@newtboy,

Last try to get anything resembling a straight answer.

If we pick specifically the 100m race as an event: If the olympics had but a single open category to all sex and genders, do you expect to see biologically female competitors ever making it into qualifying and competition?

If you are talking policies that govern individuals, average is meaningless, you need to include the outliers. What I really said was, on average it’s somewhat true a bit more than half the time….with many exceptions, so incredibly far from a rule…far from “I can agree”.

You said “ Are you saying you do not believe that people who are biologically male(By which I mean XY) have an advantage in athletics over people who are biologically female(by which I mean XX)?”.
I pointed to one instance where (I assume) chromosomal males do not have an advantage over a chromosomal female in an athletic field….just an example of why I don’t believe it’s always true that people who are biologically male(By which I mean XY) have an advantage in athletics over people who are biologically female(by which I mean XX)..one you can’t contradict.

People are never equally gifted or talented, not even with themselves yesterday or tomorrow. I find the premise faulty.

Appears to, so far, in most but not all categories.
In many, the difference is minimal and an exceptional female will surpass males one day in most. Top ranked Kenyan woman already routinely beat top ranked non Kenyan males in long distance running, for one example.

I won’t extrapolate from a temporary skewed position, it leads to ridiculous conclusions….so I won’t be able to agree.
I can agree people believe that.

It’s not just sexual biology. It has nothing to do with genitals. It’s hormones, dna, rna, mental toughness, upbringing, training, health, environment, opportunity, etc. if someone born a woman wants to compete with men, and your position is correct, what’s the harm? If a trans woman, born male but never going through male puberty or taking estrogen and hormone blockers to reverse the effects wants to compete against women, what proof do you have to show any advantage? Two athletes excelling? Out of how many?

Now how expert are you in this field? Expert enough to define the exact point where each person has an advantage vs a disadvantage? I doubt it. But you think it’s fine to deny them the right to participate based on your ignorant assumptions. Do you accept such ignorant, biased assumptions to determine what you may do, how much you may participate in public events? I doubt you would accept it for a second. Think about that.

You want to equate them to non trans people while trying to prove how they’re so different. Pick a lane please.

No matter what your opinion, denying a citizen a chance to compete in public sports is totally unAmerican. I notice how you ignore that, as if to concede it under your breath. It doesn’t go unnoticed that you can’t address that. It IS the point.

Edit : as to the olympics, they have allowed trans gender athletes since 2004. If trans women are really men, why haven’t those records become equal between men and women?

@newtboy,

On average you can agree…

I never said anything against any given pro/competitive female athlete probably beating out plenty of biologically male folks.

I was only pointing to advantages between equally gifted/talented and trained people.

To that point, can you agree that most standing olympic records as currently separated into mens and womens records, indicate that the historical separation based on XX and XY certainly appears to show an advantage. Would you be able to agree following from that, the existence of distinct mens and womens records is because without it, women would be “unfairly” left almost entirely unrepresented in every sprint distance, every lifting record and most other records.

For instance, the Olympic qualifying standard for the mens 100m was 10.05s, while the standing Olympic womens record time for 100m is 10.49s. AKA in absence of a separate competition for biologically female athletes, even the standing Olympic record holding female wouldn’t pass the bar to qualify to compete in the Olympics.

That is the advantage I am stating exists, and matters and I am asking if you acknowledge that distinction existing as a result of biology or not?

@newtboy

“What genitalia you have has no bearing on your performance in sports”

I’m gonna try once to understand this. Are you saying you do not believe that people who are biologically male(By which I mean XY) have an advantage in athletics over people who are biologically female(by which I mean XX)?

If our disagreement is that fundamental there isn’t much sense to further discussion as we are viewing two entirely disjointed versions of reality.

Using people as a wedge is upsetting. I wish the right would stop, but their platform is based on mutual hatred of the “other”, so ostracism is a main tool for them.
Trying to secure the rights of Americans to compete in publicly funded sports is not creating a wedge, it’s being a civic American where tolerance and inclusion of those different from you is a cornerstone of our national identity.

No, that’s not common sense. It’s a red herring you would use to deny non binary people the right to participate. As I showed, divisions based on biological “sex” lead to men (biological women) like the boxer above fighting against girls. Is that more “fair”? Hardly.

Yes, trans people follow those rules, and must be hormone supplement free for years before being allowed to compete in most arenas. Non trans people have access to the same supplements, and also need to stop them before they can compete professionally. People naturally have different levels of hormones, we don’t force them to suppress or enhance them to compete, nor do we exclude those with medical needs for supplemented hormones…unless they’re trans. Red herring.

