zapatos

Unfortunately it takes more than a majority. https://news.yahoo.com/texas-school-district-locked-down-173651467.html

If you are going to criticize me at least first read what I post. I've only ever promoted the idea of trying to develop some workable solution, rather than simply dismissing it is "unworkable idealism".

Well, that makes all the difference! Then I'm shocked to hear that transgender men are waiting in the wings to win the "vast majority" of elite sporting competitions. Shocked I tell you! Give me a break.

It does seem to be a truly American phenomenon. I think it is bred into us from an early age, learning about individualism, making your own way, being responsible for yourself and no one else. James Braddock was an American boxer who is widely praised for giving back the welfare money he received to feed his family during the Great Depression. So many of the people who are put up for heroes are the people who take care of themselves.

The IOC is working on it for Olympic competition. I'm happy to let them work out the kinks. Imperfect rules to begin with is not the same as evidence that it cannot work. I think allowing the Olympics to set their own rules, like they've been doing since the Olympics began, is the right way to do it. The following is from November 2021. https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-news/international-olympic-committee-issues-new-guidelines-transgender-athl-rcna5775

Definitely difficult to find a compromise. I don't at all think impossible. I don't believe we'll ever get truly fair and equitable inclusion of transgenders, but then we don't really have fair and equitable inclusion of anyone else either. We just need to get reasonably close.

I think that fundamentally the way some of us look at this, is that being transgender is as natural as being cisgender, and thus they should be allowed to participate in all aspects of society. End of story. Now, if there needs to be certain additional rules created to allow them to participate, fine. Figure out what those rules should be. We have rules for every other thing under the sun related to sports so it's not like we can't do so here. But what we should not do is just eliminate them from participating due to who they are. Now, to your question above. The difference is, with transgender women they are getting medical treatment to allow them to be who they are. With your proposal for transgender men, you are going beyond medical treatment to allow them to be who they are, and are providing drugs simply for competitive advantage.

It must be difficult living in constant fear that you could melt at any time. LOL! Stop it Smalls, you're killing me! 😂

Har! 😁

Of course he was being facetious. And while we're busy tooting our own horns, I'd like to point out that I have never beaten my wife, nor have I ever argued that women should not be allowed to vote in any election whatsoever! That is just my moral stance that I have stood by for years, and I don't care if you criticize me for my stand. I am not backing down! Let me say it again. And while we're busy tooting our own horns, I'd like to point out that I have never beaten my wife, nor have I ever argued that women should not be allowed to vote in any election whatsoever! That is just my moral stance that I have stood by for years, and I don't care if you criticize me for my stand. I am not backing down! (Just to be clear, I was being facetious there! 😀)

Who do you believe, and why?

Well, except that you did say they are.

Moon is included due to his Native American heritage.

No. I did not say EVERY woman. And based on experience, people who have had no one of their category (sex, race, gender, etc.) in an elevated position, tend to support them when they arrive. Look how blacks responded when Obama was elected President, or how elated the Sudanese were when they took their first Olympic medal, or how a grade school will all watch a sporting event together because a kid who graduated from there is favored to win a medal. Those sound like two different things; sex vs. style of play. Are you watching the men because of their sex? For example, would you still be watching the men if their style of play was like the women, and the women's style of play was like the men's? Because I am saying that many women will watch the women simply because of their sex. The little kids have role models, someone playing who finally looks like them. I think that is a big draw. Have you ever scanned the crowd at a game played by the US women's team? Thousands of face-painted girls and their mothers all screaming like crazy. And also a good number of men who just like competitive soccer, regardless of who plays.

Yeah, that's what I meant when I said 'stronger'. Clearly the men have stronger muscles and thus I wouldn't have bothered pointing that out.

I'll have to disagree with you on that one. I've been watching both for years and my view is that the men's game is clearly stronger. What the women have is much weaker competition, which always makes you look good. I agree with this. Women and girls will watch the women's soccer just because it is women's soccer. Men won't watch men's soccer just because the teams are composed of men.

Probably. Certainly women would not have been fighting for "equal" pay if they made more than the men. I'd love to hear the final reasoning that was able to convince enough people to agree to it. Yeah, you need to be careful what you wish for. Just because women generate less income now doesn't mean they will in the future, and their higher relative success in their league may mean they could be pumping up the mens' salaries in the future.

This just in... https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10036136-us-soccer-agrees-to-new-cba-with-top-mens-womens-players-guaranteeing-equal-pay?utm_source=cnn.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=editorial

I am shocked to learn that there are so many transgender men who compete at the elite level of all sports who are just waiting in the wings to swoop in and will all the competitions.

Sorry, I was trying to be funny.

I can't tell if you are being ironic or as dense as iron. 😁

Simply quoting your previous statements is not the same as answering the question. Can you say Straw Man? One of us is. I have no idea where you are going with this, but it certainly has nothing to do with mankind uniting in friendship and competition. As you clearly have no intention of staying on topic I'll be leaving this conversation now.

Guess you don't know what it was like to be a black in America in the 1930's. And in what way did mankind unite in friendship and competition after that event? As I said, a bit of a stretch.

Your link mentioned Jesse Owens and Luz Long defying Nazi sentiments. Perfect example of what I am saying. It brought those two athletes together, but shortly afterward the rest of mankind killed 50,000,000 of their own. Hardly an example of "bringing mankind together". I'm also unsure how Titmus beating Ledecky brought mankind together.

Philosophy has always been a bit of a mystery to me so please take what I say with a grain of salt. The way a philosopher speaks about philosophy and the way laymen speak of philosophy makes it seem like they are talking about two completely different fields of study. It is similar to the way QM sounds like two different fields of study depending on whether you are speaking to a scientist or a layperson. When a scientist says 'as it really is' he is generally speaking of a destination that cannot realistically be achieved, and thus philosophy may seem a bit cracked. But when a philosopher says 'as it really is' he seems (to me) to be speaking of a journey of understanding and exploration. So just as a group of laypeople discussing QM can miss subtleties and have misperceptions go unchallenged, I think it is the same way with philosophy. While what the scientists say about philosophy sounds reasonable, by reading the thoughts of our few resident philosophers I get the feeling that the rest of us are missing something when it comes to understanding what philosophy can really do for us.