iNow

Turns. People. Other similar obstacles and intrusions.

Is this a serious inquiry? Why can’t an auto out vehicle on city streets be designed to go as fast as a maglev train? Replacement is ideal, but unrealistic. Why? The scale is huge, but Walmart or Lockheed Martin and other similar private entities could surely pull it off.

Not according to the originalists on the US Supreme Court.

Do you also refuse to accept the new last name when a woman marries and no longer uses her maiden name, even after she corrects you? Do you also refuse to call someone Doctor after they compete the appropriate schooling and insist on calling them Miss or Mister, even after they correct you? What is so hard about calling a person trans or the gender which best aligns with who they are and how they identify, if it’s not simply plain old fashioned bigotry? Unless, of course, you’re trans and trying to compete in the division which best aligns with how you authentically identify yourself. I never suggested otherwise. What a needlessly barbed reply. “Fairness” has been a consistent ribbon through and core theme across multiple posts for several months now (and central to the arguments of many here standing in opposition).

Not to point out the obvious, but there have been 90 pages of discussion since then. It’s evolved a bit.

First, they're called trans women, not former men. Second, this suggests that the chess world believes men have some sort of mental and intelligence advantage over women players, which they clearly do not. I believe the International Chess Federation made a mistake here, and the female grandmaster whom everyone in this thread seems eager to protect agrees with ME, not YOU... calling the ruling ridiculous, absurd, and offensive. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-66538328 I'd very much like to understand the rationale... especially since men and women on a daily basis compete alongside and against one another in the open division already." It seems even chess is subject to prejudice and ignorance, and while they acknowledge this is temporary, it should (and almost certainly will) be undone sooner rather than later. Indeed. Appreciate your post, as well. Like a two-sided coin, fair to one may be unfair to another. We all want fairness, but we seem to target different subjects in our desire to protect. There aren't perfect answers. We'll need to compromise and refine regardless of path chosen.

It was apparently easier to evade and ignore your question then deflect with a random anecdote from a random uninformed athlete somewhere mad that they lost and lashing out in response.

Of course it is. You can’t even tell me what it’ll look like next month.

This is both a hasty generalization and an unsupported nonsequitur.

I paraphrased, and apologize that I didn't provide an exact reference to a comment I made only a few hours previous. I know what my intent was, and it was not to deceive. Thank you for this additional opportunity to further align with you in a more precise way. I'm grateful that you've called it out, but dishonesty was not present in my approach.

Yes

Off topic, but this is a space where I anticipate recent advancements in room temperature semiconductors will offer huge rewards and benefits to bring costs down. Part of why MRIs are so expensive is because they require such powerful cooling to work. You misspelled anecdote, unless perhaps you meant "narrative?"

Like the separate, but equal reference? I was just having a bit of fun. Trying to add some levity to an otherwise heavy thread. You suggested that others were being weaselly and hiding and other similar derogatory characterizations. I pointed out that perhaps they simply felt the effort of answering your question wasn't worth it. That the ROI wasn't there. That in this thread you seem to have firmly made up your mind and really don't want to openly explore other ideas. I summarized all that by saying, "Maybe they just think you're engaging in bad faith" and basically aren't worth the time or effort. In response? You said, "Link?" Link to what? Link to my suggestion that maybe they have other reasons for not answering your loaded questions? There is no link to that... it's another bad faith request. So, I shared a picture of Link from the Legend of Zelda. This is a game that's been out for decades. It's recently become more popular with a new version release, and it's everywhere in the social either lately. I made my picture of the hero of that game (Link) more on-topic by sharing a pic of him expressing himself as a female, something he did to gain entry to an area of the kingdom where men aren't allowed. You know... fun? Lighthearted... levity. I'm sorry it went over your head, but I'm sure it went over the head of others, too... so thanks for the invitation and opportunity to elaborate.

That it’s a model

That’s amazing! Have you already submitted your results to the journals?

I think it’s caused by using the wrong type of toilet paper. This assertion rests on the exact same footing as your OP. It’s a wild ass guess. It’s not even speculation.

It also offers me that time back in my day where I can catch up reading news, responding to emails, attending calls, etc while being chauffeured. It also simplifies transportation of children too young to drive to school or sporting events, or over to friends houses and back (actions today owned by parents who basically become unpaid Uber drivers).

Sure! Here he is in Gerudo Town (it’s off limits to men, hence the garb):

Who owns and manages this fleet of vehicles large enough to provide rides to every human being?

Or, experience shows that maybe you aren't engaging in good faith.

Who gets to decide when someone is no longer eligible to be considered human? You? Do YOU get to decide that this person no longer deserves to live? Who watches the watchers?

Is the mass shooter not also an "other?"

Sick burn, bruh

Why are your assertions so often nonsequitur?

Are you trying to win a bet with someone that you can be even more ridiculous and even more profoundly absurd than you already were in previous posts?