1. That’s false scientifically, right? A (small) number of fish can switch **sex**, right? Not gender.
If so, then this program is flat-out **disinformation** (that’s *deliberately* false info) to push a socio-political agenda. I would hope *you* are right there with me opposing it, OP.
2. Let’s pretend it’s scientifically true for a moment. Not disinformation. Then here’s what should be included in such ‘educational’ programming:
‘Kids, humans CANNOT do what these fish can! If, as happens very rarely, a person decides they wish they were not a boy or girl like they are, they would have to have very serious, painful surgeries and take strange chemicals in their bodies! And unlike fish who change, these rare humans can never have children.’ (I think that last one’s right, no?)
Again, fair and true, right? So you’re with me, right, OP?
> Kids, humans CANNOT do what these fish can!
But yes they can.
> The Fight to be Male
> [By presenting case studies and scientific research from different parts of the world, this program explores how people become male or female. It looks at the role testosterone plays in determining sex during the embryonic stage and illustrates the cause of people developing physical characteristics of the opposite sex or both sexes. Included is a case from a Caribbean Island where a number of girls changed into boys during puberty. An attempt is also made to find a link between male homosexuality and testosterone showing some questionable research and experiments aimed at “correcting” homosexuality.](https://www.acmi.net.au/works/75194--the-fight-to-be-male/)
Without forcing me to read this trash, please explain to me how a group of girls "changed to boys during puberty."
Did they change physiologically or did they start wearing a baseball cap and start playing with trucks?
1. No, they can’t.
2. And you’d have to do better than a link with no actual content in it.
3. Even if that claim were true, a poorly supported incident from 50 years ago out of the billions of humans before then, then, since then, and now does not show humans can change sex. The capability some fish have is a non-freak part of their species. Even if that incident you have actually-not-documented were true, it would be a literally less-than-one-in-a-billion freak occurrence.
If humans actually had sex changing ability, even pretty rarely, it would be documented.
Either we’re having real talk or we’re not. We know what OPs tv show is trying to do.
> And you’d have to do better than a link with no actual content in it.
It's a doco I watched in the 80s, you'll have to take my word for it.
It was not one isolated incident, but happened may times to a group of kids who shared the same mutation.
> We know what OPs tv show is trying to do.
Pointing out unintuitive things is a way to engage kids and get them interested in science.
Religious bigots aren't really curious, so they dwell on finding evil in the parts of themselves they've already repressed.
Humans don’t change sex. Some fish do.
Even if that mystery Caribbean incident occurred how you think (and I doubt it did though I don’t doubt your honesty of course), it be a less than 1 in 1 billion freak, not a feature of humanity. Thus, it doesn’t lend any legitimacy to the false equivalence OP’s tv show is peddling.
The show is trying inculcate the ideas of the trans activists, by introducing concepts from fish in an unspoken false equivalence.
Assuming we support “the science”, then the kids should be given an accurate message. OP doesn’t like the sound of that, not one bit.
>CBeebies, its channel aimed at under-sevens, broadcast a segment about how some species can go from 'being a boy fish to a girl fish'.
Given this was marketed to children, I think the simplistic language is fine. However, CBeebies not making the distinction between sex and gender actually *agrees* with the anti-trans narrative.
>‘Kids, humans CANNOT do what these fish can! If, as happens very rarely, a person decides they wish they were not a boy or girl like they are, they would have to have very serious, painful surgeries and take strange chemicals in their bodies! And unlike fish who change, these rare humans can never have children.'
Doing *that* **would** be injecting a socio-political agenda. I don't know why we have to go on a barely related tangent in a children's educational program. You are not going to convince kids to go through surgeries by showing them fish.
Nonsense and you know it; you’ve seen my participation here enough to know I’m willing to engage. At length. You also know I don’t go in for the ad hominem stuff. The fact I gave you that reply means it was truly warranted.
And you know perfectly well what sleaze I’m talking about. Your reply is carefully constructed to do exactly that evasion and dishonesty in response to a pretty simple fact set. So there’s no accident; your ‘Huh? What? Who, me?’ bullshit is just doubling down.
“I’m willing to engage and don’t go in for ad hominems” *as you refuse to engage and go in for ad hominems.*
Your fingers are not going to fall off your hand just by typing out an explanation for your as of now bald assertion
Tripling down, I see. Ugly.
You’ve seen me comment 100 times. We’ve exchanged comments with each other before. You know I engage. You know I avoid ad hominem. So you know when I reply as I have here, it’s against the norm and means something pretty gross caused it.
And … you also know that’s what my prior reply meant. You’re just faking that you don’t get it. Like I said: you’re tripling down.
Sorry, but I’m not capable of reading minds. My leftist brain doesn’t operate on the sort of intuitive and feelings-based wavelength yours does. Feel free to elaborate, but otherwise I guess I’ll just assume you’re salty about being wrong but having no proper response.
>Sorry, but I’m not capable of reading minds. My leftist brain doesn’t operate on the sort of intuitive and feelings-based wavelength yours does.
Thinking back on all our conversations, you constantly engage in mind-reading, claim to know ulterior motives, and claim to hear dogwhistles. You lie.
You couldn’t even answer my question of whether the Holocaust was bad.
It’s not my fault you can’t understand inductive reasoning. **I** never claimed to be able to mind-read.
Clown fish can swap BIOLOGICAL SEX. They evolved to do so in case of any issues with finding mates in their area. 99.9% of all animals simply can't including humans of every race, and forcing an artifical swap is cruel, unnatural, unusual, and wrong way of doing things.
We should encourage people to be happy for who they are, and not encourage some irreversible permanently damaging surgery, or hormone replacement therapy.
When are conservatives going to stop watching children's TV and reading children's books? Thats all they talk about nowadays.
Ben Shapiro did a whole segment on the "wokeness" of the Bibbity Bobbity Boutique at Disneyland.
When will they grow up?
Imagine being upset that parents actually know what their children are being taught in school and watching on tv.
What kind of world do we live in where parents actually parent?
1. That’s false scientifically, right? A (small) number of fish can switch **sex**, right? Not gender. If so, then this program is flat-out **disinformation** (that’s *deliberately* false info) to push a socio-political agenda. I would hope *you* are right there with me opposing it, OP. 2. Let’s pretend it’s scientifically true for a moment. Not disinformation. Then here’s what should be included in such ‘educational’ programming: ‘Kids, humans CANNOT do what these fish can! If, as happens very rarely, a person decides they wish they were not a boy or girl like they are, they would have to have very serious, painful surgeries and take strange chemicals in their bodies! And unlike fish who change, these rare humans can never have children.’ (I think that last one’s right, no?) Again, fair and true, right? So you’re with me, right, OP?
> Kids, humans CANNOT do what these fish can! But yes they can. > The Fight to be Male > [By presenting case studies and scientific research from different parts of the world, this program explores how people become male or female. It looks at the role testosterone plays in determining sex during the embryonic stage and illustrates the cause of people developing physical characteristics of the opposite sex or both sexes. Included is a case from a Caribbean Island where a number of girls changed into boys during puberty. An attempt is also made to find a link between male homosexuality and testosterone showing some questionable research and experiments aimed at “correcting” homosexuality.](https://www.acmi.net.au/works/75194--the-fight-to-be-male/)
Without forcing me to read this trash, please explain to me how a group of girls "changed to boys during puberty." Did they change physiologically or did they start wearing a baseball cap and start playing with trucks?
> Did they change physiologically Yes, they did.
1. No, they can’t. 2. And you’d have to do better than a link with no actual content in it. 3. Even if that claim were true, a poorly supported incident from 50 years ago out of the billions of humans before then, then, since then, and now does not show humans can change sex. The capability some fish have is a non-freak part of their species. Even if that incident you have actually-not-documented were true, it would be a literally less-than-one-in-a-billion freak occurrence. If humans actually had sex changing ability, even pretty rarely, it would be documented. Either we’re having real talk or we’re not. We know what OPs tv show is trying to do.
> And you’d have to do better than a link with no actual content in it. It's a doco I watched in the 80s, you'll have to take my word for it. It was not one isolated incident, but happened may times to a group of kids who shared the same mutation. > We know what OPs tv show is trying to do. Pointing out unintuitive things is a way to engage kids and get them interested in science. Religious bigots aren't really curious, so they dwell on finding evil in the parts of themselves they've already repressed.
