Select Page
Poker Forum
Over 1,288,000 Posts!
Poker ForumFTR Community

Randomness thread, part two.

Page 393 of 400 FirstFirst ... 293343383391392393394395 ... LastLast
Results 29,401 to 29,475 of 29975
  1. #29401
    I don't know if it counts as a fight if the thing takes one look at you and runs away. I assume it's a fight where the animal is pissed and ready to go to the death.

    But yeah, rat, cat, easy.

    Dunno about goose. They are pricks but what can they do to you with no claws or teeth? I think that long neck would be a pretty easy target.

    Medium dog - sure, if it's a spaniel. If it's a pitbull, I don't like my chances.

    Eagle - those claws would fuck me up I think.

    Large dog - need a lucky punch but it would probably have me bleeding on the floor before I knew what was happening. My dog's a lab and I wouldn't want to get on his bad side (if he had one).

    Chimp - lol no.

    Cobra- I mean, ok I might be able to tire it out if it's just him and me having a standoff but I don't see how I'm going to actually win. If he's actually coming after me I think I'm toast.

    Kangaroo- one kick and it's over. No thanks.

    The rest of them - no fucking chance. And yeah the grizzly might just ignore you, but if it's really pissed and wants a fight the only way you're going to get them to stop is by quitting breathing.

    And out of the last four, I'd prefer the grizzly because it would kill me the fastest.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  2. #29402
    It might not count as a fight but it's definitely a win, for the simple reason you've surely lost if you're the fucker who turns around and runs.

    Geese are pricks, and they are truly fearless, but they're not all that. Most footage you see of geese winning fights against humans involve stupid humans flapping and running instead of actually hitting the cunt. You show a goose you're up for a fight and it'll think twice. Show fear or caution, or turn your back on it, and it'll go for you.

    Anyway, this is how you win a fight against a kangaroo...

    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  3. #29403
    And here's footage of Canadian cobra chickens winning fights against tigers and gorillas...

    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  4. #29404
    That kangaroo's gotta learn to keep his guard up.

    I thought kangaroos kicked, not boxed. Maybe I'm confusing them with an ostrich.

    There's another thing I would not want to tangle with. My friend's family had some ostriches on their ranch for a while. The legs on those things, yikes.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  5. #29405
    Yeah I don't think I'm beating an ostrich. Can't see how I can hit it. I might be able to dodge it if it runs at me, sideways motion, but then what? I guess tire the fucker out, treat it like a bull. Maybe it's fitter than I am though.

    Kangaroos definitely kick, but they do so with both their legs, so it's a weird jump and double kick to the stomach. If you're well distanced, you can take a step back and it'll miss. You definitely do not want to take a hit from it because it'll take the wind out of you and you're a sitting duck. But I don't think it'll be that difficult to dodge the kicks. Certainly human level skills, even if I myself couldn't pull it off.

    Here's more Ozzy Man and kangaroos... bit of fighting with kicking to the guts... also, check out the not Burger King ad at the end. wtf is Hungry Jack's? Do you reckon Ozzy cunts comes to England and think "wtf is Burger King?"

    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  6. #29406
    Where were we talking about trans athletes? Didn't mojo say it wasn't happening?

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-57549653

    tl;dr Laurel Hubbard, formerly known as Gavin Hubbard, will be competing against women at Tokyo Olympics in weightlifting.

    This is the beginning of the end for competitive women's sport.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  7. #29407
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,659
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Where were we talking about trans athletes? Didn't mojo say it wasn't happening?

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-57549653

    tl;dr Laurel Hubbard, formerly known as Gavin Hubbard, will be competing against women at Tokyo Olympics in weightlifting.

    This is the beginning of the end for competitive women's sport.


    I said that if someone tells you their preferred pronouns and you're not cool with that, then you're being a jerk.
    That was my point.

    All the other stuff about bathrooms and sports is just tangent to my point that I was trying to humor you with answers to, even though it felt distracting. I'm not claiming I know what's best for women or trans people, and neither are you. So play all you want with the "beginning of the end" talk, I know you don't have that level of hubris to claim to know what's "best for women."



    If it becomes an issue, then we can go back to the old way. Why not let the new way have a minute to exist before you say it's so bad. Maybe I'll agree with you in time, but right now, I think the experiment is a worthy one. No one's going to get hurt in a weightlifting competition that wasn't already going to hurt themself. I don't even see why we need to be separating men and women in non-contact sports, anyway. I don't really see why we need 2 categories in most sports, anyway, and if we need a 3rd category some day so that everyone is included, then great.

    Failing to include people because you can't make another category for them is kinda asshattery, wouldn't you agree?
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  8. #29408
    You can make another category for them though. Who says you can't?

    And yeah, male weightlifters are about 30% stronger than female weightlifters, adjusting for body mass. So, until someone can show how long it takes for that advantage to go away once someone transitions, they shouldn't be allowed to compete with born females. It's basically no different than allowing one person to take a bunch of steroids while the rest of the competitors aren't.

    And it's not like the trans athletes are trying to cheat. I get that. But they're still getting an unfair advantage. So give them their own category until we know how long it takes for the advantage to go away. And if it never goes away, then that's a good argument for keeping them in a separate category.
    Last edited by Poopadoop; 06-21-2021 at 06:41 PM.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  9. #29409
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,659
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Let's at least wait to see if the trans weightlifter even wins a medal, first.

    Then let's take it sport by sport, IMO.

    But whatever, if there's an avenue for everyone capable and competitive to compete on the world-class levels, then I'm cool with it.

    I do understand and support any school or other group to hold men's and women's sports, if that's what the players want.
    On the world-class level where nations are sending their best at various events, though... I think if you can compete based on your skills, then what's under your clothes shouldn't matter. If people want separate categories, then fine as long as there are categories for everyone. Intentionally leaving out categories simply to exclude competitors who might beat you is obviously problematic.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  10. #29410
    Quote Originally Posted by mojo
    I said that if someone tells you their preferred pronouns and you're not cool with that, then you're being a jerk.
    And I said I don't care about pronouns, I care about safe spaces and sports.

    I'm really not interested in discussing pronouns. We agree. If someone wants to be referred to as "ptang", then whatever. I'm not going to come here and tell you all that someone wanted to be called "ptang", it's not interesting or worthy of discussion.

    All the other stuff about bathrooms and sports is just tangent to my point
    It's not a tangent. It's what's happening. It's what people have a problem with.

    Why not let the new way have a minute to exist before you say it's so bad.
    Really? Ok, lets' have women fighting men in the boxing ring. Why not let this happen until it's clear it's a fucking stupid idea?

    Maybe I'll agree with you in time, but right now, I think the experiment is a worthy one.
    You're willing to experiment with the careers and aspirations of girls who want to compete in sport?

    No one's going to get hurt in a weightlifting competition
    If you think this is the point, then you do not understand competitive sport.

    We're not talking about soccer at school. We're talking about Olympic weightlifting here. Competitive sport doesn't get bigger than the Olympics. This is the absolute elite.

    I don't even see why we need to be separating men and women in non-contact sports, anyway.
    Are you actually serious? Because men are much stronger than women, on average. You're basically saying "I don't know why women should have an opportunity to succeed".

    Failing to include people because you can't make another category for them is kinda asshattery, wouldn't you agree?
    Yes, I'm ok with a third category. I said that previously.

    What I'm not ok with is men competing against women in elite sports. It will destroy women's sports. You might not understand sport, but I do. It's about winning, whether you like that or not. We reward winners, with money, medals, fame. Winning is everything to an elite sportsperson. It's not about "taking part". It's not about inclusion.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  11. #29411
    Let's at least wait to see if the trans weightlifter even wins a medal, first.
    Jesus.

    Not the point. I wouldn't win a medal if I suddenly decided to compete with women. A man isn't guaranteed to win. A man has an unfair advantage, that's the point.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  12. #29412
    There are examples where men have no natural advantage over women, such as chess. I don't care about mixed genders competing against each other in elite chess. I'm cool with women's sections, and don't really care if transwomen compete with ciswomen either.

    Basically, if it's fair for men and women to compete with each other, it's fair for transwomen and women to compete with each other.

    Archery might be an example of this too, idk enough about archery but it's hard to imagine men (or women) have a natural advantage, considering it is 100% skill.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  13. #29413
    The problem comes when a sport is at least partly decided by stamina or strength. I know there are examples of women who are stronger and fitter than the majority of men, but they are exceptions, and even then they don't compete with elite men. Serena Williams is never beating Novak Djokovic, not in a competitive match. What's stopping Novak putting on a dress, calling herself Brenda, and playing against the women?
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  14. #29414
    Let's at least wait to see if the trans weightlifter even wins a medal, first.

    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Jesus.
    Agree. This is just taking the piss.

    Let's see if the guy taking performance enhancing drugs wins a medal. If he does, we can reconsider whether drugs should maybe not be allowed in sports.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  15. #29415
    I identify as a cheater. I should therefore be allowed to cheat in sports, and if you say I can't, you are oppressing me!
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  16. #29416
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    Agree. This is just taking the piss.

    Let's see if the guy taking performance enhancing drugs wins a medal. If he does, we can reconsider whether drugs should maybe not be allowed in sports.
    Weirdly, I've just made this very point on Twitter, like literally a minute ago before reading this post. Someone said to me "It’s like you believe a trans athlete has never lost… lol", to which I replied "People take steroids and lose. So just let everyone take steroids?"
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  17. #29417
    CoccoBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,256
    Location
    Finding my game
    "Sorry millions of transgender people, we just can't give you your rights, since there might be thousands of athletes who might maybe be affected by it."
    Our brains have just one scale, and we resize our experiences to fit.

  18. #29418
    They should have their own category.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  19. #29419
    Quote Originally Posted by CoccoBill View Post
    "Sorry millions of men, we just can't give you your rights, since there might be thousands of athletes who might maybe be affected by it."
    I've changed a small part of this post.

    I'm assuming you don't have a problem with men competing with women, right? Because if you do have a problem with that, then you're denying the right of millions of men to compete against women.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  20. #29420
    I'd also like to see some statistics that show there are more transwomen than female athletes. You seem to think there's three orders of magnitude more trans people. Source?
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  21. #29421
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,659
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Jibbers Crabs you all twist what I say into nonsense then argue with the nonsense. Is that good for you?
    'Cause it's boring AF to me.

    Am I saying women should be boxing men in a ring? No.
    If anything remotely on that subject, I'd be saying telling a woman she can't box a man in a ring is not protecting that woman, it's denying her the right to compete.

    Like you said, it's the Olympics. Its the very top echelon of competition. If you want to claim your the best in the world, then you have to beat everyone. If you want to claim you're the best against some limited pool of opponents, then more power to you. It's still an asterisk, IMO. If the best woman at whatever doesn't want to go up against the best man at whatever, then fine. Does it make sense to give them both the same gold medal? Is that fair? Is that good for women or is that a condescending consolation prize for being good, "for a girl?"

    I don't see this as a clear moral case either way.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  22. #29422
    Am I saying women should be boxing men in a ring? No.
    Why not? Because you acknowledge there's a competitive difference between men and women?

    If you want to claim your the best in the world, then you have to beat everyone.
    Fun fact - there are around 9000 men who have run the 100 meters faster than the female world record holder.

    Maybe she should try harder.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  23. #29423
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,659
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Why not? Because you acknowledge there's a competitive difference between men and women?
    Jibbers Crabs!

    No! Because it's not my right to tell women what they should do. As I said, if a woman wants to fight a man, then more power to her. If she doesn't want to, then she doesn't have to. Denying her the right to fight a man is not protecting her, IMO, it's denying her the right to compete on the level she wants.

    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Fun fact - there are around 9000 men who have run the 100 meters faster than the female world record holder.

    Maybe she should try harder.
    Holding people to unreasonable standards is not "supporting" them.

    I mean... man, you're a real dick to women. Spoony would be so proud of you.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  24. #29424
    ITT, Ong sticks up for womens' rights to fair competition and gets called a dick to women.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  25. #29425
    As I said, if a woman wants to fight a man, then more power to her.
    Ok, I'm fine with this. But if a woman wants to compete only against people who were also born female, isn't that her right?

    I'm not suggesting that a ciswoman cannot compete against a man or transwoman, just not at elite level. I mean, there's a woman who has been denied her Olympic opportunity to accommodate Laurel Hubbard. How is that fair? It's like Laurel's feelings are more important than this woman's.

    I mean... man, you're a real dick to women. Spoony would be so proud of you.
    This is quite astonishing. Frankly, you surprise me with this comment. I can only assume you either took my "she should try harder" comment literally (instead of the obvious hyperbole it was), or you're trolling me.

    As poop says, I am defending women here, and I'm quite happy that the vast majority of women would support my comments and argue you're the one being a dick to them.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  26. #29426
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,659
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    IDK what I'm supposed to do to indicate sarcasm, if the doesn't work.

    But it's funny that you blamed women for not trying hard enough, and clearly a joke, and I responded in kind.

    Geez, you guys. C'mon.


    I'm only saying that life is hard enough as it is without people being a jerk to you over some BS.
    I'm only saying that identity is complicated on every level, and we should be more open to letting people discover and live their own identities. We should not look at someone who is different than some contrived social expectations and take that as a threat. It's probably not. It's probably just a person trying to be themselves, whatever that means, and causing no harm.

    My only point is to treat all people with respect, and work towards equality for all, especially when all it means is to not be a jerk.


    Everything else you are trying to argue against is some boogeyman in your own head.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  27. #29427
    IDK what I'm supposed to do to indicate sarcasm, if the doesn't work.
    Ok I'll call it friendly trolling. No problem.

    But it's funny that you blamed women for not trying hard enough, and clearly a joke, and I responded in kind.
    I mean my point was that no matter how hard a woman tries, she's not capable of competing with elite men.

    I'm only saying that life is hard enough as it is without people being a jerk to you over some BS.
    Elite sport isn't BS. Not to me, and not to a lot of people. Perhaps you don't care about sport. Fair enough. But don't expect others to hold the same view you have when it comes to sport. It's of critical cultural importance to most of the world. It's also important when it comes to health. You want to incentivise people to partake in sport. Fair competition is a critical aspect of this.

    I'm only saying that identity is complicated on every level, and we should be more open to letting people discover and live their own identities.
    I don't disagree on this point. Just so long as it doesn't impact on others. In this case, it impacts on the woman who lost her Olympic place, and impacts on those who are competing against Laurel. That isn't fair.

    Everything else you are trying to argue against is some boogeyman in your own head.
    I really don't know why you think this. All I'm arguing is that women should have the right to fair competition, and that is being compromised by gender wokeism.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  28. #29428
    Mojo, I'm afraid you've inadvertently joined the World of Snowflakes on this one.

    In WoS world, it's more important not to make off an colour joke about gender identity on a forum populated by six different people a year than it is to debate any issues that actually have a tangible effect on the rest of the world.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  29. #29429
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,659
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    So your notion of being fair to women is to prevent someone who is a woman from competing as a woman?
    I don't get it.


    @poop: No, my position is to deal with facts and not hypotheticals. It was a fact that an inappropriate joke was made on this topic. My point is to call attention to that impropriety.

    If you want to talk about greater social issues, then go for it. Don't pretend I'm a spokesperson for anyone's rights, though. Don't pretend I am qualified to talk on how to fix the greater society so that awesome people aren't marginalized over nonsense.

    My position is that if we all work together with kindness, we can make things better.


    All these boogeymen about how you claim to know what's "best for women" is hot air and you know it.
    You have all the excuses to defend the continued victimization of people in the name of fairness for women, and that just doesn't make sense. It's not consistent.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  30. #29430
    You're absolutely right. We're bringing up completely reasonable points about fairness in sport because we want to victimize trans people. We've even suggested a reasonable solution, to add a trans category, just to victimize them even more. You got us.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  31. #29431
    So your notion of being fair to women is to prevent someone who is a woman from competing as a woman?
    I'm going to go out on a limb and say we disagree on the definition of "woman".

    Is it ok for me to identify as disabled? If not, why not?
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  32. #29432
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,659
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    You're absolutely right. We're bringing up completely reasonable points about fairness in sport because we want to victimize trans people. We've even suggested a reasonable solution, to add a trans category, just to victimize them even more. You got us.
    Is that what you think you're doing? Talking about what is fair?


    'Cause your "reasonable points" are fear-mongering hypotheticals, IMO. You're spending a whole lot of effort defending the status quo, which is clearly and obviously broken in many, many ways. Our societies are far from perfect. We are not serving all good people well.

    The separate category was something we all agreed was at least probably better than exclusion.


    All I'm hearing is a bunch of pushback on the notion that being a person is hard enough without the world throwing a bunch of stereotypes and expectations at you. The human experience is more complicated than any one person could fully grasp, and we find that perfectly normal people who want to participate in society are marginalized over misunderstandings and fear mongering. When presented with the scientific and medical data indicating that biological sex is non-binary, and therefore excluding trans people from competing in sports is a violation of human rights - all you do is brainstorm reasons to keep the status quo, make up boogeymen for reasons to continue to deny people their rights, act as though these people telling you who they are have some alternate agenda to commit crimes against women. Your position is anti-science, anti-human, and pro-"wah! I don't want life to be so complicated! I don't want to learn new avenues to compassion and understanding! Make the different people go away!"


    Your argument that it's only fair to tell some people they cannot participate in sport because despite 30 years of scientific findings* on the subject, we just haven't been able to make that category for them, yet... is a bad argument. Telling people that you just don't have the time to honor their rights as a perfectly normal, non-violent, upstanding member of the human race, with certain rather exceptional skills in a certain sporting area... is not honoring "fairness."

    So pretend all you like that you're arguing for fairness, but you aren't. Your fairness draws a line around a majority of humans and says they deserve it, while the minority outside that line do not. That is NOT fair. This glaring inconsistency lays all your arguments bare for what they are - excuses.


    *The biological development of genetic sex has been well understood for over 30 years. We KNOW that every ova is inseminated as a female. Regardless of their chromosomes, we all begin as female. Then a protein that codes for the development of male genetalia and other male traits may or may not activate, again, regardless of your chromosomes. There are XX people with male genitalia. There are XY people without male genitalia. There are triple chromosome people. Without a DNA test, no one would even know the "biological sex" of these "trans babies." There are hermaphrodites - no DNA test needed to see that biological sex is non-binary.

    It's a low %-age of people, but it is still the fact that just because you have male genitalia DOES NOT make you genetically male.

    So even biological sex is complicated, and unless we're requiring a DNA test for everyone who competes in sports, there's hypocrisy in this.
    Last edited by MadMojoMonkey; 06-25-2021 at 11:14 AM.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  33. #29433
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,659
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I'm going to go out on a limb and say we disagree on the definition of "woman".
    So long as you deny science, we will continue to disagree.

    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Is it ok for me to identify as disabled? If not, why not?
    Yes, of course it is. You're a glorious nutcase, friend.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  34. #29434
    Yes, of course it is. You're a glorious nutcase, friend.
    Right. Let's explore this further.

    Is it ok for me, a perfectly healthy and able person, to identify as disabled, and then compete at the Paralympics?

    So long as you deny science, we will continue to disagree.
    You surprise me. I thought you'd avoid using the "science" word on this matter, since biology is science, and "woman" is a matter of biology, not psychology.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  35. #29435
    I would argue that you're denying science, mojo, that you're willing to abandon everything you hold dear in order to not be an asshole (in your view).
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  36. #29436
    I didn't read your wall to poop before replying to you, so I see you've covered the "science" issue. Something like... we all start off female in the womb, so therefore "male" and "female" are not mutually exclusive. This doesn't change the fact that males are born with a natural advantage over women when it comes to things like strength and stamina.

    I can't produce milk. That's science. Is science discriminating against me? Something clearly happens in the womb to cause ~50% of unborn babies to develop differently. That development creates these advantages when it comes to sport. You can't undo this, science is not able to (at least yet) perfectly change these traits.

    So males or born with a sporting advantage over females. Not in every case, but in general, which is why there are 9000 men faster than the fastest woman over 100m.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  37. #29437
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I didn't read your wall to poop
    I'm not reading it at all. I just interpret it as "I don't have anything of value to add here, so instead I'm going to try to win the argument by exhausting your will to live."


    Ok, you win. I'm done with this. Have fun kids.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  38. #29438
    I would like to identify as a 10-year-old and then play chess against children for money.

    Why can't I do that?
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  39. #29439
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,659
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Right. Let's explore this further.

    Is it ok for me, a perfectly healthy and able person, to identify as disabled, and then compete at the Paralympics?
    A) You?! Perfectly healthy and able? You (like myself) are a wet noodle and a mental case.
    B) They are actual athletes who would absolutely wipe the floor with you.
    C) I don't care if want to compete at the Paralympics. Go for it. Have your "Andy Kaufman in the ring" moment.
    D) I don't think it's any form of a threat to actually disabled people for you to compete with them.


    If some transgender person is a liar who just wants to beat or beat up women, then obviously I agree with you that is a problem, and intolerable.

    What's astonishing is your assumption that all transgender people are somehow trying to trick you so they can "get away" with something.
    What doesn't make sense is that you're not trying to find ways to empower transgender people, but finding excuses not to.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  40. #29440
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,659
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I didn't read your wall to poop before replying to you, so I see you've covered the "science" issue. Something like... we all start off female in the womb, so therefore "male" and "female" are not mutually exclusive.
    Keep reading, it gets more complicated. Whether or not someone was born with a penis is not necessarily indicative of their chromosomes. Without a DNA test, no one would even know that person is trans. No one would disallow them from competing as their external plumbing indicates, regardless of any "unfair advantages" their chromosomes offer.

    This is how it has always been.

    Your argument that someone should compete in whatever category based on their biological sex is a radical change in how we choose who is and isn't allowed to play in our sports today.

    The science has shown that we already don't care about chromosomes or unfair advantages, we only care about external appearances.

    So why is it different if someone chose to change their plumbing? Your argument that it should matter implies we should be DNA testing every athlete to ensure no "unfair" advantages are in play.

    That seems like a crazy invasion of someone's private medical information over something so trivial that we've not cared at all for centuries, or at least the 3 decades since we've known.

    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    This doesn't change the fact that males are born with a natural advantage over women when it comes to things like strength and stamina.
    Lol. Ong thinks a baby male can beat up a grown woman. Such natural advantage! OMG!


    Seriously, though. You're uninformed, and you're not even asking questions. Any google search on the topic will show you that human biological sex is not a 2 state system.

    Many factors play into human biological development.

    I think we can at least make a clear distinction between people who have transitioned prior to puberty. For those people, they never experienced those later growth spurts that convey these "unfair" advantages of which you speak.

    So at the bare minimum, if that's your argument, you should be making a clear exception for trans people in this category.

    And no, I'm not saying those trans people should have different rights. I'm saying that even your own argument is flawed if you are trying to find a reason that all trans people have "unfair" advantages.

    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I can't produce milk. That's science. Is science discriminating against me? Something clearly happens in the womb to cause ~50% of unborn babies to develop differently. That development creates these advantages when it comes to sport. You can't undo this, science is not able to (at least yet) perfectly change these traits.
    Dude. WTF. Do some research.

    You're not a medical doctor, and you're making claims that are medically disproved, and you're not even trying to enlighten yourself in this conversation. I've explained many, many times how convoluted human biological sex is, and you keep insisting it's a 2-state system. This is demonstrably false.


    Whether or not you can lactate is irrelevant. Are you suggesting that a woman who can't lactate is not a woman, anymore?
    C'mon, man.

    If you are trans, then more power to you. If you're a liar who is trying to be a jerk, then knock it off. We should be accommodating and compassionate to everyone who is not a liar or a jerk. I don't even see the problem, here.

    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    So males or born with a sporting advantage over females. Not in every case, but in general, which is why there are 9000 men faster than the fastest woman over 100m.
    No, males are not born with a sporting advantage. Not in any case. The infant 100 meter sprint isn't a thing.
    Babies are too stupid to even feed themselves, or clean their own ass, regardless of anything. Lots of potential, sure, but dumb as a post at first.

    Who cares why? Should we not allow women to run next to men who are running? Is there some problem with allowing them to compete against each other? We already have an asterisk next to their "bests," don't we? There's the fastest person, then the fastest person *(excluding over half of all competitors).

    We already agree that separate categories make sense, at least more sense than excluding people who are "in the running" as a top competitor.

    Since we don't have that - any categories for trans people - and it's been 30 years since we've KNOWN that medically, we've already been ignoring these "unfair" advantages for all of history - and our only reason to not have enough categories is that we've been soooo busy for the past 3 decades... Well, screw you and your busy, these people are here, they're perfectly normal, they want to compete, and if you're too damn lazy to accommodate them, then quit crying about them competing in the "wrong" category.


    I don't really think a dozen or more categories of biological sex is going to make any sports "better." But good people are being excluded over stupid hyperbolic reasons, and if you're on the team that's looking for excuses to keep it that way, then you're on the wrong team.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  41. #29441
    A) You?! Perfectly healthy and able? You (like myself) are a wet noodle and a mental case.
    Ok I exaggerated.

    B) They are actual athletes who would absolutely wipe the floor with you.
    Like Oscar No-legs, that runner who has springy things instead of legs. He's much faster than me.

    C) I don't care if want to compete at the Paralympics. Go for it. Have your "Andy Kaufman in the ring" moment.
    No idea who he is. Is he the disabled version of Laurel Hubbard?

    You might not care, but an actually disabled person who loses his Olympic place because of me, he'll care.

    D) I don't think it's any form of a threat to actually disabled people for you to compete with them.
    Depends how disabled they are. I'm pretty sure I can swim faster than someone with no arms or legs.

    If some transgender person is a liar...
    It's not a lie if it's a matter of identity. There is literally nothing stopping a person from identifying as a woman one day, a man the next, both the day after, then whatever suits them best on Thursday.

    What's astonishing is your assumption that all transgender people are somehow trying to trick you so they can "get away" with something.
    This is an assumption you've made, and it's very much incorrect.

    What doesn't make sense is that you're not trying to find ways to empower transgender people, but finding excuses not to.
    I have tried to find ways, both me and poop have said multiple times that we don't have a problem with a trans category. That's empowerment, in exactly the same way the Paralympics empowers disabled people.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  42. #29442
    Your argument that someone should compete in whatever category based on their biological sex is a radical change in how we choose who is and isn't allowed to play in our sports today.
    Erm, how is it radical, while also being status quo?

    So why is it different if someone chose to change their plumbing? Your argument that it should matter implies we should be DNA testing every athlete to ensure no "unfair" advantages are in play.
    We do tests to make sure they aren't using performance enhancing drugs. We don't test everyone though, just random tests, or tests on those who perform significantly beyond expectations.

    Seriously, though. You're uninformed, and you're not even asking questions. Any google search on the topic will show you that human biological sex is not a 2 state system.
    I know it's not. But you're being disingenuous here. The vast majority of people are either male or female. The vast, vast majority. There are exceptions, of course. That's besides the point. If someone is born both male and female, then we have an exception and we need to make a decision based on the circumstances of that individual. But this is a very rare instance.

    Let's talk about the 99.999% or whatever. We're talking here about people who have made a choice to change their identity from male to female.

    I think we can at least make a clear distinction between people who have transitioned prior to puberty. For those people, they never experienced those later growth spurts that convey these "unfair" advantages of which you speak.
    Is the science on this matter complete? If a pre puberty boy transitions from boy to girl, are they biologically identical to a girl in every way? And are we 100% certain of this?

    I'm not going to get into the morality of a pre-puberty child transitioning. That's a whole different matter.

    So at the bare minimum, if that's your argument, you should be making a clear exception for trans people in this category.
    Only if the science is certain that no advantage exists. And by certain, I mean the same degree of certainty we have about how fast light is. How many sigmas is "certain"?

    And no, I'm not saying those trans people should have different rights. I'm saying that even your own argument is flawed if you are trying to find a reason that all trans people have "unfair" advantages.
    I never once said, or implied, that ALL trans people have an advantage. You're making so many assumptions that you really do come across as arguing in bad faith.

    Not everyone who takes performance enhancing drugs has an advantage. That doesn't mean we should allow people to take performance enhancing drugs. It only takes one to gain an advantage for it to compromise the integrity of elite sport.

    Whether or not you can lactate is irrelevant. Are you suggesting that a woman who can't lactate is not a woman, anymore?
    No. Sigh. Another assumption that implies further bad faith.


    If you are trans, then more power to you. If you're a liar who is trying to be a jerk, then knock it off.
    This is how you intend to police elite sports?

    We should be accommodating and compassionate to everyone who is not a liar or a jerk.
    This is so ridiculously naive I can't understand why you even post this.

    How, in fuck's name, do you know if someone is lying or not?

    And it's not even the point.

    No, males are not born with a sporting advantage. Not in any case. The infant 100 meter sprint isn't a thing.
    Bad faith. We're not talking about babies doing the 100 meters. You're ignoring that 9000 men have run faster than the fastest woman. Why is this the case? Why are so many men faster?

    Males are born with a sporting advantage. They have male hormones. This will cause them to develop into men, stronger and fitter than women (on average). That's why.

    Should we not allow women to run next to men who are running?
    Why are you trying to twist this into sexism?

    Well, screw you and your busy, these people are here, they're perfectly normal, they want to compete,
    Cool. No problem. Let's give them a category for trans people so they can compete fairly against each other without shitting on ciswomen.

    I don't really think a dozen or more categories of biological sex is going to make any sports "better." But good people are being excluded over stupid hyperbolic reasons, and if you're on the team that's looking for excuses to keep it that way, then you're on the wrong team.
    I'm on "team fair". And it's not fair for a male, with physical advantages, to compete against women at elite level.

    You're on the wrong team buddy. You're putting "being nice to a minority" ahead of "being fair to the majority".
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  43. #29443
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,659
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    I'm merely suggesting that the current way we handle trans people in society is exclusion by lack of accommodations.
    This is unfair.

    I'm trying to discuss ways in which we, as not jerks, can help accommodate trans people to excel in whatever they are passionate about.

    I didn't come here saying all trans people should compete as women or as men or that anyone should or shouldn't be allowed to use any restrooms. You said that.

    All I said was, well, we have no accommodations for these good people. We've known as a fact for over 3 decades that these people are just normal people. The accommodations are still not there. So what then?

    I'm asking how can we, as good people accommodate trans people into our societies as full fledged members, with equal rights to jobs, opportunities, and even sports and bathrooms?

    And if the greater society clings to archaic and false norms about what it means to be a human, then how can we, as good people who do not want to see other good people shat upon, help to accommodate those good people, and shine a spotlight on their awesomeness?


    All I'm getting from you is reasons that we shouldn't try to answer these questions. Not reasons why it's good, or reasons why my ideas are off, but something similar or radically different would work. We all agree that a lack of accommodations in sports and restrooms for trans people is unfair to trans people, right? We all agree the lack of categories for trans people in these 2 specific issues, does put a negative social pressure on them, right?


