The strange situation concerning sex and gender

There are normally two sexes.



We have always taken it to mean that an animal with a penis is male and a female has a vagina. It has been so throughout the animal kingdom. A farmer birthing a calf, knows on sight that a calf with a penis will not produce milk.

It’s been a reliable system of knowing what sex a creature is. It has worked with humans too. We can tell the difference between males and females, boys and girls.

All cultures bring their children up as boys or girls.

But now, in the west, this is considered wrong by a small minority with very loud voices. We should remember they are a MINORITY, yet they have been screaming so loudly, we have given them attention.

The baby that screams the loudest gets the most milk!

So now we are able to choose our gender, no matter what sex we are born. And parents should encourage their children to decide from an early age. As you will pick up from my tone, I think it’s all quite potty!

HOWEVER, there are really strange things concerning sex and gender that show deviations from what we have considered normal.

Here is a good article from Nature showing how biology is recording the anomalies. Its called Sex Redefined.

I don’t think it redefines sex, that is a misleading headline, but it’s an interesting paper nevertheless showing how science is coming in to support the minority .

Sex can be much more complicated than it at first seems. According to the simple scenario, the presence or absence of a Y chromosome is what counts: with it, you are male, and without it, you are female. But doctors have long known that some people straddle the boundary — their sex chromosomes say one thing, but their gonads (ovaries or testes) or sexual anatomy say another. Parents of children with these kinds of conditions — known as intersex conditions, or differences or disorders of sex development (DSDs) — often face difficult decisions about whether to bring up their child as a boy or a girl. Some researchers now say that as many as 1 person in 100 has some form of DSD2.

When genetics is taken into consideration, the boundary between the sexes becomes even blurrier. Scientists have identified many of the genes involved in the main forms of DSD, and have uncovered variations in these genes that have subtle effects on a person’s anatomical or physiological sex. What’s more, new technologies in DNA sequencing and cell biology are revealing that almost everyone is, to varying degrees, a patchwork of genetically distinct cells, some with a sex that might not match that of the rest of their body. Some studies even suggest that the sex of each cell drives its behaviour, through a complicated network of molecular interactions. “I think there’s much greater diversity within male or female, and there is certainly an area of overlap where some people can’t easily define themselves within the binary structure,” says John Achermann, who studies sex development and endocrinology at University College London’s Institute of Child Health.

These discoveries do not sit well in a world in which sex is still defined in binary terms. Few legal systems allow for any ambiguity in biological sex, and a person’s legal rights and social status can be heavily influenced by whether their birth certificate says male or female.


Biologists may have been building a more nuanced view of sex, but society has yet to catch up. True, more than half a century of activism from members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community has softened social attitudes to sexual orientation and gender. Many societies are now comfortable with men and women crossing conventional societal boundaries in their choice of appearance, career and sexual partner. But when it comes to sex, there is still intense social pressure to conform to the binary model.

The binary model is Male or Female. It’s what most people are – either male or female.

How are we going to name a non binary model? Could we redefine sex in dogs or cows too?

I dunno – it’s a crazy planet. But the article has a solution!

So if the law requires that a person is male or female, should that sex be assigned by anatomy, hormones, cells or chromosomes, and what should be done if they clash? “My feeling is that since there is not one biological parameter that takes over every other parameter, at the end of the day, gender identity seems to be the most reasonable parameter,” says Vilain. In other words, if you want to know whether someone is male or female, it may be best just to ask.


It’s painful to watch the piranhas – Roger Scruton

I have always liked Roger Scruton. He was/is a smoker who defended smoking. For that he was punished. His crime here.

I find his honesty, refreshing. His dress, manner and relaxed style of talking off the cuff, very entertaining. Added to that, he actually has ideas. His own ideas!

He has ideas worth thinking about.

But he’s in trouble again.

Sir Roger Scruton is England’s greatest living philosopher. He also happens to be a very outspoken, articulate conservative — so it comes as no surprise whatsoever to see the left playing the faux outrage game in order to oust him from his position as a government advisor.


So, to get rid of him, it is employing the same tactics it successfully used earlier this year to force conservative journalist and educationalist Toby Young out of his job on the board of a university watchdog. The process is known as “offence archaeology” (or “offence archaeology” if you prefer, the phrase having been invented by an American).

Offence archaeology is the act of digging around in a person’s past literature and career to uncover opinions, actions, ideas and opinions that cause offence.

Offence. Here are Scruton’s crimes of thinking….. Link

In a 2007 article for the Telegraph, Scruton said homosexuality was not “normal” and outlined his opposition to gay adoption.

“Every now and then,” he wrote, “we wake up to the fact that, although homosexuality has been normalised, it is not normal. Our acceptance of the homosexual lifestyle, of same-sex couples, and of the gay scene has not eliminated our sense that these are alternatives to something, and that it is the other thing that is normal.”

On gay adoption, Scruton wrote: “It is no more an act of discrimination to exclude gay couples than it is to exclude incestuous liaisons or communes of promiscuous swingers.”

He added: “We are being asked to overlook all that we know about the fragility of homosexual partnerships, about the psychological needs of children, and about the norms that still prevail in our schools and communities, for the sake of an ideological fantasy.”

Scruton returned to the theme of Islamophobia in an article for the Spectator in March 2016. He wrote that those who criticise Islam “have to put up with every kind of nasty label — racist, fascist, sexist, and whatever imagined ‘phobia’ serves the agenda of the day — and will be hard pushed to hold on to a job as a policeman, a teacher, or a government official”.

He added: “It is this fear in response to fear that is now leading the authorities all across Europe to hide the truth about the sexual crimes of Muslim immigrants.”

I think he’s a goner.

We are a goner.

Liberal Leftists, the piranhas of the waters of Western Civilisation, are going in for the kill (as they have with others too) until all that’s left to nurture us is the sterile sea of their own ideas.

A re-blog, ‘Getting Cocky’ by When I’m King

I love the writing of ‘When I’m King‘. (Steve Briggs)

He’s funny and serious and very pertinent. Please enjoy…

Getting Cocky

This morning on the drive in to work, I caught a radio report about men in the UK seeking penile enlargement in ever increasing numbers. To avoid the cost of professional surgery, some were injecting their ‘lad’ with oils, Vaseline and other substances presumably sold under the counter for that express purpose. Fortunately the NHS is, as ever, on hand to rescue people from self-inflicted injury and self-directed stupidity.

As I get older I rarely claim any more to have the first clue what is going on in society. News, politics, science, etc, I get, but I have never been completely at ease with the sheer banality of ambition of the narcissists who strut and preen among us. The women who want to look exactly like Barbie, the doll. The incomprehensible need of many to adopt the Instagram pout and adorn their portrait with puppy noses and ears. The obsession of – while otherwise aiming for normal body proportions – white women trying to achieve the over-inflated, genetically specific, steatopygia arse. What is wrong with you all?

The cosmetic/beauty/fitness/glamour industries and all their offshoots occupy far too much of the national consciousness. So-called ‘reality’ TV and the public flaunting of your vanity, ignorance, lack of shame and sheer vacuity ought to be a target for ridicule. Instead it just encourages the morons to gag for more. Worse, nonentities end up becoming idols for people whose former life dreams rarely strayed far from their next fix of fried chicken and contraband cigarettes.

But all that pales in comparison with the phenomenon of blokes injecting oil into their old man. Why? Seriously, by the time you get the chance to deploy your wee man-missile, the battle has been won. Unless you have an acorn instead of a mighty oak it is unlikely she will even notice unless, you know, she has lots of very clear memories against which to compare your, er performance. But isn’t performance what it’s all about? Titchy Tom Cruise plays the giant Jack Reacher, for heaven’s sake; doesn’t that tell you anything?

We are not all blessed with looks, health, height and brains, but we make up for it with working with what we’ve got. Work faster, smarter, longer, harder or with more sheer persistence. Set goals and when you fall at the first hurdle, pick yourself up and start over; the only real architect of your success is you and when you sit at that drawing board you have to consider how to use what you have.

All the props – lift heels, hairpieces, tattoos, muscles – say far more negative things about you than you may imagine. What really matters is not how you change how you think you appear but how you deal with the hand you’ve been dealt. There is a level of vanity which is normal and makes us human. But vanity has got out of hand and self-awareness has been banished, along with personal responsibility; lost in the me-me-me culture which pervades.

So, if you’re looking in the mirror at your dick and wondering whether the object of your desire would admire a thicker one, just remember the object of your desire is almost certainly yourself. If you think that by having surgical alteration of a part of you that isn’t used as often as you’d like would improve the situation, consider how much action you’ll be having when the corrective skin graft is healing. Think once, think twice and don’t make a bigger prick of yourself than you already are.

Books by Steve Briggs

I don’t wear Poppies

It’s Poppy time.

I won’t wear them, buy them or sell them.

I wore a White Poppy once. But now, in my grumpy old age, I don’t wear any.

My ancestors fought in many wars. The sacrifice of their lives and physical health, the wrenching away from their families, the destruction of their lives was wrought by Governments making War. My ancestors had no choice about going to war: the ones who refused, were imprisoned. The ones who ran away, were shot.

My ancestors did not make war.

Governments and Kings made war. And still do.

I will neither wear a red poppy, nor a white one. It is a superficial affirmation that the wearer is remembering the fallen. Its a patronising symbol that ‘the people’ remember. It’s political. Noticing how it has become a mandatory virtue signal for everyone in the public domain, I’m more revolted by it than ever.

Fortunately I’m neither important, nor in the public domain.

I can grieve for the fallen in the privacy of my pacifist heart.

And mourn the fact that war is still with us.

Outrageous chemical-dosing experiment to force friendship toward migrants: not science fiction

Love potions for the 21st Century! Re-blogged to archive on Life on an Alien Interested to see where this goes…..

Jon Rappoport's Blog

by Jon Rappoport

October 23, 2018

I really hope you understand this.

It is not a fantasy. It isn’t science fiction. It isn’t satire.

It is Brave New World, but not the Huxley novel. It’s happening now.

It’s a published study that appears on the website of the prestigious Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

The title of the study is, “Oxytocin-enforced norm compliance reduces xenophobic outgroup rejection.” (Reference: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017 Aug 29;114(35):9314-9319.)

Xenophobia is defined as: “fear or hatred of foreigners, people from different cultures, or strangers.” (

Oxytocin, the chemical used in this study, is described by Medical News Today: “Widely referred to as the love hormone, oxytocin has also been dubbed the hug hormone, cuddle chemical, moral molecule, and the bliss hormone due to its effects on behavior, including its role in…

View original post 1,026 more words

Fairy-tales and Feminism

I rather enjoyed the original fairy-tales. They were pretty gruesome – scary in fact. Imagine the courage of caged, abandoned children waiting to be eaten in the Hansel and Gretel story, sticking a chicken bone through the bars so the witch could feel how skinny and unappetising they would be should she choose to eat them that day.

And, oh, the fear that the hunter would rip out Snow White’s heart for the terrifyingly jealous Wicked Stepmother! And Snow White’s kindness to seven men dwarves, chiding them to be neat, clean and orderly.

And the dreadful conditions of poor Cinderella in grubby clothes sitting amongst the cold ashes and living with cruel sisters – a reflection of the condition of poverty stricken children and young people of that time long ago. And the desire for her situation betterment.

The real fairy tales told of love, hate, jealousy, envy, greed, ingenuity, loss, fear, loneliness, hope, kindness and survival – and history once upon a time, a long time ago. That’s what I thought. Teaching stories, they were. Teaching us through our own emotional responses.

But Feminists are very anti fairy-tails, saying they were written to groom girls into submission by cis males bent on dominance. I don’t think this is true. The old fairy-tales were about lessons in behaviour, not only for girls, but for boys too.

Fairy-tales now days are different. I agree with Feminists about how they are presented to children now.

In fairy-tales, the girl wins the Prince. Well, in Disney fairy-tales, which are slick, superficial re-tellings of the real stories, they do. Girls attract the Prince by looking pretty, feminine and wearing beautiful clothes. And the Prince is captured by their beauty and the two of them fall instantly in love.

Just about every girl, and some boys too, even in remote countries, have ‘Princess Dolls’, manufactured with bodies, hair and faces that capture the Princess ‘look’ that is wildly unachievable by any young person – comic characters really.

