice I said genders, not sexes. Depending on how much exposure to sexual materials and observing other children and adults they do, they will probably understand the difference between the sex organs at a fairly young age as well. Parents can't force gender identification on their children any more than they can "force" them to have blue or brown eyes. All they can do with these types of tactics is traumatize the children.

Just to clarify, my daughters are not trans. One is pansexual, one is cis and one is bi.

There was no decision on their parts. That is who they are. I could ask the question of Flock, Spock, or others who believe as they do - When did you decide to be heterosexual? If gender is a decision to be made, then there must have been a moment that you made that decision.

Thanks for clearing that up. Now I'm even more skeptical. In my opinion, and that of many, many others who weren't indoctrinated by the 'education' system, all these new gender classifications are artificially dreamed-up constructs created by the same leftist conglomerate that came up with the totally contradictory but politically useful construct called microaggressions.

In this case, yes, I had to look it up on google. Pansexual? That is a construct that didn't exist until a few years ago, and is an artificial, arbitrary definition to support a narrative. Even its 'official' definition is unclear as to how it differs in describing someone who is sexually attracted to both sexes.

You are right about one thing. I didn't make a decision about my sexuality. I have always been attracted to females. Now someone or some group has decided that is to be called 'cis'. Who gave them that authority to control the language and make it so I have to accept it (or be called names they have defined that equate towards being hateful, or in some cases be made a criminal))? Your children HAVE made a decision to define and align themselves based on this new, artificial, unscientific and divisive narrative. And you, yourself, just blindly accept that narrative and judge others that don't and will not accept it. THAT is the difference here.

I just want to add that in your case I don't see, then, how they are being discriminated against unless THEY initiate it. In our society, it is pretty much accepted that they can love who they want to love, and very few people care. The only conflict is when they push their narrative on people who don't buy into it. Like going to bakers that don't want to participate in a gay wedding because of religious objections and insist and sue those people as harrassment, when they could easily just go to another baker who would. Would they go to an Islamic or Jewish butcher and sue them because they wouldn't sell them bacon? No, because they are only doing so to proclaim their victimhood and force their narrative.

I don't accept your narrative based on what you told me, krox. And there is even more that I am firmly against when it comes to the Transsexual agenda.

[kroxquo]

Unless I"m mistaken, Krox's two daughters are biologically female, not that it should be any concern to you or me.

For many people, there are "societal and cultural restrictions and limitations based on their decision" of what religion to practice. And in large parts of this country, there were social and cultural restrictions and limitations not all that long ago based on their race. But let's call these "restrictions and limitations" what they are: bigotry. Regardless of whether it's based on race, religion, sexual preference, or gender identification.

Children begin to decide their gender identification as soon as they are capable of understanding the differences between the genders. Notice I said genders, not sexes. Depending on how much exposure to sexual materials and observing other children and adults they do, they will probably understand the difference between the sex organs at a fairly young age as well. Parents can't force gender identification on their children any more than they can "force" them to have blue or brown eyes. All they can do with these types of tactics is traumatize the children.

Just to clarify, my daughters are not trans. One is pansexual, one is cis and one is bi.

There was no decision on their parts. That is who they are. I could ask the question of Flock, Spock, or others who believe as they do - When did you decide to be heterosexual? If gender is a decision to be made, then there must have been a moment that you made that decision.

Thanks for clearing that up. Now I'm even more skeptical. In my opinion, and that of many, many others who weren't indoctrinated by the 'education' system, all these new gender classifications are artificially dreamed-up constructs created by the same leftist conglomerate that came up with the totally contradictory but politically useful construct called microaggressions.

In this case, yes, I had to look it up on google. Pansexual? That is a construct that didn't exist until a few years ago, and is an artificial, arbitrary definition to support a narrative. Even its 'official' definition is unclear as to how it differs in describing someone who is sexually attracted to both sexes.

You are right about one thing. I didn't make a decision about my sexuality. I have always been attracted to females. Now someone or some group has decided that is to be called 'cis'. Who gave them that authority to control the language and make it so I have to accept it (or be called names they have defined that equate towards being hateful, or in some cases be made a criminal))? Your children HAVE made a decision to define and align themselves based on this new, artificial, unscientific and divisive narrative. And you, yourself, just blindly accept that narrative and judge others that don't and will not accept it. THAT is the difference here.

I am removing myself from this conversation. Not because I am afraid to stand up to your arguments. Not because you have convinced me you are right. But because I have always intended to keep my discussions and arguments and you and Spock have made it nearly impossible for me to say anything without really letting go. And I do not want to degrade myself by stooping to say what I really think about Spock's and your opinions of my children and my parenting.

[flockofseagulls104]

Just to clarify, my daughters are not trans. One is pansexual, one is cis and one is bi.