    So pretend all you want that I'm on the wrong side for asking whether doing nothing and continuing to exclude trans people from society is best for them, and by correlation best for society. Pretend all you want that I'm trying to hurt women or I'm insensitive to women's rights and women's issues.
    Funny how you never seemed to care so much about women's safety until the notion of a trans person in a ladies' restroom was brought up. Funny how we've never had a long discussion about how much you care about women's issues, despite our years of shooting the shit, until the discussion of trans people being perfectly normal people who are excluded from society is the topic of discussion.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  44. #29444
    I'm merely suggesting that the current way we handle trans people in society is exclusion by lack of accommodations.
    This is unfair.
    I'm not going to disagree with this. But we've made suggestions. I don't want to oppress trans people. I want to treat them fairly... in the same way we treat women fairly. Women have the own sporting category because it's not fair to put them against people who are born with an advantage.

    I'm trying to discuss ways in which we, as not jerks, can help accommodate trans people to excel in whatever they are passionate about.
    Translympics.

    I didn't come here saying all trans people should compete as women or as men or that anyone should or shouldn't be allowed to use any restrooms. You said that.
    No I didn't I said trans people should compete as trans people.
    I said trans people should have their own restrooms.

    We've known as a fact for over 3 decades that these people are just normal people.
    I haven't once suggested these people are not normal. Just that they are different to women.

    The accommodations are still not there. So what then?
    We can do one of two things...

    1) promote trans sports and facilities.
    2) force women to share their spaces with another gender, and force them to compete with another gender.

    Maybe I'm missing a 3) or even a 4). But given those two choices, one is acceptable and the other is not.

    I'm asking how can we, as good people accommodate trans people into our societies as full fledged members, with equal rights to jobs, opportunities, and even sports and bathrooms?
    Translympics, and trans toilets.

    All I'm getting from you is reasons that we shouldn't try to answer these questions.
    You're woefully misunderstanding me then. All I'm saying is don't shit on women in order to not shit on trans people.

    We all agree that a lack of accommodations in sports and restrooms for trans people is unfair to trans people, right?
    Yes.

    We all agree the lack of categories for trans people in these 2 specific issues, does put a negative social pressure on them, right?
    Yes.

    So pretend all you want that I'm on the wrong side
    If your solution is to force women into accepting trans people as women, with regards sports and safe spaces, then as far as I'm concerned, you're on the wrong side. This isn't a solution for me.

    Pretend all you want that I'm trying to hurt women or I'm insensitive to women's rights and women's issues.
    It seems to me that you are. I can't believe anyone seriously thinks it's appropriate for someone born as male to change gender identity and compete against women. I'm even more astounded that anyone would find it appropriate to allow people born as male to use female toilets and showers.

    Funny how you never seemed to care so much about women's safety
    This is deeply unfair. Just because we've never talked about women's safety before, doesn't mean it's not something that concerns me. Of course women's safety concerns me. This is precisely why I insisted on walking women home after the pub when I was younger, even though I had zero chance of getting laid as a result.

    I don't think we've ever talked about animal rights either. Do you therefore assume I don't give a fuck about animals?
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  45. #29445
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,659
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    My suggestions to allow people to use whatever restroom feels most appropriate to them and to allow people to compete in the sporting leagues that feel most comfortable to them is just me brainstorming. If you think they're bad ideas, then fine. What are your ideas on how to accommodate every good person in our society (specifically trans people vis-a-vis this conversation)?
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  46. #29446
    My suggestions to allow people to use whatever restroom feels most appropriate to them...
    I mean, why should this only apply to trans people? What if I, someone born as male and who identifies as male, want to use the ladies? Who decides what's "appropriate"?

    What are your ideas on how to accommodate every good person in our society
    I've said many times. Translympics, and trans toilets.

    btw, "good person" is subjective. Who gets to decide who a "good person" is? There seems to me only two ways this can be decided... either everyone is treated equally (all people are "good"), or those without criminal convictions. But even then, lots of people I would consider "good people" have criminal convictions. It's a fine line, not least because some people might have criminal convictions based on laws from another country, that wouldn't make them a criminal in another.

    I don't see how "good people" can be considered in this debate, as it's not an objective term.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  47. #29447
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,659
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    This doesn't apply only to trans people, it applies to everyone, and always has. No one is required to show what's under their clothes to use a restroom. No one is required to prove their chromosomes to use a restroom. No one has ever been required to do this. A trans person who is "passing" isn't going to get hassled or anything, and no one's getting their safety threatened. It's only when someone pings our sense of "not normal" that people suddenly want to jump in and hassle someone. The fact that it's in the name of "protecting women" is clearly problematic. There was no actual threat to anyone until people started hassling the different one from taking a piss.

    I'm certain we agree the assertion that a trans person is a threat to anyone, merely on the basis they are trans, is bigotry.
    Ergo, the assertion that a trans person in a ladies' restroom is a treat to anyone is misguided at best - and probably bigotry.
    I don't think you're suggesting that.

    So why are you defending a bigotted position? Some bigotted women will imagine they are threatened when in fact, they are not. Should we defend the bigotted women, or the actually oppressed trans person who is only using a public restroom as intended?

    If this IS a real problem, then why can't the women with an issue simply clear the room while the normal, non-bigoted person uses the space. Why is it the irrational people jumping at shadows you choose to defend, when you don't support the reasons they are jumping in the first place?

    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I've said many times. Translympics, and trans toilets.
    We all agree on this.

    It's been 3 decades since we knew as medical fact that trans people are normal.
    Where are these translympics and trans toilets?
    What should a trans person do in the dearth of these accommodations?

    What do you advise a "good" trans person to do?
    Just to be clear, by "good," I mean a person who is genuine in who they are, and not threatening anyone, and only wants to participate in the same ways that other people are participating.

    And don't even start with your, "How can I know who is good?" talk. You know a trans person is good the same way you know anyone is good. You even helped out by explaining that the merely being a criminal is a red herring. So good means what it always means. This shouldn't be any impediment to answering the question. The only way it is, is if you're asserting that there are simply no good trans people, so any attempt to accommodate good trans people is moot. But you clearly don't think that. So what's even your issue?

    ***
    I, MMM, am not claiming I have any answers. You know when it comes to people's motives and stuff, I'm generally clueless.
    So I can't even begin to think that I know what will be best in the long run.
    I can certainly sympathize with people who mean no harm and are being mistreated by society, though.
    I can certainly understand when someone who is being excluded decides they've had enough and just blatantly does what everyone else is doing. The history of civil rights advances is full of people with stories like that. Including many, many women who simply refused to hear the BS that they shouldn't obtain PhD's or be able to teach at university, or to do science, or what the hell ever women have historically had to fight tooth and nail to get.

    The assertion that I'm not aware of these struggles or that I'm not sensitive to women's rights is simply asinine. Anyone who knows me at all knows I believe in equality in society for anyone who is an honest person just trying to excel at whatever they're passionate about. I do not support bigots and assholes who claim to be victims as a ploy to actually victimize someone. Those "Karens" are the problem, not the normal person they are harassing.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  48. #29448
    The fact that it's in the name of "protecting women"
    It's not about "protecting women" from any physical threat, at least not necessarily. Nobody seriously thinks if I walk into a ladies toilet that I'm going to assault anyone. It's just inappropriate. We're protecting privacy. Women want privacy. Who are you to deny them privacy?

    Privacy based on gender is something we've all grown up with. It's normal behaviour to respect that privacy. What you're suggesting is radical, I'm not the radical one. You're suggesting we stop doing what we've done for, idk, centuries? How long have we had male and female toilets for? How long have women changed their clothes in private?

    It's easy for you, a man, to say "I don't give a fuck about privacy", because men don't tend to get ogled, men aren't subject to anywhere near the same degree of perverted behaviour as women are. It's entirely reasonable that women want to have somewhere separate from men to do certain things, like piss, change, clean etc. I don't give that much of a fuck about privacy either, but that doesn't mean I think we should abandon private spaces based on gender. That seems to me to be completely disrespectful to women.

    I'm certain we agree the assertion that a trans person is a threat to anyone, merely on the basis they are trans, is bigotry.
    Not really, it's no more bigoted than assuming I'm a threat based on my gender, and I am subject to that all the time. If I walk into a women's changing room, I am assumed to be a threat. I don't consider that bigotry.

    It's not about them being trans. It's about them being not-female, like me.

    A trans person who is "passing" isn't going to get hassled or anything
    This is where it's a bit murky. Ultimately it's about making other people feel uncomfortable. If you are not making others feel uncomfortable, then are you really doing anything wrong? If someone passes for female, nobody notices, then it's not a big deal because nobody is made to feel uncomfortable.

    But if you are making others feel uncomfortable, then you should ask if your behaviour is appropriate. You've got to be honest with yourself here. You can't just go "I don't intend to make others feel uncomfortable so you shouldn't feel uncomfortable". It's not that simple. Women have a right to privacy.

    Ergo, the assertion that a trans person in a ladies' restroom is a treat to anyone is misguided at best - and probably bigotry.
    I don't think you're suggesting that.
    No it's not what I'm suggesting. All I'm saying is that it's reasonable for women to want privacy, from men, and from other people who are not women.

    If your argument is #transwomenarewomen are all that bollocks, I'm sorry but I'm not in agreement here. Not if trans is simply identity. Not if someone can simply insist they are a woman and to argue is bigotry. No.

    So why are you defending a bigotted position?
    I'm not, I'm defending the right of women to privacy. That's all.

    Oh, and a right to fair competition of course.

    Some bigotted women will imagine they are threatened when in fact, they are not.
    It isn't bigotry to want privacy.

    It's been 3 decades since we knew as medical fact that trans people are normal.Where are these translympics and trans toilets?
    This is a good question. I can't answer it. All I can say is the answer is not to take away women's privacy.

    What do you advise a "good" trans person to do?
    Demand trans facilities instead of demanding to be treated as women.The problem is, this isn't happening, so cities are not installing trans facilities, which means this debate rages on and on.

    In the absence of trans facilities, I don't have a solution. There is no good answer.

    You know a trans person is good the same way you know anyone is good.
    ie, you don't. I'm not leaving my wallet unattended because I don't assume everyone is a good person. I assume there are bad people, of all genders and races. Unfortunately, society contains lots of bad people, and in certain situations, we assume everyone is bad. That's why you're locking your door at night.

    I, MMM, am not claiming I have any answers.
    Neither do I. But I'm really not on board with taking away women's privacy. And simply saying transwomen are women is kicking the can down the road. They're not women. They are trans. It's not a dirty word.

    I can certainly sympathize with people who mean no harm and are being mistreated by society, though.
    I too have sympathy for these people. But I also have sympathy for women who want privacy.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  49. #29449
    CoccoBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,256
    Location
    Finding my game
    Quote Originally Posted by Some guy on the internets
    A common question I hear people ask, usually to mock poor, white conservatives, is “Why do these people vote against their own self-interest?” In many ways, it is a valid and perplexing question. Poor whites stand the most to gain from economic policies like Biden’s, which grant child credits to families, freeze taxes for those making under $400K, provide Covid-19 relief to hardest hit areas, rebuild crumbling infrastructures such as bridges and highways in rural communities, and offer lowered costs for Medicare, to name just a few. All of these would tend to help the reddest of the red states and their inhabitants.

    Yet these regions typically show the highest loyalty to Trump and the GOP. Many point to endemic racism, to the culture wars over abortion and trans rights, and to notions of individuality and freedom wrapped up in things like the anti-mask movement and the preservation of an unfettered second amendment right to own guns of all kinds.
    But perhaps these are just indicia of a more generalized principle: People don’t vote their *self* interest, they vote their *group* interest.

    Political opinions are not reasoned through and arrived at, they are more typically worn like badges of honor that identify you with your group, whether its party, religion or community. The more proudly you display them (think bumper stickers and T-shirts) the stronger you signal your loyalty to the group.

    Uncomfortable facts that run contrary to a professed belief (such as that the GOP wants to gut the Affordable Care Act on which you and your family depend) are resisted by the group so effectively that *any* contrary statements, even if totally incorrect, often will be cited and clung to in order to justify the belief (e.g. my rates would have gone up even more under ObamaCare, which is socialism!) This quest for evidence can grow increasingly absurd, to the point where people believe the most fantastical of lies (think QAnon) in order to support their groupthink. This is in fact the cornerstone of cultish behavior.
    If you’re hoping to win poorer folks on the far right over, it’s not useful to argue in the abstract that the Democrats will help them out the most. But there is a wide section of the population that is persuadable. That persuasion is not so much based on facts around economic policies, but on how those same policies are demonstrably actually helping *other* people out in their communities, people they might like and respect. If someone in their own community says that the child care tax credit or the ACA saved their family, community members may listen.

    Another very effective way to get the message through is to have celebrities, such as actors, singers and well-known authors, carry the torch. People *want* to see themselves aligned with the people they admire. This is why it actually does matter quite a bit for people like Taylor Swift or BTS to take a political stand. For those who don’t spend a lot of time thinking about politics, but know that they respect these artists tremendously, new political opinions can form as the mind races to justify why they like them. (This is also why cancel culture and deplatforming is such a hot issue for radical conservatives.)
    It also nearly goes without saying that telling people they are stupid for voting against their own pocketbook isn’t going to persuade them. They also aren’t dumb so much as manipulated, and in fairness liberals do much the same retrenching when faced with facts that run counter to their political ideology and set of beliefs about their leaders. The problem with liberalism is that it seeks to establish itself based on reason and fact, when these things demonstrably are not the things the typical human brain uses to arrive at a decision, whether it’s what to eat for lunch or who to vote for.

    I make enough money lately as a business owner to put myself in a higher tax bracket, and yet I vote against my own economic self-interest all the time. I do this because I believe in the ideals of my own group, which espouses equality of opportunity and fairer division of wealth. These values are apparently more important to me than my own pocketbook. Am I delusional? I would like to think not. I can make a post-hoc argument about how my self-interest is really served by supporting redistributive economic policies and high marginal taxes, but that really just is confirmation of a pre-existing desire to see myself as a person with certain values. I cannot argue with the idea that I regularly place the ideals of my group (liberal Democrat) above my own economic self-interest.

    The same goes for those on the other side of the political spectrum. Understanding where this stubborn and seemingly illogical behavior arises, and how best to address and deal with it, is essential for us to win a majority of voters to our side.
    +1 insightful
    Our brains have just one scale, and we resize our experiences to fit.

  50. #29450
    CoccoBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,256
    Location
    Finding my game
    Our brains have just one scale, and we resize our experiences to fit.

  51. #29451
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,659
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    I can't believe you.

    You're investing all this time and effort into continuing to argue why a group of historically oppressed people should just suck it up and keep being oppressed 'cause other ignorant people refuse to accept that they don't know shit from shinola about human biology, let alone the vast complicated range of human intimacy and how it is given and received.

    You're investing all this time and effort into arguing against the perfectly normal expression of human biology because it doesn't fit with your ignorant expectation of a binary system. Our society lied to us. It told us there are only 2 sexes. It told us that sex and gender are the same thing. It taught us that different is a threat.

    It was all wrong, and frankly, bigoted lies intentionally designed to obfuscate reality and confuse people about what it means to be a person.

    It's no different than gay-bashing or racism or any other form of human hatred directed at people due to misconceptions and fear of something different.


    Someone being trans is normal.

    If you hear that trans people are oppressed in society, and your response is, "but women!!" then maybe you should really take a long, hard look at why even the notion of trans people coexisting in society alongside the other perfectly normal human sexes bothers you. Maybe you should take a long, hard look at why you put up a mental wall to even learn the facts known by science and the historical pattern of bigotry in our society and maybe try to connect some dots. Probably, society taught you something false.

    If you care more about holding onto that ignorance than you do about ending the suffering of normal, good people, then you are part of the problem, not the solution.

    I'm not saying I have the answers, but at least I'm looking.
    I'm not saying you're supposed to have the answers, but you're not even helping find them.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  52. #29452
    You're investing all this time and effort into continuing to argue why a group of historically oppressed people
    Women are historically oppressed too. You're arguing in favour of continuing that oppression, just so you don't oppress another group.