What genitalia you have has no bearing on your performance in sports, unless there are competitive orgies I’m unaware of.

One or two trans athletes being outstanding proves the point that there isn’t a noticeable advantage….otherwise every sport would be dominated by trans athletes….and that’s simply not the case. I bet statistical analysis would show trans athletes are not better, but worse on average than their non altered counterparts for many reasons.

Funny how denying a group their rights to participate (or exist?) in your eyes is “equality” and equitable.

Edit: How do you feel about hormone testing to decide which group you compete in? Too much testosterone, or not enough estrogen, compete with the “Ts”,…below the line on testosterone, or above the line on estrogen, compete with the “Es”. Or how about just separate by body mass index? Now is the problem solved? Do you concede that now the debate is settled? LMFAHS!!

In your biased, ignorant little mind it’s settled, not the real world where facts override your ignorant feelings and misconceptions and people’s rights to participate in publicly sponsored competition aren’t over ridden by ignorance and thinly veiled hatred.

🤦‍♂️

So if you synthesize your own through exposure to sunlight, you’re good? Or at least better off?
Is it possible that it’s not the delivery method, but the systems that use vitamin D being healthy beforehand vs being supplemented after the fact? Maybe it takes a while to get those systems healthy, and supplements don’t help with that.

Edit: Maybe, since the same receptors are used to metabolize vitamin D as to infect a cell with covid, those receptors being “full” might be what’s stopping infections, and dosing with vitamin D after infection doesn’t magically replace the Covid with vitamin D? Not really about vitamin D or why you need it, just about the mechanism the body uses to use the vitamin D? Biology is intricate, and why things work and how is not always clean and simple.

Melatonin? Then why aren’t people with more melatonin, people of color, nearly immune? Why are island nations like the Virgin Islands still having outbreaks today? Why were Southern states hit just as hard or harder than northern states? Many questions here.

His explanation seems to confirm this. If your cells produce vitamin D efficiently, they are less prone to infections, if you artificially add artificial vitamin D, it helps with the cellular functions, but the processes that should be producing it are still suppressed, possibly more because your body isn’t triggering them due to low vitamin D levels. It’s less about overall vitamin D levels than about having healthy systems that properly produce and utilize it….at least that’s my takeaway.

It’s not just about sunlight..it’s about diet, overall health, sleep, etc. biology is complex, and we always want a simple solution. There isn’t one most of the time, and our attempts to simplify only make things worse. Eat well, sleep well, get some sun, get some exercise, and you’ll be as safe as you can be naturally….then try supplements in addition, not instead.

I get plenty of sun, and my windows are from the 50’s. It definitely makes me feel better to get sun, but there’s a limit. Don’t just go sunbathe in Arizona, use your brain.

@newtboy,

1. Given how few people are affected, I'd love to see way less coverage of trans-sports as a wedge issue to rally political bases

2. Failing that, isn't it clearly 100% common sense that the Men's and Women's sports divisions are NOT divisions applied based upon gender but instead upon biological sex, and as such should always have been a non-issue.

3. I really can't see the issue, if it must be raised, as anything other than a request for special exemptions to be made. Existing competitive sports are divided based on biological sex and most have requirements around usage of drugs, hormones and other performance enhancing substances. We have existing and established testing for both the biological sex and PED requirements. Applying those equally to everyone IS equality.

/s There, now the debates all settled /s

What do they mean “ Recently, scientists in Japan were surprised to find a species of oval squid raised in captivity could change its coat, depending on whether its tank was clean or covered in algae.”…are they students, because I saw this described and demonstrated in 88 in my marine biology class in Hawaii….then we dissected it….then we cooked and ate it as a class. Interesting teacher.

Absolutely not the first time they’ve been “caught” doing this…maybe the first time with high definition cameras, in one specific laboratory condition, with that specific species, raised in captivity, but this is every day behavior for many cephalopods, including squid, and absolutely not a new discovery.

Let’s see them decipher the intense flashings, strobing, color waves, slow fades, etc that they use to communicate and hunt. That might be a first….but I doubt it. Others have studied their insane chromatophores and their amazingly mailable mantles and how they use them for decades if not longer.

This is a neat bit of biology, but to pretend they just discovered this is outrageously dishonest. Get real, people knew squid camouflaged themselves amazingly well long before that guy named Jesus was fathered by a forced pedophilic inception. Almost like saying scientists just discovered newts like it moist, or that water is wet.

