Dublin Pride ends media partnership with RTE over Liveline's Gender Identity discussion

Precisely. Everyone is, including myself.

That is why I am irked when I'm accused of participating in these debates for no other reason that 'to hold people back'. To say that it's all just a question of everyone being regarded as equal in law is just reductive.

I'm more on here to gain an understanding for myself than anything else. I do that by reading opinions, giving my view on it after some thought. That is why I said earlier that I find this message board educational. When the JK Rowling thread was in existence I hadn't a clue what what posters here were talking about half the time which is why I never got involved in it. It's been a journey for me since then that's for sure.

The thing about gender is noone really understands it. Medical scientist's have tried to understand it but they have never been able to after all the study's. The can't even say what gender is in a psychological sense.

I have a theory of my own that came to me recently and I think I'm as entitled to put forward my theory as anyone is.

And here it is;

The question is always asked; what is the difference between sex and gender. Biological sex vs a personal sense of gender.

I think that's all wrong. I think gender is basically sexuality.

So if you ask what is gender? Well whatever it is gender can't exist without sexuality. Gender is grounded in sexuality.

If one were to accept my way of looking at it, that means it's silly to talk about 'gender' in isolation. As if it's just a personal characteristic like the individual colour of one's hair. Gender is sexuality, is what I'm proposing.

I want to back this up with what we see. We see Drag Queens, fem boys, transsexuals, trangenders all being grouped together. All of those are regarded as sexual identities, except for transgender (which is though to be simply gender not sexuality), but why is it they are all regarded as 'the same kind of thing' politically. It's because they ARE all the same kind of thing, which is an identity, a characteristic, that is grounded in sexuality.

Further back up: Whenever you see trans women especially, they classically fashion themselves in a feminine sexual way. You never see butch trans women.

All those stereotypical natural gender differences that men and women have, men butch, women feminine, exists because of sexuality, to differentiate the two. That is why when one transitions the first think they want to amend or 'fix' is their sexual sex organs, obviously breasts, genital. So clearly their sense of gender is grounded is sexuality, not gender because gender is just incidental to sexuality.

Now we hear about various gender identities, gender fluid or one of a 100 genders. This is utter nonsense if you think of gender as just gender. It makes much more logical sense if you think about it as a sexuality identity, not a gender identity. Because the sexual fantasy mind exists.

So again, what I am saying is that there is no such thing as gender in isolation, it is grounded in sexuality. It is an extension of sexuality.

I want to be really clear , I'm not saying trans is a sexual perversion (no more that I would say homosexuality is a sexual perversion). I'm only saying that gender is grounded in sexuality and gender can't exist without human sexuality. And yes, I am saying that children although not sexually active, they do develop their sexual identity from a young age.

This all means that I think gender expression is really sexuality expression. This means transgender is a sexuality topic, not a 'gender' topic.

Now you might ask...what difference does it make? Well it would make a difference because are we really going to teach kids in schools about flip sexuality identities, for one.

I know there was a incident in the UK in recent years, where Muslims objected to a school teaching kids about homosexual parents. The way the school did it was 'oh look here, some children have 2 mummies'. At first I though that was fine, but I've changed my mind. I don't think we should be teaching kids about flip sexual identities in the guise of doing it for acceptance of homosexuals. In the same way I object to teaching kids about transgender flip identities because it is a sexuality issue in it's nature imo. Over 16 maybe, but not younger.

So, all of these opinions I couldn't possibly have just dreamt up out of fresh air to to contradict OEJ's accusation that I'm only involved in these debates to 'stop people moving forward'. Clearly I'm using this forum as a way to think about this topic.

I think the only way forward is to know exactly what transgender is, what is it's nature. Only then can we make progress and agreement. We are certainly nowhere near that as it is.