    You're investing all this time and effort into arguing against the perfectly normal expression of human biology because it doesn't fit with your ignorant expectation of a binary system.
    You're making this up. Show me where I say gender is binary. Show me where I say sex in binary.

    Someone being trans is normal.
    Show me where I claim otherwise.

    If you hear that trans people are oppressed in society, and your response is, "but women!!"
    If you hear that women are oppressed in society, and your response is "but trans!!"

    Same argument.

    maybe you should really take a long, hard look at why even the notion of trans people coexisting in society alongside the other perfectly normal human sexes bothers you.
    It doesn't bother me. You're completely, consistently, misrepresenting me.

    I'm not saying you're supposed to have the answers, but you're not even helping find them.
    Not true. I've given solutions. You haven't, other than to agree that the solutions I propose are not offensive.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  53. #29453
    mojo, you seem to be buying the idea that to suggest trans people are not the same as women, is to oppress them and to be "bothered" by them. That's not the case at all.

    I do not have a problem with trans people. I have not once given the impression that I am bothered by trans people.

    I have simply argued that trans people should not be using women's toilets, and should not be competing with women in sports. That is not being "bothered" by them.





    Fun fact - I'd fuck her.

    Assuming she doesn't have a cock, anyway.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  54. #29454
    Guy measures TV, doesn't know how to measure TV, complains about TV being a rip off.

    https://www.thepoke.co.uk/2021/06/29...ry-funny-read/
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  55. #29455
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,659
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    I'm asking why trans people can't inject themselves into public spaces and demand their rights just like any other group has historically done. Just like women have done. Your assertion that conveying rights to trans people is somehow taking away rights from women is nonsensical.

    You've found reasons trans people shouldn't complain if there isn't a separate bathroom or sporting category. You've found reasons it's acceptable to justify why trans people being kept from public spaces is only right and just 'cause women's rights trump trans rights 100%. You've found reasons that wrong social norms should be perpetuated or excused 'cause some people perceive a threat that doesn't exist.


    You say separate categories is what you want.
    Fine, but it's been 3 decades and those categories don't exist.
    If your response to a trans person standing up against that injustice is that they should sit down, well... you're not who I thought you were.



    If all you have to offer in this conversation is obfuscation around why trans people who do not have categories should just continue to be silently oppressed, then I'm frankly no longer friends with you, and my time on FTR is finally at an end.

    I'm not going to continue to expose myself to people who can't have a discussion in good faith.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  56. #29456
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Fun fact - I'd fuck her.
    Dude, look at her face. The jaw, the nose, the brow. That's a boy face. It's an attractive boy's face for whatever that's worth, but it's still a boy face. The eyelashes and the haircut and the blouse are tricking your brain.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  57. #29457
    oskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,712
    Location
    in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
    The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
  58. #29458
    ^^ I'm confused. Is Ong gay, or am I?
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  59. #29459
    Quote Originally Posted by mojo
    then I'm frankly no longer friends with you, and my time on FTR is finally at an end.
    Dude, what? This is crazy.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  60. #29460
    I mean, what a ridiculous thing to fall out over.

    Hey ong, if you don't back down and accept that trans people, in fact all people, should be able to use whatever restroom they want, we can't be friends and I'm outta here.

    How am I supposed to react to this?

    Come back in a week and let's talk about something else. If not, well take care of yourself dude.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  61. #29461
    Jesus Christ you guys.

    Mojo, that's a dick thing to say even if you're angry at someone when you say it. Friends are allowed to disagree with each other without one of them taking their ball and going home. Say you're sorry.

    Ong, you knew this was winding him up and you kept arguing about it and winding him up more. Say you're sorry too.

    And fwiw, I'm sorry to both of you that I started this topic off with my insensitive joke. Ok?
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  62. #29462
    Of course I'm sorry, I didn't think arguing with mojo was "winding him up", I thought I could argue with him about anything without it getting to that.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  63. #29463
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,659
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Hey ong, if you don't back down and accept that trans people, in fact all people, should be able to use whatever restroom they want, we can't be friends and I'm outta here.
    That's nowhere near what I'm saying. Lack of good faith.

    I'm saying there's this group of oppressed people. Science has known that these people aren't liars or charlatans (any more than any other group of people) for over 3 decades, and still our society treats them like they shouldn't exist. That's an affront to human rights.

    When my point is A) That's epicaly wrong and B) What can we do to fight this injustice?
    and your response is "These people should continue to be oppressed 'cause women are oppressed, too."

    Then you're not answering the question, you're changing the subject.
    When called on changing the subject, you double down on some asinine sentiment that I'm insensitive to women's struggles, women's rights, women's safety, etc.
    You can't even stay on topic without inventing boogeymen to lash out at, inventing things I haven't said to argue against, finding any reason that the oppression of these people is something they should just accept and I should stop trying to find ways to empower them.

    Well, that's not acceptable to me. I am deeply offended by your attitude towards this. I've said, and I'll repeat that I'm not claiming to have any correct answers, and I'm not suggesting it's your responsibility to have them, either. I'm offended because when I ask the question, "What can these oppressed people do to get their equal rights?" all you can come up with is, "They shouldn't have equal rights."

    I cannot be friends with someone who does not respect the dignity of all humans. It's not a front; it's not a ploy to change you; it's who I am. If I find I cannot respect you, I'm not going to waste either of our time arguing over things.

    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    How am I supposed to react to this?
    If you've been disingenuous to me, or if you've been trolling me, then apologize and I'll change the subject to how what you did severely hurt my feelings and caused my faith in your humanity to waver to the point of collapse.

    If you're firm that you've represented your position accurately, then just wave goodbye. There are billions of people in the world. There's no point is spending free time with people you don't respect.

    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Come back in a week and let's talk about something else. If not, well take care of yourself dude.
    Sorry, but I've seen your heart on this issue. If that vision is accurate, there's nothing that can change that loss of respect, and it would be totally disrespectful to spend time with you just to try to prove how I am right and you are wrong.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  64. #29464
    Quote Originally Posted by mojo
    That's nowhere near what I'm saying. Lack of good faith.
    No, when I got home last night and saw your post I was drunk because I'd just watched England beat Germany. It's how I took the comment at that time. Ok it's not what you're saying. It's deeper. I apologise for even replying last night when I should have known it was better to come back sober.

    But I'm not a bad person seeking to oppress anyone. I don't see how this can be a matter of such gravity that you're willing to cut ties over this. You've consistently misrepresented me, or at least that's how it feels, because you make me feel like I'm a terrible person oppressing trans people when that couldn't be further from the truth. This is why I felt like I had to stand my ground on this matter.

    I don't think it's healthy to continue this discussion. I don't want to upset you any more than I already have done.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  65. #29465
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,659
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    As it stands, if this conversation is over, I'll leave FTR.

    I'm not demanding anyone agree with me. I'm not accusing anyone of being a bad person.

    I'm saying that my continued presence in a community that doesn't place the same level of importance on the dignity of human livelihood is unhealthy for me. I'm saying that when I am asking questions about how to better serve the dignity of all people, and I'm met with derision, misdirection, and the implicit accusation that I'm too stupid to see how stupid I am, that's not a healthy environment for me.

    I hope I don't need to explain to a psychologist why that's not a very healthy and supportive place to choose to spend my time.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  66. #29466
    It has never been my intention to make you feel that way mojo. Nobody here thinks you're stupid, least of all me.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  67. #29467
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,669
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    As is usual, I come in after all the drama has passed. Well shit, what did I miss this time?

    @mojo, I think ong is has a valid point even tho it's being delivered in usual ongities.

    The subject is particularly olympic sports. The example at hand is weight lifting, but let's take another discipline: 100m flat. This is widely recognized as the epitome of human athletic achievement.

    These are the current world records for the 100m flat.

    MEN


    WOMEN


    Seeing these times, you can see clear disparities between these groups. The slowest one of the males would still be setting the fastest world record ever of the females by a proverbial country mile. Every 0.01 seconds is huge in this particular discipline.

