iNow

He’s mostly ignored, and any convos and cogitations about LLMs were likely just btw he and his mates in dingy pub

Definitely not, especially since accuracy has been decreasing over time

We are allies in this, as well.

Well that’s progress then. Enjoy your night bud ✌🏼

And what if, in close consultation with their doctors and family and for reasons wholly and entirely unrelated to athletic competition, they’d already reduced their testosterone in this manner? If their hormone levels were ALREADY WITHIN the allowed thresholds for female sport, and have been for years and years, would you still persist in advocating for this blanket ban against even offering them the chance to qualify for participation? And yet even here within the sexes we see a spectrum. Think of the difference between Dolf Lungren and Martin Short or the difference between Janet Reno and Scarlett Johansen, for example. It does no harm to the beauty of the rainbow understanding more precisely how it actually functions. Human sex and gender is no different in that regard.

And trans athletes should be allowed to make this decision, as well.

While your intent was to be dismissive, your example does little more than further refute your own position on this topic. You’ve been falsely claiming that sex as a hard binary trait and that counter examples should all be ignored, while others are accurately stating that it exists along a spectrum. Well, you know what else exists along a spectrum? Color, including individual colors like Red which is defined as having a wavelength anywhere in the range of 620nm to 750nm. To make it plain, your stance in this thread is akin to arguing that “only 647nm is red, and no other wavelengths! Not even 648nm or 646nm!! Why? Because I said so. So there! Nanner nanner boo boo. Stick your head in doo doo.”

Evolve and update our outdated approaches as we continue to learn more about the true nature of reality. Also by this definition, infertile women and post menopausal women wouldn’t qualify as women in your world. That’s rather absurd IMO, and succinctly demonstrates the paucity of this stance. I suspect that’s not at all what you intended with this, but it IS the most logical next step when pursuing such an approach. There. FTFY Once more, and as already previously shared, just because something isn’t a problem for you personally does NOT mean it isn’t a problem for others or that it’s not something which would positively impact those great many others who are sharing and contributing to this society alongside us.

We’re not talking about people identifying as dogs. We’re not talking about people who identify as dogs then trying to be accepted in the sports division that aligns with that. We’re also not talking about doctors assigning people as dogs at birth and those same people then trying to be acknowledged as human later in life, despite them knowing that the dog label doesn’t accurately reflect who they are The argument you’re making here is strangely reminiscent of gay marriage threads 10+ years ago where people would repeatedly and without hesitation say, “what’s next, allowing someone to marry their dog?!” Slips and slopes and dismissive nopes have no place in this. But again… this topic does that. It’s precisely why that troll came and bumped it several weeks ago then left.

The point is that those who insist there are “ONLY TWO GENDERS!!1!!2!one!1!” are wrong and simply ignoring the natural reality that humans exist more along a spectrum than some outdated, arbitrary, unrepresentative binary.

Actually, many are. No need to lambaste me on a personal level for stating it clearly and openly. I’m not trying to misrepresent you. I’m not being devious. I’m not out to get you. I’m not a bogeyman.

Generally no, but that’s not to say it’s impossible. Helpful. Thx.

Did you intend your comment to include both types of diabetes here, or just Type 2?

^ +1 Just logged in to say the same thing. Just bc something is not a problem for one of us personally does NOT mean it isn’t a problem for others who are being systematically targeted, excluded, and scapegoated across society merely for openly being the most authentic versions of themselves.

This is a fairly standard case of IP licensing wherein the family, an estate, or an entertainment firm of some sort is recognized as having the rights to the likenesses, images, voice, etc. (whether they purchased or inherited or argued for their ownership in court, they become the person who must approve use and who gets paid later when that happens).

While it’s not quite an argument, it is a valid summary of your perspective on this topic and I, while disagreeing with your choice and dismissing it as arbitrary, totally accept that. Much like use of the terms retard and nigger and faggot have thankfully fallen out of favor, I suspect that refusal to accept transitions of birth assigned males to trans females (and their participation in sports) will similarly fall by the wayside as an outdated form of bigotry and prejudice. You can either join us on this side of the equation once you finally agree, or simply fall off the proverbial ledger when you die.

I wasn’t aware that newborn infants were genetically tested before having a sex assigned at birth. I’ve also never seen genetic testing mandated as a prerequisite to participation in sports. Do things perhaps work differently where you live than where I do? And the argument presented here and elsewhere can be summarized as believing that all 7 of those trans athletes out there seeking acceptance will somehow cause this massive industry to crumble into disrepair and apocalyptic ruin.

This feels too easy. No, I don’t favor detrimental drug treatments. I do, however, favor regimens designed in partnership with parents and doctors to support trans individuals in more healthily realizing their true selves in a more wholistic and empathetic manner. As to whether or not that treatment confers some competitive advantage depends entirely IMO on 1) the nature, frequency, and intensity of the treatment, and 2) in the specific sport and the nature of the class/division being sought within that sport (i.e. the details matter here and I prefer avoiding broad all encompassing generalizations).

And what if you were prevented from competing alongside your peers in the sport that you’re passionate about due solely to that “choice” someone else made FOR you at birth? Would you perhaps be more on my side of the equation of this issue than you are right now today?

What if it was assumed for you that you were female? Assuming you feel exactly as you do today as an individual, as JCM in your current form and your current experiences, is it reasonable to also assume you might seek to change it to male given how you perceive yourself? That’s what she said.

Out of curiosity, how old were you when you “chose” your gender?

Not everyone likes the same style of music. Even the same one person likes different music at different times or on different days. Some like eclectic samples and different perspectives. Discussion forums aren’t much different. Different user populations. Different topics. Different styles. It’s fun to visit farmers markets and try multiple different vendors. Going solely to the same one over and over is a recipe for boredom.

Not necessarily. It’s one of the possible options, though. My main point is the rules are arbitrary. We can and should alter them IMO. Especially not in US public schools where legislators across the entire country are actively banning trans competitors (aka “kids”) from participating.

The one who likes the way orgasms feel.