dimreepr

No, but why would you? If you haven't got a vested interest in the outcome of a game, I can only imagine it's a vicarious excuse to be indignant; if I'm wrong, please explain how... My sister Bella, she's a big girl and if she put her foot down it would take the entire front row to move her. You are so blinded by your cultural bias, that anything or anyone that doesn't conform is impossible to see; to the point that if she did beat your arse, you'd pretend not to feel it, from your hospital bed. I challenge you, also, to come up with an answer to the above question... My breath, while baited, won't be held; for obvious reason's.

Firstly, no one in this thread is a professional athlete AFAIK so no direct interest in who comes first, so why shout unfair? Secondly, this is an absurd argument: Every athlete knows the rules of the game they play and everyone here knows the rules are arbitrary, so why shout unfair? In @beecee example rugby; why stop a women playing in a male team, if a. she wants too b. she's good enough and tough enough? Thirdly, I don't care if my peers disapprove, that's why I'm fighting in this corner. 😉 Please explain how this question is not fundamentally about bias, specifically the cultural bias that women are the weaker sex?

Now you're grasping at straw's...

The difference is, the quality of the argument...

how is that gender specific????

I'm sure @beecee would profit from treatment/learning/teaching, even if he doesn't like it...

Believe me I've been tempted, but it wasn't a fair fight... 😉

For one or two it's about a slight pay cut, for the rest I can only imagine it's their ego's; the bias I've been taught, is that women are the weaker sex; so I'll be humiliated, in front of all my peers, if I step into the ring and get my arse kicked, by a lady; that's unthinkable and therefore, via dubious logic, it's unworkable...

If you walked up to a door and decided it was a push door, you'd be there all day pushing; even after the owner told you "it's actually a pull door".

I've never proclaimed myself a philosopher, and just to be clear "I AM NOT A (trained) PHILOSOPHER"; I am, however, guilty of philosophising, the quality of which you're not qualified to assess, as your no expert. So, FFS, stop using it as an excuse. "Science is a discipline in eternal progress way of thinking, and we do science even if we do not to understand what we are doing." FTFY And for science read philosophy.

Been there and got the T-shirt. Indeed, it's an idea of how to improve; the ism is a hammer they use, instead of screwdriver...

It's strange how often an ideal is dismissed as unworkable, by people who don't want it to work...

Philosophy doesn't accept what's generally believed, it's there to question 'why it's generally believed'; you freely admit that you've not been trained in either discipline. To do something practical in a violent situation also requires training; otherwise you're just an angry old man trying to take out Bruce Lee in a street fight. Just because you're capable of throwing a punch, it doesn't mean you'll be effective. Entropy is in eternal progress, science/philosophy lives and dies with us...

It should, but not it seems, if you change your mind...

OK, so how is that gender specific?

That depends on how wealthy you think you are...

Welcome to the middle of the bell curve...

Indeed, just an overpaid athlete that's frightened of a slight pay cut

If it's truely equal pay, the binman/woman would be paid the same as a professional footballer; but first things first, let's just admit that women have an equal say in the future of us.

Nothing, literally... Thanks +1 another lesson learned...

You misunderstand my confusion, what I don't understand is, how you can hold so many opposing position's at the same time? I understand cognitive dissonance, but this is some next level stuff...

I wouldn't vote for him...

The actual question of the thread is, what's wrong with progress and why is it an ism? IMHO...

I suspect we're talking past each other, I'm not saying the question's are literally the same, I'm saying they think about the answer's in exactly the same way. It's a good job I took @MigL advice, and invested in a quality 'irony meter'...

There's two thing's that's wrong about that assumption: You're basing it on just one side of the argument. You're not allowing for a confused child that's full to the brim with hormones. And you're not allowing for a genuine change of mind. Three!!! there's three things that's wrong about that assumption; but then nobody expects a Spanish inquiry. 😁 So, you've got nothing against PC or social or justice or warrior, as long as you agree with what they say; otherwise "they're not worthy" to listen to, even their more reasonable suggestions; sound's awfully religious to me, please explain my confusion.