    Enter transgenderism. I believe that what Ong is saying is as follows, and any of you feel free to correct me if I am wrong. If it's allowed that, for example, Fred Kerley, to compete against a random pool of women, it would be clear that he would breeze to the finish line before all the other ones, and therefore make that competition invalid. A joke, if you will. The outcome is clear before the start. So, they are taking transgenderism in sports to its extremes; just inserting a random biological male into a pool with random biological females would not be fair to the biological females.

    Of course, Fred Kerley can not just enter the women's race. But, I believe that what you are saying is that if Fred Kerley goes to the process of declaring himself a woman, changing pronouns, maybe change his first name legally to Frieda, and whatever other way he/she/they would decide to come out as being transgender, he/she/they then should be allowed to compete in the women's pool as a woman. At the moment the process is wide ranging, going from just "name changing" all the way to the more permanent snippy snip. Therefore, olympically, it would be a nightmare to revise this logistically, yo know, making sure the competition is clean and fair etc. How can you ensure the inherent test(osterone) advantage is fully neutralized (without allowing the women, or rather, those with lower natural test, to dope and we would have the russia in the 80s scandals all over again)? The size advantage (longer athletes with a longer gait can tend to be intrinsically faster and have that last second emergency lunge, see 6'5" Usain bolt) will forever be there, you can't shrink someone's frame (at least not with our current tech, who knows in the future).

    I believe that what mojo is saying is that trans athletes should be given a chance to compete anyway regardless of details, and what ong is saying is that this competition would then be unfairly balanced towards those with more male hormones (closer if not actual to biological men) therefore invalidating the competition as you would know the outcomes.

    Again, another out there example, imagine if Hafthor Bjornsson gets into a deadlifting match with only (biological) women by simply changing his name to Bjornsdottir. World records would be set overnight. That is the extreme as far as I can understand it that ong is laying down the ongity way.

    So one of you is arguing from the moral standpoint, the other from the purely logical standpoint. I see both sides, but I don't see how you can have the moral side without it affecting the outcomes dramatically; The next logical result could be that a whole lot more of people coming out as transgenders to compete in the "easier" pool. In other words, it incentivizes cheating, basically. You also never hear about a woman deadlifter who transitions to a male deadlifter to compete in the Olympics. If anyone can have a link to one such article please link it.

    Also the other point I saw being brought up in the thread: friends are supposed to disagree. It would be a boring fucking world if everyone always agreed on everything.

    Third point: now kiss and make up guys.

    Addendum: The bathroom issue wtf No one cares what the fuck you are doing in the bathroom anyway, and if some peeping tom would really get this far into troll territory just to see what the other gender is doing in the bathroom, I would say that gender is the least of *their* problems. I won't ever be policing your shit, I have better things to do. Go take a shit in whatever bathroom you want, not a big deal.
    Last edited by Jack Sawyer; 07-01-2021 at 04:09 PM.
    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  68. #29468
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,669
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    As it stands, if this conversation is over, I'll leave FTR.

    I'm not demanding anyone agree with me. I'm not accusing anyone of being a bad person.

    I'm saying that my continued presence in a community that doesn't place the same level of importance on the dignity of human livelihood is unhealthy for me. I'm saying that when I am asking questions about how to better serve the dignity of all people, and I'm met with derision, misdirection, and the implicit accusation that I'm too stupid to see how stupid I am, that's not a healthy environment for me.

    I hope I don't need to explain to a psychologist why that's not a very healthy and supportive place to choose to spend my time.
    Quite au contraire mojo, I think you are a brilliant mofo, and I always appreciate your opinions on everything.
    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  69. #29469
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,669
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    Oh, and just if it's not clear, I have nothing against trans people, or anyone else for the matter. Everyone should do whatever they want to do. While also minding their business. I just don't get people ready and willing to judge others because of their situation, lot or choices.
    Last edited by Jack Sawyer; 07-01-2021 at 04:24 PM.
    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  70. #29470
    CoccoBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,256
    Location
    Finding my game
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer View Post
    These are the current world records for the 100m flat.
    So how many of those times are set by trans people, since they're allowed to compete?
    Our brains have just one scale, and we resize our experiences to fit.

  71. #29471
    Quote Originally Posted by CoccoBill View Post
    So how many of those times are set by trans people, since they're allowed to compete?
    They're not.

    But if anyone were allowed to compete as self-defined male or female, then soon all of the world records would be held by biological men (on the mens' side) and biological men identifying as women (on the womens' side). That's kind of the point; men are bigger and stronger than women.

    What objection do you have to a separate trans category or categories? I don't think I've ever heard one.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  72. #29472
    CoccoBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,256
    Location
    Finding my game
    I don't know where you got you're info, but they are.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transg...ople_in_sports

    There are recent bills trying to block or restrict them, but trans people have been able to compete in many sports, in particular in the Olympics and track and field for years now. Where is the wave of trans women winning all medals? Sure, there are restrictions regarding for example acceptable hormonal levels, but just the fact that there is a striking lack of trans women even competing suggests that this huge worry about sports integrity is maybe not so much about that, as it is about prejudices.

    https://onherturf.nbcsports.com/2021...womens-sports/

    Wrong article, fixed.
    Last edited by CoccoBill; 07-05-2021 at 04:38 PM.
    Our brains have just one scale, and we resize our experiences to fit.

  73. #29473
    CoccoBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,256
    Location
    Finding my game
    And again, IDGAF about any of the sports or who wins or what. I care about a group of people that's persecuted, because you know there might, we haven't checked, but there just might be some inconvenience to some others caused by treating them like people, so we can't have that.
    Our brains have just one scale, and we resize our experiences to fit.

  74. #29474
    Quote Originally Posted by CoccoBill View Post
    I don't know where you got you're info, but they are.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transg...ople_in_sports

    There are recent bills trying to block or restrict them, but trans people have been able to compete in many sports, in particular in the Olympics and track and field for years now.
    That depends on how you define "trans" I suppose. If by that you mean to include (we're being inclusive here) any biological male who decides he wants to id as a woman and thus compete with biological women, then no, they're not allowed to do that. If its' someone post-op and who has been judged to not have a biological advantage, then yes they are allowed.


    Quote Originally Posted by CoccoBill View Post
    Where is the wave of trans women winning all medals? Sure, there are restrictions regarding for example acceptable hormonal levels,
    You just answered your own question. Like I said, it comes down to how you identify someone as trans.




    Quote Originally Posted by CoccoBill View Post
    but just the fact that there is a striking lack of trans women even competing suggests that this huge worry about sports integrity is maybe not so much about that, as it is about prejudices.

    It's not a prejudice that men are bigger and stronger about women, it's a simple face. So, while there are certainly people out there who aren't tolerant, as much as you'd like to think bigots are the only reason there aren't trans women in every sport all day long, it's not. It's part of it, sure, but it's not all of it.



    I mean I'm not sure what that editorial is trying to argue, except to say that life isn't fair to women, so we shouldn't worry if adding trans people to women's sports is also unfair. Not exactly a strong moral position to take, is it?


    Still waiting for an answer as to why not give trans people their own category?
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  75. #29475
    Quote Originally Posted by CoccoBill View Post
    And again, IDGAF about any of the sports or who wins or what.
    But the athletes do, so do their sponsors and everyone who invests in them. It's not simply about who wins a race in a playground, there's a lot at stake for athletes in sports.


    Quote Originally Posted by CoccoBill View Post
    I care about a group of people that's persecuted, because you know there might, we haven't checked, but there just might be some inconvenience to some others caused by treating them like people, so we can't have that.
    Ok, but flip that around and say "I care about a group of people (women) who are being persecuted by letting trans women compete with them for money because you know, there might, we haven't checked, be reasons to think that at some undetermined time after an operation, they might be on an equal biological status with women. And we don't want to inconvenience any trans people by treating women like people too, so we can't have that."
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •