iNow

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

That doesn’t render them contradictory. It shows that they are multifaceted and layered, not simplistic but nuanced and representative of numerous perspectives. This is an important difference of which you should take note. Thanks for sharing. I wish you well with your anxieties.

🍻

Perhaps you’re right. Perhaps I am overcompensating for my own biases and trying to right various wrongs, but you know what? I’d rather overcompensate toward the side of inclusion and acceptance of those already marginalized and violently targeted on a daily basis instead of adding to the already rampant problems of needless exclusion and discrimination these marginalized groups are facing. I’d rather overcompensate and help bend the arc of history toward justice any day of the week and twice on Tuesday’s.

Sometimes the bully gets their power bc people fear them, not just bc they always win a proper fight. I believe this is about saying to diplomats, “it doesn’t matter who you are, where you live, or which country you represent… we can and will harm you whenever we damned well please.”

I’m okay with that. Tho please note that I reject the underlying premise that my advocacy for accepting trans women as women and trans men as men “demeans the very idea of diversity.” Lol Your use of the word “if” here is the sticking point for me. I agree with your basic logic, but I’m not seeing that approach in obvious display here. Instead, we seem to have lots of preconceived conclusions about trans women having advantages in sport which then go in search of data supporting those conclusions (or don’t seek that data at all, in fact). That’s different than having uncertainty on a topic then neutrally searching for data which can clarify it… with no bias toward any specific outcome. Summarized: The sense of unfairness is being assumed as a starting premise, not left as a mere hypothesis or possibility seeking rejection or reinforcement. And I know these guys with whom I’m interacting in this thread. They’re good people and it’s not my intent to besmirch their character. We’ve argued and agreed scores of times through the years. I am, however, highlighting these possible biases in their thinking and even gave them the benefit of the doubt by calling these potential biases unconscious. If that’s enough to warrant all of the neg reps, then so be it. You’ll always know where you stand with me, even if you don’t like where that is.

It might also be irrelevant since this issue reeks of unconscious transphobia and sounds absolutely nothing like warriors striving for athletic fairness.

Perhaps part of the reason this sometimes feels more like an attack on transgendered humans instead of a defense of fairness in sports is the fact that you’re not equally concerned with the lack of fairness females transitioning to males will also face when entering male sports. Food for thought.

Post-truth is pre-fascism

Anything which distracts people from focusing on real issues or standing up against tyrants by causing us to spin around the axle battling back untruths like these being repeated by bad actors and other badly confused individuals

Thank you for the follow-up. I’m completely unsurprised by your findings. Regardless, +1 for putting in the legwork on this

I’m fine with this. However, the onus of supporting / looking into that isn’t on me since I’m not the one suggesting parity lacks. My stance is plain. Treat trans women as women and let them compete accordingly. End program. Do not pass go. Do not collect $200. Move on. If regulations need to be updated to allow for that to be acceptable to the hordes of enlightened sports fans out there, then let’s do that, but for the love of Thor stopping standing in the way of transgendered equality in sports and otherwise. Be an ally, not an obstacle.

Again here you betray your previous denial and show the falseness of your protest by suggesting that allowing transgendered females to compete in sports as female is something which lacks parity (I.e. you think / are suggesting other people think doing so is unfair).

Perhaps you don’t realize it, but it’s embedded in your and other peoples words. I take your point that many people are concerned about fairness in sports and that is their reason for opposition. No quarrel there. However, there’s no other valid conclusion one can logically draw from that stance other than those people consider the idea of allowing transgendered females to compete in sports as female as unfair.

Oh, look! Yet another fictional narrative bogeyman with zero basis in reality. I reject your premise that allowing transgendered females to compete in sports as female is unfair. Am I the only one reminded by this comment of the “big scary black man” stereotype?