iNow

Lol. I see what you did there.

I’m not the one making claims like “we segregated women to be sure they had fairness in competition” so the onus really isn’t on me to go hunting for evidence. I challenge that claim and believe it’s already been challenged by others earlier. Swansont just reinforced it again above. The separation was about excluding women, not ensuring they had fair competitive opportunity. And even if it was, it’s irrelevant. “It’s always been this way” isn’t an argument I find terribly compelling for continuing to exclude transgendered men and women. Even female sports organizations say they should be included (see final quote from my link in the post immediately preceding yours).

A few helpful points https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/07/26/states-are-still-trying-ban-trans-youths-sports-heres-what-you-need-know/ And while there were many other relevant points, this one really stood out to me: As did this: On a brighter note, at least more than 85% of transgendered youths feel unsafe in school and face regular threats of violence. 🙄

Which ones? I'm fairly sure this same claim was made earlier in the thread and already flatly rebutted.

The other name for those is "Donald Trump." #bonespurs

Thanks for sharing. Does that mean you do or that you do not support allowing transgendered males to compete in male athletic divisions and transgendered females to compete in female athletic divisions?

We’re united in our desire to protect those we love. The divisions often come from us each loving different things.

That’s great. Thanks for sharing, but it has nothing to do with either my reply or the thread topic.

You’re welcome to believe anything you want, but my “guess” at least doesn’t rely on fantasy and instead posits an explanation using known workings of our nervous system.

When read in total, the article does a fairly nice job of being respectful to the multiple positions. You wouldn’t know that by reading only the brief quoted snippets, though

I actually enjoyed the article. Nearly upvoted it. Different strokes for different folks, I guess You literally picked out one sentence from a long-form article. While you don’t find “psychological protections” to be “particularly helpful,” I feel the same way about cherry-picking.

This isn’t a thread about Trump and the way many of his voters felt marginalized and forgotten. You’re wandering thoughts need more focus, IMNSHO.

I could indeed, but I didn’t. I’m not ignoring it. I’m treating it as much less likely.

Do what, exactly? To what end, then? Can we not proceed with improving the horrid response that’s wedged people against vaccines, masks, and social distancing based purely on political affiliation or “news” source AND strive for continuous improvement of lab safety protocols? Summarized: You seem to me to be focused on the wrong things. Bright shiny object syndrome. Perhaps instead consider focusing on how to stop active disinformation campaigns from splitting us apart as a society and causing millions to act in ways deleterious to our collective health as if this is just another edge issue AND explore procedures for further minimizing lab leaks / breakage of safety rules and how best to enforce those rules and protocols just in case the origin wasn’t natural. We can, and should, do both IMO. You seem to be singularly focused on one narrow piece of this puzzle and I believe it’s distracting you from other more important pieces that make up the larger whole. And TBH, I don’t really care what you think I like to do a lot. These are my thoughts, being added authentically to a discussion in a discussion forum consistent with the forum rules to which we each agreed when joining. You’re free to ignore them, but not free to stop me from sharing them. And I’d prefer that the phrase “avoid it like the plague” still actually meant something and hadn’t been cheapened by tens of millions of idiots who distrust experts and refuse to take obvious and simple steps to mitigate spread and needless death (not speaking of you, of course).

In parallel, you’re sort of proving my point. I get the very real impression that nothing would satisfy you OTHER THAN confirmation this was released intentionally from a Chinese lab. Maybe I’m wrong and that’s not your stance. Simply sharing how I perceive you.

Lots, but you seem to be implying nothing is. The problem is we’re already pretty confident about what happened and how this originated. It’s just that this probable origin is for various reasons insufficient for the conspiracy theorists to accept and to cease the social media disinformation spreaders from raking muck.

I will, however, support those Alliterative Authors Always Alacritously Adding Amusement

I’m sure there’s a joke in there about fertility and being top heavy, but I’m a boob and can’t seem to nurse it out

Indeed. It’s based only on the parts compared, but ignores large sections of genetic code that were simply discarded before comparison began. Watched this video recently with my kid which explains it well

Sadly, no. They’re not members of a protected class, and instead are pretty representative of those who’ve wielded the majority of power and wealth and opportunity for many centuries.

That’s a bad misreading of the evidence, IMO. The conclusion here is NOT that “nobody wants to work anymore.” The conclusion is nobody is willing to get WAY underpaid for working garbage jobs nobody else wants to do, especially after a year and a half of the entire planet referring to them as “essential workers.” Basically, if they’re so essential, then employers need to up the wages confirming that. Getting $2 an hour and some measly tips just to survive the week and feed your kids isn’t gonna cut it anymore. Until wages go up and employers respond to these market shifts, little will change. Folks have realized life is too short and too easily lost to continue being treated as indentured servants under horrible bosses in brutal vocations… so they’re looking for better options. People do want to work, but they also are tired of being critical to the infrastructure of society and being treated like trash. Similarly, productivity gains were mostly up in sectors where working from home was an option for the first time in the pandemic. This largely disproves the old canard that working from home leads to slacking and employees taking advantage of the system in large numbers and loss of profits, so people are rejecting employers who are needlessly trying to force employees back into the office in-person for no good reason. People are leaving those jobs and finding employers who respect their need for flexibility and family in their schedules… employers who see working from home as more than a mere perk, and acknowledge it as a requirement for many. I would change this only by adding the word “again.” This libertarian notion has AGAIN been shown to be absurd, but as with many ideologies to which people are emotionally married, facts don’t tend to trump passions and political preference.

Is there something in all of that mess to which you expect me to respond?

Fair point. Don’t disagree

Maybe your body was just under stress and encoded the memories in the wrong chronological order