J.C.MacSwell

Good point. Not after Covid but after the Covid shutdown/reopening of border. Or should I say planned reopening of the border?😟

I have three of his books. Dreams of a Final Theory and The First Thee Minutes, both mentioned above and which I quite enjoyed. The third I got was way over my head...but I got a good deal on it and couldn't resist it...the buying part...not the reading...😀 RIP Steven Weinberg

Not so "fast"... "The two unions representing more than 8,500 Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) employees announced this morning that the majority of their members have given them a strike mandate." https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cbsa-strike-vote-border-1.6118764 I'm sure it's totally "coincidence", but they've timed their potential strike with both the opening of the borders after Covid and the middle of summer. So don't take it personally if you show up at the border and are given the "Canadian cold" shoulder...(politely compelled to wait in a bit of a border line up)

Before INow accuses Swansont of intentionally or subconsciously attempting to dehumanize transgenders, is it fair to say Swansont was just making an analogy and understood the limitations of it?

Except not only is she not putting sugar on her porridge, she eats nothing for breakfast but cornflakes, and she was born, raised and never left New Zealand. Now make some Venn diagrams, and see if you can figure out the no true polarized American fallacy...

Hard to blame Megan Rapinoe, in the politically polarized US, for talking up one side of this polarization. I can respect that to a degree. She is one of the best women soccer players in the world. Truly an elite athlete that in many countries would be shunned for her sexual orientation, and not allowed to marry the person of her choice, but has been outspoken for women's and LGBT rights. I absolutely respect her for that. She also makes half a million dollars a year playing soccer (good for her, I respect that), but whines about making less than men...not men specifically though...male soccer players...damn the gate receipts or any reflection on the economics that has made her quite wealthy...but I guess not wealthy enough... Billy Jean King is probably better known for beating a 50+ year old man than being #1. No disrespect for her athletic ability or activism on women's sports or LGBT rights, but I have yet to hear any details from her as to how to integrate transgenders into female sports at competitive levels. Also Martina Navratilova, also a former #1 of at least the same calibre, and also an advocate for LGBT rights, has voiced concerns about transgender females competing in female sports...(maybe she's also subconsciously against gay marriage, INow?) From Wiki quoting Navratilova: "And what I think I have come to realise, the biggest thing for me, is just that the level of difficulty that trans people go through cannot be underestimated. The fight for equality and recognition is just huge. That being said, still, for me, the most important thing in sports... and you have to remember, trans rights and elite sports are two different things, although of course they are connected. What's the right way to set rules so that everybody feels like they have a fighting chance? It feels to me that it is impossible to come to any real conclusions or write any meaningful rules until more research is done." I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest these letters are probably agenda and politically driven, with a fair assessment of the importance of acceptance and sports participation for transgenders, but little if anything about how to fairly integrate transgenders at competitive levels.

They are an advocacy group for women's sports. They aren't required to make or enforce the rules for them. Any other examples you can cite to prove you're missing the point? The claim was " a majority of women's sports organizations" favoured transgender inclusion in competitive women's sports without caveat. One which INow, to his credit, rescinded.

The distinction is that it's not coming from women's sports organizations, who would be obligated to come up with an acceptable and workable set of rules, rather than simply make supportive statements.

At the risk of sounding racist, homophobic, anti-gay marriage, and transphobic, my carpentry experience suggests pounding triangular pegs into round holes is not always a great idea.

It's not in this: "Over 80 women’s rights and gender justice organizations support includingtrans girls and women in women’s sports. So do high-profile female athletes. Soccer star Megan Rapinoe, former world No. 1 tennis player Billie Jean King and professional basketball player Candace Parker joined nearly 200 other professional, Olympic and collegiate female athletes on an amicus briefcontesting the Idaho law. Close to 1,000 collegiate athletes supported trans athletes in two letters, calling on the NCAA to move championships out of states that passed bans. WNBA players Sue Bird and Natasha Cloud, WNBA coach Cheryl Reeve, U.S. paralympian Alana Nichols and scores of other athletes signed on to a similar letter to the NCAA last year." Thank you. Now can you suggest a reason women's sports organizations can't accept that carte blanche level of inclusion?

Give me a hint...is it in the first link, behind the paywall? Quote something from one of them that suggests they wish to "Treat transgendered women as women and let them compete in women’s sports. End program." That's your claim... an extraordinary one given all you should have taken in during the life of this thread. Now back it up if you can.

Where? I'm willing to bet I won't find it, in the context of "Treat transgendered women as women and let them compete in women’s sports. End program."

Just accept them? No strings attach? Which organizations are these?

They should be included. The question is "How should they be included?" Without a clear and acceptable answer to that you are setting them up for failure. Profound failure. Failure you will point your finger at. You point out the small numbers of transgenders excelling in female sports. Is your wish that that continue? Rely on continuance of stigma to keep their numbers low? Force them out unless they are willing to alter their bodies, through surgery or drugs? Or is your wish that they gain acceptance, and encourage them to compete in healthy sports?

The success of protected female sports is irrelevant? Far from it. Or do you mean irrelevant to this topic? Also far from it.

By and large it was exactly the opposite. It may have taken years to include the marathon, pole vaulting etc etc. but the separation allowed more women to compete at the highest competitive levels. Far, far more women.

You have to take it all with a grain of seasoning...

I'm not at least one of those first three...and can arguably check off one of the second three....so count me safe as well...

We were going to build a wall and make the Americans pay for it...but in our laid back way we never got around to it.

In their defence...Britannia would not have ruled the waves without them... (that is in their defence...isn't it?)

Okay. So what is wrong with these journalists argument here? Fauci does seem to think he should be above answering to Paul, to the point he doesn't really give substantial answers. (not that I heard everything, or any more than highlights, but his claim that what was funded was not gain of function is pretty clearly lacking...or hopefully I can be corrected?)

+1. That's why despite all your crap...we still love you...

I could do the same thing. I could suggest you have biases against minorities of your own, know that it's wrong, and are over compensating. ...or we could stick to the science and only call out racism, transphobia, etc. when it actually appears.

I wonder how many were thinking "scientists" when they responded to their confidence in "science", or how the question was posed? That said, I have no doubt about the trend. +1 Swansont. No one is accusing you of cherry picking...