Posted on 11/16/2008 9:08:02 PM PST by Maelstorm
There is an enormous and growing body of research, encompassing the fields of biochemistry, neurobiology, physiology and psychology, which all point to a clear conclusion: that there are profound differences between men and women. These go well beyond the obvious physical appearances and reproductive differences; men and women differ at many levels, and also approach relationships differently. As such, this document rests upon, and makes the case for, these four foundational principles:
1. Gender differences exist; they are a fundamental reality of our biology and impact our psychology. Our maleness and femaleness is a key aspect to our personhood.
2. Acknowledging, rather than ignoring (or worse denying), gender differences is the only intellectually honest response to this reality.
3. Gender differences are complementary; individuals, our collective humanity, and society as a whole, all benefit from masculine and feminine characteristics. We are better for having men with a clear understanding of their masculinity and women with a clear understanding of their femininity.
4. Gender identity confusion does exist in a small minority of individuals.
5 It is a painful pathology and warrants a compassionate response. However it is not the ‘normative’ experience and is not therefore a paradigm upon which to drive social policy and institutions.
(Excerpt) Read more at gendermatters.org.au ...
This reminds me of a blog topic I saw, "What's different about gay marriage?"
To which I replied, "Why would anyone have to ask?"
A good download to save as a pdf and think about.
Apparently they did not do their study in Seattle or LA.
Thanks for posting. This should be read and studied by every person in politic, and every school teacher. It’s very well researched, has many references, and is clear.
Exactly. I think the fact that the obvious has become so lost in todays world unfortunate. One does not need Jesus or religion to believe that same sex mating is essentially incorrect. It doesn’t take much analysis to prove this but the left wants to marginalize this as a religious issue. It doesn’t matter the diseases, the physical illnesses, the natural mental and social consequences. What is particularly unfortunate is how many cases of same sex molestation go unprosecuted and unaddressed because of the ascendancy of homosexual activism in modern culture.
I think that is where we often fail. We do not need to approach the issue from a purely religious perspective. Reasonable, intelligent people of all stripes should be able to see and agree on this issue.
Yeah that is true but even in California it is still a minority. It is time to turn the tide and bring back a sense of what true decency and sexual integrity is.
Wow Sandra Bernhardt is looking really rough in that pic... /sarc
I am inclined to say: "Well, Duh...."
Hundreds of years people knew this. Now, we have to have a ‘scientific study’ for us all to catch on.
Thank you for posting this, Maelstorm. I am sending it along to family and friends.
Commonly know as the Third Leg theory.
Yes. I so pray for this.
You’re going to love this:
I had a supervisor not even a year ago who, when I was introduced to “her”, was in the middle of the process of “gender reassignment.”
Co-workers informed me that prior to his transgender adventure, he was just one of the guys, a military vet in his original country (Ireland) who leered at women along with them and so on. Everyone was surprised by the new situation...
I was very uncomfortable having to interact closely with “her” on a nightly basis...”she” was rather arrogant, condescending, and discontent...I eventually gathered that “she” felt harassed and discriminated against at work; that there had been complaints about “her” insistence on using the women’s locker room in the earliest stage of transformation, that management had supposedly both bent over backward to accomodate and simultaneously micro-managed “her”, disciplining “her” on at least one occasion for the slightest dereliction of orders, allegedly.
The upshot of the story is that “she” wound up resigning and going into another field of work, complaining to the end about how “she” had been treated. I heard that she got $80,000 in an out-of-court settlement against our employer.
My position is that people such as “she” suffer from a mental illness and all, and should be afforded some compassion of course, but the concurrent (and perhaps greater) concern should be for the effect on workplace morale; the freakish discomfort caused to people like myself, to women in the locker room, and to others; for the overall rights of others around such a person not to be subjected to the will of a sick, twisted, and confused person to the point that we have to be affected, uncomfortable, and distressed ourselves. And of course there’s the economic injury to the company wrought by lawsuits from such people.
Don't just say that. Make it happen! :-)
Bump for later reading!
That was interesting. However, by using the word “gender,” instead of “sex,” they’re already giving ground to their enemies. Humans are born male or female, one of two “sexes.” Parts of speech have “gender,” with up to seven possibilities in some languages, iirc.
By using “gender” to describe men and women, a writer tacitly agrees that this distinction is as arbitrary, and as meaningless, as the assignment of “masculine” gender to a raincoat and “feminine” to a table.
Interesting take but I think a bit taxing on the details. Most understand that gender as it refers to sexual relationships male or female. I personally like the idea of getting back to a clear definition of gender. I do believe you are confusing two distinctly different things. Gender as it applies to language is not the same thing as gender in reference to human sexuality. Same word different things. :-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.