Carlton Supporters Club

Sexuality and Gender are not same same but different.  More gay people won't spurn more gay people.  More people will be curious about it, maybe even give it a go, but sexuality is unique.  Pheromones make up a larger part of attraction and I think the right mix in the right person might attract you to someone of the same gender from time to time.  This is scientifically viewable.

Trans is a bit different.  You have avoided this part of the debate in a slippery manner with different analogies, but what can being male or female mean?  Is it behaviour?  Is it attire?  The point I am making isnt about the gender, its about the gender CONSTRUCT.  The role people believe a man or woman play and ergo, by extension question if they are that role.  Not that gender.  Identity is shaped by gender, not gender by identity.  ITS BACKWARDS THINKING.  How can i convey this message in any other way? 

Back to your analogy about the American Indian community.  From the same culture, The tale of the two wolves portrays the good and evil that lives within us, represented by the conscious and the unconscious desire of man. If we are unconscious of our thoughts, we are at the mercy of feeding the evil wolf. Our unconscious thoughts are the unresolved or repressed parts of our psyche.

Lets not make it good evil but its more about how you nurture your identity and the masculine and the feminine.  Sexuality is a much more biological process.  Not all women turn me on, but I am turned on by women.  I am fundamentally straight.  Feeding a gay component of my body will not limit my attraction to the women, but it may increase my ability to be turned on by men.  I am not gay, but I can appreciate a good looking rooster, and my thought is that he would do well with the ladies (or maybe even the men if so inclined). 

Trans on the other hand becomes a cycle of questioning ones self.  Feeding the wolf.  I am a woman in a mans body is repeated to the point that it is true.  Its programming, unless you belong to the very minute percentage born with some level of genetic ambiguity.  Its not honest to become a female if you arent one or vice versa.  Its actually a bit deceitful.

Not to mention, its actually not real based on my definition of Male: Human with male genitalia or Female:  Human with female genetalia.

What is it, about a trans person that makes them feel a different gender to their biology?  Ive asked this, I dont really get an answer, just what they feel makes them happy.  I feel happy when I buy new stuff, but that isnt the key to happiness.  When I am going through a tough time, I remember to be thankful for what I have acknowledging that I am quite fortunate for the things I have, and try to dismiss the things I don't.  THAT is the key to happiness.


With that point in mind, apply that to your question 4.  Be thankful for what you have.  Others would love to have your issues instead of their own.

2.  Read your link.  As I expected this is a completely no comparison.  The hand having a "mind of its own" isnt about getting it cut off at all, is sporadic, and amputation isnt given as a treatment option in your link.  It is effectively nuero diagnosed, and potentially treatable but in some cases where the neuro pathways are broken beyond repair, not the same thing. 

3.  Foot fetish.  The fact that you even state its a wiring issue in the brain, makes me state you already have your answer to this question.  You dont approve of that either.


Are you going to tell me, how these people somehow are granted the ability to find out how it feels to be a woman when they arent one or vice versa?

I can call you she, her, if you like, that still doesnt make you understand what menstruation or menopause feels like.

LODS has answered point 1 better than I can, but walking into a cubicle with a man dressed as a woman makes me feel a little uncomfortable, and I imagine females might feel the same.  Guess I am trans after all.... 

Amazing example of how politics plays into science reporting.

I notice that NASA has released a bunch of James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) images. These are outstanding, but they left me a little blah, not because the images aren't great but because there was nothing to compare them to. I thought NASA missed a trick by not making direct comparisons between images from JWST and HST, like for like.

However, when a queried an associate who works as a professional astronomer it was explained to me that the scientists do not want to diminish the remaining worth of the HST. So the decision was made to deliberately not make any overt direct comparison in the initial public offerings. It's probably there somewhere buried in the background info, but they won't highlight it. Because they don't want funding for HST cut prematurely, and they fear this might happen if public perceive HST as redundant.

It's bit sad and a bit cynical, is it an opportunity lost?

My oldest brother is an astronomer and he would never compromise science for political purposes.  If anything, he is dedicated to using science against political agendas.

I haven't spoken to him about the James Webb Telescope images but I noticed a comparison of James Webb Space Telescope images to Hubble's pictures: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-07-13/nasa-webb-hubble-telescope-universe-image-comparison/101233396

LP, you’re creating issues that don’t exist

There is no issue, it's just an observation about the release of the data, and the explanation I was given about how it was staged and why.

Much of the funding gets secured through the decadal survey, but it's not entirely immune to the effects of public perception.

If you read nasa's fb feed or website youll see plenty of posts promoting both telescopes.
There was one article that had a screenshot of a Hubble tweet (I think) congratulating the new kid on the block and looking forwards to working together into Hubbles old age.

Bec didn't do herself any favours when she
complained on social media about red dust in her pool when bushfires were raging and lesser well off folk were losing everything.
It wasn't malicious but she just couldn't read the room or have awareness of others issues and the magnitude of despair they were suffering.
Bec needs a bit of education in how the other half live and why her home was targeted rather than a bashing in the media. I remember reading that Jerry Seinfeld bought an expensive flash mansion/property years ago that he bulldozed to the ground and was asked why and his reply was "because I can"....
Hopefully Bec never gets to that level and can learn a bit more about being humble and I reckon then her local crime problems might go away...

Exactamundo. Snobbery is never attractive.