xandorxerxes wrote: ↑Fri Dec 10, 2021 12:43 am
Haohmaru wrote: ↑Wed Dec 08, 2021 5:35 am
And then you have Xander saying this is all good. What kind of bullshit is this. How you supposed to compete against that. Same with that one MMA fighter who was everyone's ass. And with fighting technique can make up for power more than in swimming.
Is she fully transitioned? Does she still have a testosterone advantage? Does her body have some other advantage that no woman can have? If she's not transitioned, still has a testosterone advantage, or has some other advantage that no woman can have then no, she shouldn't be able to compete. If she's the equivalent of a really tall or freak of a woman, then sure.
A freak of a woman is still a woman and that's something other women understand and accept. Also, this freak of a woman would still get walloped by the male version in her sport. A 7' WNBA woman would still get dunked on 10/10 times by a 6'4'' NBA player
She beat the next best *teammate* by 38 seconds, not the next best racer...
My mistake, but not really relevant. Wouldn't that make the teammate the best swimmer on the team, then?
That happens.
When? At that level of competition among women when is the second-best 38 seconds slower than the best? They wouldn't even be on the team. Hell the entire team wouldn't be on the team.
She's also much slower than records that future Olympians set
So?
Let me ask y'all something - if we make trans people compete by their sex, how the hell are women supposed to beat someone who is athletic and transitioned to a man? If a straight man or woman gets surgery that makes them better at their sport as a treatment for some other condition, should they be automatically disqualified from their sport for getting it?
My answer:
I don't care.
We can cross that bridge when we get to it.
Maybe that means these trans men don't ever get to compete with women because of that, would that suck for them? Sure, but you also made the choice to alter your body to a degree that it creates advantages beyond the natural advantages that biology accounts for so...oh well. Maybe because trans men are virtually no threat to actual men in the sports world( because biology is real however it may make for men feeling awkward in the locker room) they compete with men, it would have to be sport dependent because a trans man would still likely get crushed in fighting related sports and the like or maybe there are trans leagues.
I don't fundamentally care.
(I'm not saying they are the same because they ARE NOT)But back in 1820 if you said, "Hey, slavery is morally wrong. People cannot be property." there were plenty of people that said, "Well, how will we survive without it? Who will pick the cotton, the fruits, and the sugar cane? It's just how society works!"
The correct answer would have been, "I don't know and I don't care. I just know that it is a moral evil. We'll figure out the rest."
This is like the "BUT WHO WILL BUILD THE ROADS?!" question when mentioning the illegitimacy and evil of the state. My answer is the same. I don't care how we'll build the roads, people will figure it out, I just know the state is illegitimate. I don't need to have the solution to everything to know that allowing this to continue is wrong.
In this case, it's not necessarily at the level of "moral evil" but it's wrong and I don't really care about how they compete in the absence of this current situation. Maybe that makes me evil or wrong but ah well.
In no universe do we make sweeping changes for the infinitesimal that's not how society functions because it makes zero sense. Especially when there is no
NEGATIVE (key being negative) right being violated.
I don't watch TV, so I don't know what you're watching. If it's Tucker please stop.
Are you attempting to be cute or did you genuinely not get that by "TV show" I meant life and the events unfolding before us.? If it's the former, you can fuck right off, if it's the latter then I'll clarify. We're watching the same TV show(life and unfolding events) but somehow we come out with vastly different ideas on what we just watched. That's what I mean by "watching different TV shows." Of course, there will be some variation but we're like on entirely different planets of difference.
Bunch of stuff about politics, voting, those more evil republicans, righteous Democrats, and orange man bad
You do remember you're talking to an anarchist, right? Remember, I'm the "The State is morally evil and illegitimate" guy so all that voting shit means nothing to me. It's all bullshit which is why I've said in the past that people need to work on themselves so they can have more options to say "Fuck this. I'm out." (whatever form that takes for that person)
My main point is that you seem to hold the Democrats as "better" when they're not and currently in today's political climate I'd say they are worse because they think they have the people on their side so they are going for broke. Republicans are just chicken shits that ultimately do nothing and just do the same shit just less of it.
As Michael Malice says, "Conservatism is just progressivism driving the speed limit."
Also, about that article, you can't ignore his opinions and "just read the article" they are intertwined with each other.
But we're ultimately talking in circles again, you will NEVER convince me and I will NEVER convince you so why bother? This isn't fun. It's really not. I don't think you just have a different approach, I think you're just flat out wrong in the way you see things (COVID, the role of government, most politics, alphabet mafia politics) I'm sure you feel the same about me. That's fine. We are in separate tribes. As I've said before, doesn't mean our tribes can't interact where things align, but when they don't, you stay in your sandbox and I'll stay in mine. If we choose to mix a little bit of our sand then cool, that's our choice but we should not be forced to mix sandboxes.
I may have said this before and I know this would likely never happen but if we were ever in a situation where we both had daughters in some kind of league together and the trans athlete situation came up where this affected our daughters. And you are like "Yah!" and I'm like, "Nay!" you can best believe I'd do everything I could in a legal, non-aggression principle-following way to make sure you didn't get what you wanted.
Same for COVID (where I think you are the most wrong in terms of government overreach and power)
Same for all other things we disagree on
Or...(the more likely situation)
I'd go somewhere else. Which is my focus now, having the resources to do that.
EDIT: In other controversial news
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/08/us/c ... state.html
I'm of the opinion that I don't actually care if Roe v Wade is overturned and I don't care if there are stricter abortion laws because there will be 20-30 states that will either be less restrictive or allow you to kill your baby right up it comes out the womb and even after if Virginia had its way.
I also think that instead of shouting about how much you love abortion (which is sick) you could just put your own money where your mouth is and create organizations that help women that live in the more restricted state go to free for all states where they can get the abortion. That's NOT what California is doing here. My idea means using your own private money, not taxpayer money.
Also "...state a sanctuary for women seeking abortions" is such a sick, twisted combination of words.
Also, can we agree (rhetorical question, I already know the answer) that there are now three camps? Pro-life, Pro-choice (where I used to be but the arguments fall apart under any real scrutiny) and then now pro-abortion which actively celebrates abortion.