There was no decision on their parts. That is who they are. I could ask the question of Flock, Spock, or others who believe as they do - When did you decide to be heterosexual? If gender is a decision to be made, then there must have been a moment that you made that decision.

Thanks for clearing that up. Now I'm even more skeptical. In my opinion, and that of many, many others who weren't indoctrinated by the 'education' system, all these new gender classifications are artificially dreamed-up constructs created by the same leftist conglomerate that came up with the totally contradictory but politically useful construct called microaggressions.

In this case, yes, I had to look it up on google. Pansexual? That is a construct that didn't exist until a few years ago, and is an artificial, arbitrary definition to support a narrative. Even its 'official' definition is unclear as to how it differs in describing someone who is sexually attracted to both sexes.

You are right about one thing. I didn't make a decision about my sexuality. I have always been attracted to females. Now someone or some group has decided that is to be called 'cis'. Who gave them that authority to control the language and make it so I have to accept it (or be called names they have defined that equate towards being hateful, or in some cases be made a criminal))? Your children HAVE made a decision to define and align themselves based on this new, artificial, unscientific and divisive narrative. And you, yourself, just blindly accept that narrative and judge others that don't and will not accept it. THAT is the difference here.

I am removing myself from this conversation. Not because I am afraid to stand up to your arguments. Not because you have convinced me you are right. But because I have always intended to keep my discussions and arguments and you and Spock have made it nearly impossible for me to say anything without really letting go. And I do not want to degrade myself by stooping to say what I really think about Spock's and your opinions of my children and my parenting.

Just love your children, which I am sure you do, but think about the harm this narrative is doing. It is NOT needed not beneficial to anyone. Especially to children.

[silverscreenselect]

Now I'm even more skeptical. In my opinion, and that of many, many others who weren't indoctrinated by the 'education' system, all these new gender classifications are artificially dreamed-up constructs created by the same leftist conglomerate that came up with the totally contradictory but politically useful construct called microaggressions.

In this case, yes, I had to look it up on google. Pansexual? That is a construct that didn't exist until a few years ago, and is an artificial, arbitrary definition to support a narrative. Even its 'official' definition is unclear as to how it differs in describing someone who is sexually attracted to both sexes.

You are right about one thing. I didn't make a decision about my sexuality. I have always been attracted to females. Now someone or some group has decided that is to be called 'cis'. Who gave them that authority to control the language and make it so I have to accept it (or be called names they have defined that equate towards being hateful, or in some cases be made a criminal))?

Bacteria were first identified in 1676 and given the name in 1872 (yes, I looked it up). Viruses were identified and named in 1898. The names are relatively recent, but they've been around for millions of years. It just took science quite a while to catch up.

People have been presenting themselves as the opposite sex throughout known history. For much of that time, they either kept it to themselves or got locked up in insane asylums (or worse). It's taken medical science quite a while to understand the phenomena and assign appropriate labels. The word transexual was first used in 1923 and transgender in 1971. These terms weren't "dreamed-up constructs created by the same leftist conglomerate." They first appeared in scientific and medical journals to describe conditions that had existed for centuries without being given a name. And Flock is right; there is a lack of agreement in the medical community about the differences between pansexuality and bisexuality (although pansexual seems to encompass more of a broad emotional attraction than a purely physical one.) The biggest evolution in our study of sexuality and gender identity is the realization that there is a scale of both sexuality and gender identification, and the exact contours and boundaries are not strictly defined (or precisely known).

Flock is wrong about the use of the term cisgender. It refers to one who identifies with their natal sex, not one who is sexually attracted to the opposite sex. Because that condition was considered "normal" for many years, no one gave a name until the 1990s. Based on what Flock says, he's always been cisgender.

Our study of human sexuality has lagged behind other scientific fields in part because psychology in general has lagged behind the physical sciences and in part because of the difficulty in talking openly about the subject. The term pansexual was first coined around World War I, and its first use was in medical journals. But pansexuals have been around since the days of ancient Greece and Rome (at least). Again, the phenomenon was ancient, the term used to describe it fairly modern. Human sexuality hasn't changed in millennia. No one invented homosexuality, bisexuality, pansexuality or any other condition. Our understanding of the subject has evolved, just as our understanding of bacteria and viruses have evolved. That's scientific progress. It's not a political or cultural agenda.

[flockofseagulls104]

https://twitter.com/i/status/1679900646630146048

This is what's going on. And the response?
Moms for Liberty designated a HATE GROUP by the ACTUAL hate group called the SPLC.

https://www.momsforliberty.org/about/

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/moms- ... r-AA1dGOt9

Don't you dare use the proclamations of politicians, the 'findings' of judges or the decisions of swamp dwellers who are protecting their turf to defend what is so obviously wrong. Think for yourself for once.

The survivors and 'true believers' of anti-establishment wings of the 1960's cultural and societal movement that accomplished so much good are the communists. And they have had multiple generations to indoctrinate young people with their insanity. And they have become the establishment. So here we are again, back full circle. Don't trust the establishment.