No, he lucked out, but Trump’s foreign policy was worse. He just capitulated to international thugs, cozied up to them except Iran. That’s why Ukraine was already occupied and Crimea recognized. It’s why N Korea advanced their capabilities so much. It’s why the Taliban gained so much power in 2020. He actually claimed China used biological warfare against us (utter bullshit, but his position), but made no moves against them in retaliation. No wars happen if you don’t oppose our enemies.

Biden isn’t my god, he’s far from perfect, he’s just an improvement. Being instrumental in opposing Assad gassing his own people is a bad thing? I was disappointed we didn’t depose him quickly with international support.

The Ukrainian parliament threw Yanukovych out in Feb 2014 on the grounds that he "has restrained himself from performing his constitutional duties" and effectively resigned. He had surprised everyone by abandoning an agreement made with Europe to be part of a free trade union, shocking the country, and instead intended to strengthen ties with Russia, and had been murdering protesters in the streets when he fled the country.

The people of Ukraine and Russia will suffer. Germany too. Probably all NATO nations….and all countries dependent on Russian aid.

My idea would have been to threaten Putin months ago that if one MORE Russian soldier or piece of military equipment crosses the border into Ukraine, we will fast track Ukraine into the UN immediately, permanently recognizing their actual borders, if he doesn’t send more military, we can negotiate peacefully with UN status on hold…and get solidarity with our allies on the plan. Maybe simplistic, but it’s what he fears, use it.

Can only guess what BK33's video is about. Seeing "T*****'s lawer" and the "Q" in the corner, is like being offered a cold sore lipped kiss.

I'll pass.

If it was something about '16 vs '20 - it's a poor point. No one died. People were unhappy but compliant. No one lied that the votes were tainted. '16 was far more sane and civil.

AND LOOK WHO WAS INSTALLED IN 2016!

It was like a Prom fiasco where the frogs from the biology lab won both King and Queen. Just made a mockery of the Prom's First Dance.

All the more reason the objection(s) to the 2020 election was a travesty. 2016 installed one of the worst ever!

https://www.c-span.org/presidentsurvey2021/?page=overall

[Even ranked below a man that really never served. Man on his deathbed was considered a better President.]

Just incase you're afraid of- you know- facing reality

========================================


IQ testing and the eugenics movement in the United States

Eugenics, a set of beliefs and practices aimed at improving the genetic quality of the human population by excluding people and groups judged to be inferior and promoting those judged to be superior,[39][40][41] played a significant role in the history and culture of the United States during the Progressive Era, from the late 19th century until US involvement in World War II.[42][43]

The American eugenics movement was rooted in the biological determinist ideas of the British Scientist Sir Francis Galton. In 1883, Galton first used the word eugenics to describe the biological improvement of human genes and the concept of being "well-born".[44][45] He believed that differences in a person's ability were acquired primarily through genetics and that eugenics could be implemented through selective breeding in order for the human race to improve in its overall quality, therefore allowing for humans to direct their own evolution.[46]

Goddard was a eugenicist. In 1908, he published his own version, The Binet and Simon Test of Intellectual Capacity, and cordially promoted the test. He quickly extended the use of the scale to the public schools (1913), to immigration (Ellis Island, 1914) and to a court of law (1914).[47]

Unlike Galton, who promoted eugenics through selective breeding for positive traits, Goddard went with the US eugenics movement to eliminate "undesirable" traits.[48] Goddard used the term "feeble-minded" to refer to people who did not perform well on the test. He argued that "feeble-mindedness" was caused by heredity, and thus feeble-minded people should be prevented from giving birth, either by institutional isolation or sterilization surgeries.[47] At first, sterilization targeted the disabled, but was later extended to poor people. Goddard's intelligence test was endorsed by the eugenicists to push for laws for forced sterilization. Different states adopted the sterilization laws at different paces. These laws, whose constitutionality was upheld by the Supreme Court in their 1927 ruling Buck v. Bell, forced over 60,000 people to go through sterilization in the United States.[49]

California's sterilization program was so effective that the Nazis turned to the government for advice on how to prevent the birth of the "unfit".[50] While the US eugenics movement lost much of its momentum in the 1940s in view of the horrors of Nazi Germany, advocates of eugenics (including Nazi geneticist Otmar Freiherr von Verschuer) continued to work and promote their ideas in the United States.[50] In later decades, some eugenic principles have made a resurgence as a voluntary means of selective reproduction, with some calling them "new eugenics".[51] As it becomes possible to test for and correlate genes with IQ (and its proxies),[52] ethicists and embryonic genetic testing companies are attempting to understand the ways in which the technology can be ethically deployed.[53]

@newtboy,

thanks for clarification.

So in your view, do you see the left objecting to any of the following things that kinda speak to Maher's point, and I think fits to the point of the 'left' being upset with him,

-Defending Chapelle which left would decry invoking their definition of dog whistle, transphobia...
-Pointing out a correlation between violence and Islamic extremism which left would decry as islamophobia
-Believing sports/olympics should divide competitors based on biological sex rather than gender identity == Transphobia
-(Big any famous celebrity accused of sex crimes) and suggesting they deserve a fair trial == failure to believe victims/survivors

Those are all things that have been pretty commonly defended by large groups of the left from what I've been seeing. Am I wrong?

Jane you ignorant slut…..MY tangent straw men!?! Lol!!! You mean like how many ultrasound techs I’ve known!? Or what my personal hands on experience is….as if one can only have an opinion on abortion or knowledge of the stages of development if they are ultrasound techs. Aaaaaahahahaha. That must be good meth.
Ok, here….again…. Illiterate Fool: you aren’t so blatantly hypocritical that you are both anti choice and anti mandatory vaccination, are you?

No one said it makes one a doctor besides you. Another paper tiger you set up for yourself. It’s not clever, you aren’t “winning”, you need your Ritalin.

My degree is general science, so I’m actually qualified to answer general science questions like this one. What’s your degree in again?

Bob, if you won’t or can’t read, there’s no point repeating myself again….Your question, replete with grammatical errors, was answered multiple times above. Reading comprehension is obviously not a strong suit for you.

In short, my hands on knowledge is decades of science education well beyond biology, necessarily including basic medical education (like topics like this), a continuing curiosity about how things work that keeps me up to date on most mainstream science including medical breakthroughs and quackery like your arguments, and ties to the Stanford medical community because my mother edited all their publications for decades, forwarding me the most interesting advancements they made, often before they were published.

Now, again I ask…what’s your personal experience on this topic? I’m absolutely certain it’s less, there’s no way an 8th grade dropout works in medicine. You have no experience and no education, no understanding, no knowledge at all, just what bubba dun told you down to da boars nest.

It’s what there is at 6 weeks. The whole thing is less than a newt in the egg, no limbs, 1/2 the size of a pea….the heart isn’t formed at all. Get someone to read for you, watch a film, this isn’t hard info to find if you remove your head from your anus. Look at real medical sites, not anti abortion propaganda sites, they lie, exaggerate, and obfuscate.

That is a nerve pulse, not a heart beat, and any competent tech knows the difference.
A pulse starts at 6-10 weeks, the heart takes over 20 before it's a heart. Any tech that sees a heartbeat at 6 weeks needs retraining....There's NO FUCKING HEART TO BEAT!

No, doctors do not relay 100% of what the tech writes...have you ever had one?! I've had a few. They also edit, even reject reports that have errors. Claiming they see a heart beating at 6 weeks would be an error, a grievous error.

Mom dragged me to work and I met ultrasound techs (among other medical professionals). That's what you asked, how many I had met. You fucking asked, moron. Why did YOU ask how many I had met if it's irrelevant?! You're a fucking two year old.

Take your meds....you've lost your fucking mind, you're over triggered, and you took too much meth last night. Try again when you can string a rational thought together.

You're talking about techs knowing more than the doctors because they see the scans daily....but they don't see hearts on those scans, they see a microscopic twitch in a few cells.

Hands on knowledge?....more than you, I passed biology (up to advanced molecular organic chemistry, you never even dissected anything I would guess)). Those with hands on knowledge and medical training say there's no heartbeat with no heart, and no heart until over 20 weeks after conception.

If you are implying I I should shut the fuck up because (you assume) I have no first hand experience seeing 6 week old cell clusters twitch, why are you talking about anything? You not only have no experience, but you have no knowledge, no education, no clue.
I've at least seen multiple videos of such "twitches", which is all one sees in person, and there's barely even a tube, there's not one structure of a heart formed, and there's absolutely not a functional heart for months by anyone's theory.

Triggered much?!

I don't have to do ultrasounds to read the biological foetal evolution of a prehuman. There's no question here about the facts. That's the advantage of being able to read a text book.

Do you think ultrasound technicians and sonographers are doctors? Think again.

Mom worked at the biggest hospital in Texas for years, so I've met more than I counted. I also met doctors.

If you could read a text book, the science isn't in question. A tube that perhaps slightly twitches but has no mechanism to pump fluid is not a heart, it's a nerve signal from the cluster of cells that eventually will become a brain to pump when one is there months later, nothing more at 6 weeks. Calling it a heart beat is lying. There's no heart to beat. It's like calling a wire and battery a computer because computers use wires and electricity. The rest just isn't there.