• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Trans women are not women (Part 8)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ooh, bait and switch. Texas is evil, so California must be good! How about they're both evil in different ways. How about child sex trafficking is evil, and ruining children's bodies and minds with puberty blockers and major unnecessary surgery is also evil?
 
Rolfe said:
Ooh, bait and switch. Texas is evil, so California must be good! How about they're both evil in different ways. How about child sex trafficking is evil, and ruining children's bodies and minds with puberty blockers and major unnecessary surgery is also evil?
Click to expand...

These laws are making it pretty clear who the people who honestly had concerns about these treatments and who was just using this as a pretext to enact their animus.

No matter how you slice it, laws like passed in Texas are meant to, and will cause, significant harms to trans children. Those supporting such policies are outing themselves as the repugnant bigots they are. It's a bit nice to have some honesty in such clashes, bigots JAQing off and concern trolling are awfully tedious. These laws are a mask-off, litmus-test type moment.
 
Last edited:
Sometimes bad people do good things by accident, although they don't mean to. Sometimes bad people do bad things which, were they done with good intent, could do real good.

Life is complicated. And giving children puberty blockers is evil, even if evil people think so too.
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
These laws are making it pretty clear who the people who honestly had concerns about these treatments and who was just using this as a pretext to enact their animus.

No matter how you slice it, laws like passed in Texas are meant to, and will cause, significant harms to trans children. Those supporting such policies are outing themselves as the repugnant bigots they are. It's a bit nice to have some honesty in such clashes, bigots JAQing off and concern trolling are awfully tedious. These laws are a mask-off, litmus-test type moment.
Click to expand...
This is circular. I will rewrite it to make it more explicit - It is pretty clear that the state enacting woke progressive laws is the "good" state under woke progressive ethics.

This argument gets nowhere unless you are dealing with woke progressives, which I don't think you are dealing with. I'm certainly not a woke progressive.
 
Personally, I'm all for Texas and California taking radically different approaches here. This is what allows us to judge the results of different ethical systems. Does Chesa Boudin style criminal justice lead to a kinder, better justice system where the causes of crime are dealt with and everybody is better off, or do they lead to urban decay and endemic criminality? Do all these liberal policies around gender create well adjusted young people, or damaged neurotics?

There is at least some hope for real world comparison here.
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
These laws are making it pretty clear who the people who honestly had concerns about these treatments and who was just using this as a pretext to enact their animus.

No matter how you slice it, laws like passed in Texas are meant to, and will cause, significant harms to trans children. Those supporting such policies are outing themselves as the repugnant bigots they are. It's a bit nice to have some honesty in such clashes, bigots JAQing off and concern trolling are awfully tedious. These laws are a mask-off, litmus-test type moment.
Click to expand...

Cool, cool. Now explain why Lia Thomas should compete as a woman.
 
Rolfe said:
Because only a bigoted transphobe would deny her inner feelings?
Click to expand...
I think people are reasoning in terribly different ways here.

I can't speak for SuburbanTurkey, but I think for a lot of people there is a belief that a world that operates under universal enlightenment principles, and of course there are different sets of those, is some kind of ideal world. Lia Thomas is living as a person in that ideal new world, you and I and many of those female swimmers aren't. In fact we are preventing it being realised.

If they would only accept these woke enlightenment principles into their hearts, and you and I accepted them into our hearts, then there would be no problem with Lia competing. People lose at sports all the time, if we only accepted that she was a woman the same as them, then it would just be one woman beating other women. You don't mind women beating other women do you. The problem is that you believe she is not a woman. Your belief is the problem. We are the problem.
 
Objective reality is the problem. Hence the attempts to redefine words. [Wil]lia[am] Thomas is not an adult human female. Thus, as they can't win on that one, we get these dishonest whines about "but that's not what I mean by woman!"
 
shuttlt said:
I think people are reasoning in terribly different ways here.

I can't speak for SuburbanTurkey, but I think for a lot of people there is a belief that a world that operates under universal enlightenment principles, and of course there are different sets of those, is some kind of ideal world. Lia Thomas is living as a person in that ideal new world, you and I and many of those female swimmers aren't. In fact we are preventing it being realised.

If they would only accept these woke enlightenment principles into their hearts, and you and I accepted them into our hearts, then there would be no problem with Lia competing. People lose at sports all the time, if we only accepted that she was a woman the same as them, then it would just be one woman beating other women. You don't mind women beating other women do you. The problem is that you believe she is not a woman. Your belief is the problem. We are the problem.
Click to expand...

Complete and utter nonsense.
 
Rolfe said:
Objective reality is the problem. Hence the attempts to redefine words. [Wil]lia[am] Thomas is not an adult human female. Thus, as they can't win on that one, we get these dishonest whines about "but that's not what I mean by woman!"
Click to expand...
That's only because you insist on using a definition of female that doesn't allow her to be what she wants to be. Just recant and the problem goes away. It's like Winston in 1984. All the problems stem from you insisting that O'Brien is holding up 4 fingers rather than 5. If you would just say 5 and believe it, then everything would be fine.
 
I like this one, from Twitter.

FOLJI9RXEAATkqT
 
theprestige said:
Cool, cool. Now explain why Lia Thomas should compete as a woman.
Click to expand...

Whether or not she should be able to compete is something I'm rather undecided about. College athletics is the nearest thing school sports has to professional league, where concerns about fairness in competition are at their zenith. This does not totally eclipse non-discrimination concerns, but it certainly presents a very complicated situation. Whether or not there should be more strict constraints for recently transitioned athletes, in the interest of fairness, is something I find debatable.


What do you think is driving Texas new anti-trans guidance to investigate parents of trans children as child abusers? Do you agree that malice is the only reasonable explanation for why Texas is investigating parents as criminals, including for medical transition that took place before this radical change in policy? Generally speaking post-hoc criminalization is seem as the stuff of oppression, not sound lawmaking. Even if you wanted this kind of policy to become law, the openly malicious approach Texas is taking seems maximally likely to be found unconstitutional.
 
Last edited:
shuttlt said:
Personally, I'm all for Texas and California taking radically different approaches here. This is what allows us to judge the results of different ethical systems. Does Chesa Boudin style criminal justice lead to a kinder, better justice system where the causes of crime are dealt with and everybody is better off, or do they lead to urban decay and endemic criminality? Do all these liberal policies around gender create well adjusted young people, or damaged neurotics?

There is at least some hope for real world comparison here.
Click to expand...

Not sure why you're trying to paint in such broad strokes.

The Texas situation, which is likely to be mimicked by other red states, presents a very specific question. Should other states cooperate with criminal investigations of trans parents that are clearly rooted in anti-trans animus? California says no, which seems the obviously correct answer.

I'm curious what exactly "woke" means to you. You pepper it in freely like a throw away adjective of no meaning. Perhaps that's a question for a different thread.
 
Roboramma said:
Among the words whose meaning you seem to want to change is "correlate".

"Man and woman don't seem to correlate with any particular sex anymore" can you explain what you mean by this sentence? Because if it's in English, it's clearly false.
Click to expand...
Oh **** sorry, you are correct I used the wrong words, doh.
My fault sorry,

This is what I was meaning to say
"Man and woman don't seem to be dependent on any particular sex anymore"

I was aiming for gender being a variable and sex a constant.
 
Last edited:
SuburbanTurkey said:
I'm curious what exactly "woke" means to you. You pepper it in freely like a throw away adjective of no meaning. Perhaps that's a question for a different thread.
Click to expand...
OK. I'll bite. :-) I hope this doesn't descend into arguing over the definition. I think it is a word that is too new and still evolving for there really to be a dictionary answer, hence your question. I'll give you my meaning, just take in to account I've had a couple of glasses of gin.

To some degree, woke is the left wing version of being red pilled. Being red-pilled is more of a negative vision thing about the unattainability of utopia, while being woke is positive vision. A lot could be said about what one has opened ones eyes to when one is woke. I think the key thing I mean when I use it here is that somebody who is woke believes in the attainability of some liberal utopia that can be willed into existence if only everybody accepts a particular take on the traditional liberal values of liberté, égalité, fraternité, rationalism and the perfectibility of man. As I think I've said, in it's forward looking aspect, it's a type of millenarianism.
 
Last edited:
shuttlt said:
OK. I'll bite. :-) I hope this doesn't descend into arguing over the definition. I think it is a word that is too new and still evolving for there really to be a dictionary answer, hence your question. I'll give you my meaning, just take in to account I've had a couple of glasses of gin.

To some degree, woke is the left wing version of red pilled. A lot could be said about what one has opened ones eyes to when one is woke. I think the key thing I mean when I use it here is that somebody who is woke believes in the attainability of some liberal utopia that can be willed into existence.
Click to expand...

Red-pilled strikes me as an equally ill-defined term.

To be honest, whenever I see some reactionary using "woke", I always assume they'd prefer to use a slur of some sort, or it just means "foolish". It's an empty expression. It's not totally worthless, it's right up there with "red pilled", "based", "SJWs" or whatever other lingo weird right wingers use these days. It lets you know the user forgot they weren't on 4chan still.
 
Last edited:
SuburbanTurkey said:
Red-pilled strikes me as an equally ill-defined term.

To be honest, whenever I see some reactionary using "woke", I always assume they'd prefer to use a slur of some sort, or it just means "foolish". It's an empty expression. It's not totally worthless, it's right up there with "red pilled", "based", "SJWs" or whatever other lingo weird right wingers use these days. It lets you know the user forgot they weren't on 4chan still.
Click to expand...

Cool. Now explain why Lia Thomas should compete as a woman.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom