Italian cardinal upholds science

Science c. 1988 that is.  I remember the date, because that is when I was in college at the Ohio State University main campus.  And I remember taking a sociology course.  I also was taking courses in Education.  And I remember specifically being taught that kids need a male and female presence.  Hence why "Deadbeat Dads" were the scum of the earth.  Not only did they abandon their responsibilities to the moms who could subsequently abort those same children without the dad's consent.  But they were denying the children a fundamental need. 

That's why we had things like Big Brothers and Big Sisters.  It's why Bill Clinton made the whole Deadbeat Dad problem a federal issue.  Not only was there the issue of responsibility.  But it was for the sake of the kids!  They needed that male and female presence; a mother and father to use the archaic terminology.  Or at least the dads had to pay up if they weren't going to be around to provide that presence. 

Of course today, we now know the science, oddly enough, shows that kids need no such thing.  Any combination of gender will do.  Which reminds me of a newscast I watched some time ago about Transgender kids.  Some of the parents being interviewed said they knew their kids were transgender as early as infancy.  How did they know?  Why, working with their doctors and therapists, it was concluded that the kiddos showed signs of gender relativity.  What were those signs?  Among other signs, things such as a young boy preferring a pink blanket, or playing with dolls at a young age.

Strange, but in the 70s, when I was a kiddo myself, I remember being part of those grand experiments to show that pink and blue and airplanes and dolls meant nothing at all.  We only played with those because we had been artificially programed by a sexist, patriarchal society to think playing with this or preferring that color meant anything.  That was, of course, the science of then.  The science of now shows just how stupid those scientists were back in the day.

There is Science, and then there is science.  Science can say "Look, gravity!  The earth orbits the Sun!  Photosynthesis!"  But I've noticed there is this invisible line where the Science seems to stop, and starts acting more like science: a fusion of political campaigns and an agenda driven opinion.  And it always seems that the scientific facts of this science just happen to align with the agendas of the latest, hippest who get invited to all the great parties.  I can't help but think that it's a little bit beyond cosmic coincidence.