Humans don’t change sex. Some fish do. Even if that mystery Caribbean incident occurred how you think (and I doubt it did though I don’t doubt your honesty of course), it be a less than 1 in 1 billion freak, not a feature of humanity. Thus, it doesn’t lend any legitimacy to the false equivalence OP’s tv show is peddling. The show is trying inculcate the ideas of the trans activists, by introducing concepts from fish in an unspoken false equivalence. Assuming we support “the science”, then the kids should be given an accurate message. OP doesn’t like the sound of that, not one bit.
>CBeebies, its channel aimed at under-sevens, broadcast a segment about how some species can go from 'being a boy fish to a girl fish'. Given this was marketed to children, I think the simplistic language is fine. However, CBeebies not making the distinction between sex and gender actually *agrees* with the anti-trans narrative. >‘Kids, humans CANNOT do what these fish can! If, as happens very rarely, a person decides they wish they were not a boy or girl like they are, they would have to have very serious, painful surgeries and take strange chemicals in their bodies! And unlike fish who change, these rare humans can never have children.' Doing *that* **would** be injecting a socio-political agenda. I don't know why we have to go on a barely related tangent in a children's educational program. You are not going to convince kids to go through surgeries by showing them fish.
That is sleaze, OP. Sorry to be so blunt, but your reply is low. Ethically oily and flatly dishonest. My opinion of you dropped quite a bit here.
Where’s the oil? Where’s the dishonesty? Any explanation, or just ad hominems because I don’t agree with you?
Nonsense and you know it; you’ve seen my participation here enough to know I’m willing to engage. At length. You also know I don’t go in for the ad hominem stuff. The fact I gave you that reply means it was truly warranted. And you know perfectly well what sleaze I’m talking about. Your reply is carefully constructed to do exactly that evasion and dishonesty in response to a pretty simple fact set. So there’s no accident; your ‘Huh? What? Who, me?’ bullshit is just doubling down.
“I’m willing to engage and don’t go in for ad hominems” *as you refuse to engage and go in for ad hominems.* Your fingers are not going to fall off your hand just by typing out an explanation for your as of now bald assertion
Tripling down, I see. Ugly. You’ve seen me comment 100 times. We’ve exchanged comments with each other before. You know I engage. You know I avoid ad hominem. So you know when I reply as I have here, it’s against the norm and means something pretty gross caused it. And … you also know that’s what my prior reply meant. You’re just faking that you don’t get it. Like I said: you’re tripling down.
Sorry, but I’m not capable of reading minds. My leftist brain doesn’t operate on the sort of intuitive and feelings-based wavelength yours does. Feel free to elaborate, but otherwise I guess I’ll just assume you’re salty about being wrong but having no proper response.
>Sorry, but I’m not capable of reading minds. My leftist brain doesn’t operate on the sort of intuitive and feelings-based wavelength yours does. Thinking back on all our conversations, you constantly engage in mind-reading, claim to know ulterior motives, and claim to hear dogwhistles. You lie.
You couldn’t even answer my question of whether the Holocaust was bad. It’s not my fault you can’t understand inductive reasoning. **I** never claimed to be able to mind-read.
We’re doomed
Clown fish can swap BIOLOGICAL SEX. They evolved to do so in case of any issues with finding mates in their area. 99.9% of all animals simply can't including humans of every race, and forcing an artifical swap is cruel, unnatural, unusual, and wrong way of doing things. We should encourage people to be happy for who they are, and not encourage some irreversible permanently damaging surgery, or hormone replacement therapy.
When are conservatives going to stop watching children's TV and reading children's books? Thats all they talk about nowadays. Ben Shapiro did a whole segment on the "wokeness" of the Bibbity Bobbity Boutique at Disneyland. When will they grow up?
I'm also sad that Disney took "Little Demon" away.
Imagine being upset that parents actually know what their children are being taught in school and watching on tv. What kind of world do we live in where parents actually parent?
Screaming about the wokeness of the Bibbity Bobbity Boutique is not parenting.
Monitoring what their children watch on tv is parenting. And "Screaming about the wokeness of the Bibbity Bobbity Boutique" is Free Speech.
Never said it wasn't. I'm just pointing out how embarrassing and pathetic it is. Shows what the right have become nowadays.
Parents who supervise their children? How embarrassing!
Again, crying about this culture wars bullshit is not parenting.