[silverscreenselect]

https://twitter.com/i/status/1679900646630146048

This is what's going on. And the response?
Moms for Liberty designated a HATE GROUP by the ACTUAL hate group called the SPLC.

Moms for Liberty Uses Hitler Quote To ‘Scare’ Parents (Once they were caught, they issued an apology.)

Inside Moms for Liberty’s Close Relationship With the Proud Boys

Six reasons why Moms for Liberty is an extremist organization

If the shoe fits...

[Bob Juch]

Yesterday I was told my oldest great-grandson has dressed in drag. He's cis otherwise.

[silverscreenselect]

In this case, yes, I had to look it up on google. Pansexual? That is a construct that didn't exist until a few years ago, and is an artificial, arbitrary definition to support a narrative. Even its 'official' definition is unclear as to how it differs in describing someone who is sexually attracted to both sexes.

Wayne Brady, host of Let's Make a Deal, has come out as pansexual or, as he describes it "bisexual with an open mind."

"I came to pansexual because… to me, pan means being able to be attracted to anyone who identifies as gay, straight, bi, transsexual or non-binary. Being able to be attracted across the board. I took pan to mean that not only can I be attracted to any of these people or types physically, but I could be attracted to the person that is there." [Brady clarified that he's not dating anyone at the moment] "I am single, but it's not about being with someone right now. I've got some work to do still. Then, Wayne as a single, open-minded pansexual can make a decision and be free and open to other people."

https://ew.com/celebrity/wayne-brady-co ... 4ac26d84a0

[BackInTex]

In this case, yes, I had to look it up on google. Pansexual? That is a construct that didn't exist until a few years ago, and is an artificial, arbitrary definition to support a narrative. Even its 'official' definition is unclear as to how it differs in describing someone who is sexually attracted to both sexes.

Wayne Brady, host of Let's Make a Deal, has come out as pansexual or, as he describes it "bisexual with an open mind."

"I came to pansexual because… to me, pan means being able to be attracted to anyone who identifies as gay, straight, bi, transsexual or non-binary. Being able to be attracted across the board. I took pan to mean that not only can I be attracted to any of these people or types physically, but I could be attracted to the person that is there." [Brady clarified that he's not dating anyone at the moment] "I am single, but it's not about being with someone right now. I've got some work to do still. Then, Wayne as a single, open-minded pansexual can make a decision and be free and open to other people."

https://ew.com/celebrity/wayne-brady-co ... 4ac26d84a0

Hoity-toity classification to one-up the oh so common homosexual.

[flockofseagulls104]

In this case, yes, I had to look it up on google. Pansexual? That is a construct that didn't exist until a few years ago, and is an artificial, arbitrary definition to support a narrative. Even its 'official' definition is unclear as to how it differs in describing someone who is sexually attracted to both sexes.

Wayne Brady, host of Let's Make a Deal, has come out as pansexual or, as he describes it "bisexual with an open mind."

"I came to pansexual because… to me, pan means being able to be attracted to anyone who identifies as gay, straight, bi, transsexual or non-binary. Being able to be attracted across the board. I took pan to mean that not only can I be attracted to any of these people or types physically, but I could be attracted to the person that is there." [Brady clarified that he's not dating anyone at the moment] "I am single, but it's not about being with someone right now. I've got some work to do still. Then, Wayne as a single, open-minded pansexual can make a decision and be free and open to other people."

https://ew.com/celebrity/wayne-brady-co ... 4ac26d84a0

Hoity-toity classification to one-up the oh so common homosexual.

I'm not up on these new scientific facts. Can we assume he was born that way?

So we have PAN sexual. OK. I want to make up a new construct. How about POT sexual? That will be defined as someone who only gets horny when they're stoned. What do I have to do to get that on the indoctrination list?

[tlynn78]

In this case, yes, I had to look it up on google. Pansexual? That is a construct that didn't exist until a few years ago, and is an artificial, arbitrary definition to support a narrative. Even its 'official' definition is unclear as to how it differs in describing someone who is sexually attracted to both sexes.

Wayne Brady, host of Let's Make a Deal, has come out as pansexual or, as he describes it "bisexual with an open mind."

"I came to pansexual because… to me, pan means being able to be attracted to anyone who identifies as gay, straight, bi, transsexual or non-binary. Being able to be attracted across the board. I took pan to mean that not only can I be attracted to any of these people or types physically, but I could be attracted to the person that is there." [Brady clarified that he's not dating anyone at the moment] "I am single, but it's not about being with someone right now. I've got some work to do still. Then, Wayne as a single, open-minded pansexual can make a decision and be free and open to other people."

https://ew.com/celebrity/wayne-brady-co ... 4ac26d84a0

Hoity-toity classification to one-up the oh so common homosexual.

Basically, just keeping ones options open.