Drag queens strive to achieve it, and do, very cleverly.

But despite any protests by feminists, the fairy-tale, is still the most popular situation for women. Women marry ‘up’ – called Hypergamy – quote –

However, even in relatively gender-equal societies it is generally accepted that young women will often partner with powerful older men; while the general rule is that older men have had more time to gather wealth and status than younger men and they are on average wealthier and of higher status.

Studies of heterosexual mate selection in dozens of countries around the world have found men and women report prioritizing different traits when it comes to choosing a mate, with men tending to prefer women who are young and attractive and women tending to prefer men who are rich, well-educated, ambitious, and attractive.

Many women, even Feminists, still long for their own fairy-tale.

Oh the disappointment, oh the pain

Two years ago, when David Cameron scuttled away and Theresa May stood outside Downing Street, proclaiming “Brexit means Brexit”, I felt proud of her. I felt proud that a woman was now Prime Minister. I felt proud that she seemed so forceful. I felt proud that Britain was the one country that had seen through the scam that is the European Union and chosen to leave.

I expected blue skies ahead. I expected a surge of optimism, enthusiasm, a pulling together in all sections of the country. I expected a Phoenix.

Instead we have had hate, rage and dis-unity to a shameful degree.

Great British politicians have shown themselves to be a whimpering collection of fearful people, cowering in the shadow of their real rulers – the EU.

And Mrs May has shown that, far from meaning “Brexit means Brexit”, she is an appeaser, weak, untruthful, shallow, feeble and unloveable.

As a woman, she is disappointing.

As a Prime Minister she is even more disappointing.

As a representative of Great Britain, she is embarrassing.

The pain of feeling shame for the whole ghastly, disappointing  mess that is Great Britain now, is almost too much to bear.

More on British schools…child abuse

I wrote a post on the UK Mad Hatters of education here .

There has been an outcome from the many outraged comments on Twitter about making six year olds write a love letter from a King to his (male) servant suggesting marriage.

UK Govt to Give Private Junior Schools LGBT Lessons Opt-Out

I quote

While the government’s response to the consultation is yet to be published, The Timesreported “civil servants are understood to have made it clear” that inspectors should no longer fail private schools on the basis of neglecting to meet sexual diversity requirements, which include making children aware of issues such as “gender reassignment”.

Ofsted, whose leader Amanda Spielman has demanded schools place “liberalism” at the “heart of the curriculum” while insisting that institutions with “cultural conservative or religious values” should be “exposed”, said the standards should remain in place, with a spokesman saying the watchdog believes it “appropriate” that all primary school children are taught to respect LGBT lifestyles.

The Department for Education said: “Independent schools, like all schools, have to promote respect for other people with particular regard to the protected characteristics under the 2010 Equalities Act.”

News of the move, which was deemed as a government U-turn by left-wing opponents, followed what The Times characterised as intensive lobbying by faith groups after reports that schools were being downgraded over teachers’ failure to explicitly highlight LGBT issues during class-time.

This applies to schools that are NOT Government schools, remember.

Failing a private Jewish girls’ school for the third time, Ofsted claimed that pupils at the north London school for children up to the age of eight were being denied “a full understanding of fundamental British values” because they were not given instruction on homosexuality or gender reassignment.

Buckingham University’s Professor Alan Smithers told The Times: “Whether or not young children should be taught about LGBT issues and gay families in schools has been a battleground for ages.

“This looks like a government U-turn. Jewish, Christian and Muslim groups have bitterly resisted the requirement to teach alternative lifestyles, with protests and placards. If this loophole is granted to independent schools, there will be a big push for this in state primary schools too,” he added.

The news came after backlash on social media to a video which shows 6-year-olds at a state primary school in Manchester being tasked with writing homosexual love letters from a fictional ‘Prince Henry’ to his manservant, ‘Thomas’.

A full understanding of fundamental British values, for me, has got nothing to do with a tiny minority of people that many small children have probably never encountered and instruction on homosexuality or gender reassignment in junior schools is ABSOLUTELY not acceptable in any junior school. It is child abuse to my mind.

Bring on the outrage!