Jacko92

Who are your colleagues? Your definition of heritability isn't correct. Here is an introduction that they should probably read. http://psych.colorado.edu/~carey/hgss/hgssapplets/heritability/heritability.intro.html

One might say at least they tried. I would concede the range is slim and quite dull. There are other designers though. I picked the first result on Google. Have a look at others. One DNA etc. You seem to be moaning that there are no clothes for other genders. Are you designing on their behalf? Have you any intention to? Your attempt to make some sort of smart comment backfires because your cynicism is there for all to see. Oh - and re your actual post. If you ask random members of the public if Balsa is a softwood they will probably say yes. Cos it's soft. Ask wood experts and they'd say no, it's not a softwood. Maybe experts know best?

The clue is in the name genderless.clothing.com. If you don't think it's genderless enough why not design your own and launch a competing website?

You don't care either do you? You are trying to make some sort of pseudo-intellectual point but actually just looking foolish. ---------- Post added 22-09-2017 at 22:15 ---------- No, you just can't understand post 443.

The clue is in the name genderless. If you don't think it looks genderless maybe you should become a fashion designer and launch your own site?

Yeah, it is designed for males OR females. Hence it being genderless-clothing.com.

On this website maybe? https://www.genderless-clothing.com

Balsa is a soft wood but not a softwood. A Brazil nut isn't actually a nut and an astronomer will tell you anything that isn't hydrogen or helium is a metal. For the purpose of your trivial question unisex means non-gender specific. Happy?

What, unisex clothing you mean?

Which bit of "successive governments" confused you into thinking he's blaming just the Tories?

Hahaha. The irony of your final sentence here is so delicious I might have to pinch myself so I know I'm not dreaming. ---------- Post added 21-09-2017 at 02:25 ---------- Does a dress not look like a dress unless it has a label?

So you ARE arguing there should be no labels on clothes at all then. Do you mean to? If you are truly okay with anyone wearing whatever they want that makes total sense. But that's not what comes across.... You imply I think everyone should wear the same grey overalls. I think you can wear what you want and have been very clear. For you to interpret my words the way you did suggests a massive logic bomb to your brain has destroyed your reasoning.

Why should I take you seriously when you keep misrepresenting things I've written? I didn't ignore the rest of your post. I've already asked what is the point in any labels in any clothes. You've made that argument yourself - though I don't know if you meant to or even realise it..... ---------- Post added 20-09-2017 at 22:25 ---------- Should only things that threaten you be allowed then? You make little sense.

If you want diversity you have a funny way of showing it.

Buy the one you like that fits.....like most people would. Why does it require a label to indicate if its "ok" for you to buy. ---------- Post added 20-09-2017 at 22:00 ---------- I have. If you missed them its your fault. The rest of your post is meaningless ranting.