Not really suprising a couple of man-hating lesbos using (abusing) a six yr old male child for their own amusment; no doubt some feeb excuse or justification will be duly provided by buzz or greens. 

 

This is another example of how a politically correct stance brings "freedom" to a miniscule minority while trampling the rights of the majority. In this instance the "majority" are defenseless children, no vote , no say and no rights other than the socially engineered direction taken by the overseeing government department,  filled to the brim with politically correct imbecile public servants who march to the Fabian beat. They do not make policy; they regurgitate the corrupt social engineering policies adopted from their Fabian head office in the UK.

Communism and socialism was on the nose in the first world for the past 50 years, so the strategy of power from the ballot box was not practical, but a fifth column of activists indoctrinated at uni and ready to fill the " decision making positions" in the public service was the strategy, it worked.

Re the dykes, they have all the rights that a heterosexual couple has, and like heterosexuals there are those with competent parenting skills and those with lifestyles and ideas that are dangerous and damaging to the child.

That an agency can give a child to a couple who have a gender re assignment issues right now is criminally negligent in regard to placing the child in a stable domestic environment.  One year after re assignment would be the prudent time to begin an evaluation into the suitability of a placement.

Male gender re assignment to a female finds the vast majority keeping to the role of heterosexual female with a male partner, they don't turn dykie and chase women. But in the lesser common re assignment of female to male,  a large percentage enter into homosexual relationships with men,  psychologists don't know why but I would surmise it is hormone driven, but why the reverse is not apparent is unknown.

This re assignment candidate and new daddy will have the best of all sexual worlds, a cornucopia of identity choices. He will have his wife, who wants to have a child for them, he will have, or should I say does now have a template for a transvestite child who has a penis should he get a bit faggy, and there is always faithful Rover, should bestiality take his fancy. Apart from the last flippant remark the issue is not not sexuality but identity, this couple are not the usuall homosexual paring where they are happy with their sexual identity.  

How degenerated is this woeful socially engineered society the Fabians have foisted on us through the placement of regurgitating imbeciles in key community and social management roles.  Kangaroos take better care of their joeys than we do our kids, but we take better care of their joeys than we do our own kids, that is political correctness in motion.

Last year Australian uni's produced half the engineering degrees of a generation ago, but social engineers are in every government office and most bullsheiser community advocacy groups.

Love the sound of clashing PC orthodoxies in the morming...

... wrote on Sep 30^th, 2011 at 1:55pm:


Maybe, maybe not.

Unfortunately the state of the research is somewhat limited. The numbers of people involved in studies that might answer this sort a question are generally too small to be statistically relevant.

I'm not convinced it is a problem even if they are more likely to gay / want to change genders.

it's pretty unusual for a boy to want to cut his penis off.

if he is bought up by lessos you really HAVE to consider that as a reason

i did

Quote: