this same effect is also used in Super Meat Boy (videogame that's tough - almost guaranteed to see a wave a deaths before you succeed)

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?

Similar to his answer to the question..”do you think this (Putin invading Ukraine) is evil.”

Trump “I think in 100 years people are going to look back and they’re going to say “how did we stand back and nato stand back” which in many ways I’ve called a paper tiger don’t forget I rebuilt nato because when I became president the first thing I noticed when I went there to the first meeting was that most of the countries were not paying or were paying far less than they were supposed to. There were only 8 out of 28 countries that were paid in full the United States was not only one of them, we were making up the deficits in order to protect Europe. We were paying POSSIBLY 80% of nato to protect them and then they take advantage of us yet on trade because on trade they’re every bit as bad as Gina. They treated us very badly on trade. We changed a lot of that around but they were very tough on trade I asked, Angela Merkel how many chevrolets are you selling this month in Munich or Berlin, and she looked at me and said “well probably none” I said you’re exactly right, none and yet we had the Mercedes Benz and the Volkswagens and all of them. We had all of the German companies, and the same thing with farmers, our farmers sell virtually nothing to Europe, you take a look at what we sell and yet we take their product.
They treated us very badly in trade and we defended them and we really if you look at the real numbers I bet you it’s close to 80% and I said “you have to pay and if you don’t pay we’re not going to defend you, and it’s one way or the other I knew Putin very well…almost as well as I know you, Sean, and I will tell you, we talked about it. We talked about it a lot. He did want Ukraine but I said “you’re not going into Ukraine”. He would never ever have gone into Ukraine and President Xi of Gina would never have even thought about going into Taiwan ..not doing windmills because they’re killing eagles. They’re killing the bald eagles and other eagles and other birds and we have these windmills all over the place and the environmentalists pretend they love them, but they’re really hurting our country they’re driving down values, they’re just absolutely killing us it’s one of the most expensive forms of energy…the turbines are all made in Gina or Germany, so they get the advantage of that….it’s…uh…just ridiculous but the real problem…”

Again, the question was “Do you think this (referring to the Russian invasion) is evil?”
This is the second interview where Hannity asked him that very question and he completely ignored it to ramble nonsensically.

Just as rambling, disjointed, fact free, casting blame, flattering himself, and completely ignoring the question because he cannot say anything rational, certainly nothing remotely against Putin or the pee tape goes public….or something worse.

@bobknight33…this is you guy? This is want you want? Mr stream of consciousness word salad spewing Trump? My 97 year old grandmother could still think and talk circles around him with her teeth out … and she’s been dead for 8 years.

rats.

stuck - like a bug on a windshield - trying to come up w/one.

anyway...bet the driver received some training on not crossing the bigger guy. tough lesson but maybe they're on the right track now. 'tho one might ever know...the driver might have been loco. no motive to do what he did.

oops. gonna go. my jam is on...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sROSe31vV2s

I've played the Playstation Pepsi game (on emulator) - it was actually pretty tough! had to quick save/load many times to get through it.

I would rather be thought an elitist by middle school dropouts who think they know everything but in reality are 100% wrong >98% of the time and partially wrong the rest of the time than be one of them.
Elitist!?! Lol. Are we back in 2016!? What do you think that word means?
Elitist: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/elitist
a: giving special treatment and advantages to wealthy and powerful people
b: regarding other people as inferior because they lack power, wealth, or status
That hardly fits, I think the rich should pay MORE by percentage of income, not LESS. Technically "special treatment", but definitely not more advantages.

Q: Do you think Trump is elitist? Explain your answer. (Pretty sure you just decided elitism is good).

If you would read, and not just insanity that agrees with your preconceptions, if you weren't so smarmy and dismissive whenever you THINK you have some point to make or gotcha tidbit of data, acting like a third grader who just took the last desert at lunch taunting the next in line, your bad grammar wouldn't get you ridiculed so often and you would be far less aggressive about making your mistaken points, and would again receive less ridicule.

But instead you swing nonsense with vitriol and hate like a club, clearly trying to do damage, but your club is a fake made of foam rubber lies, making it impossible to not smack you down every time you try to knock someone out with it and stand dumbstruck that it bounced back into your face.
If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough.-Jackass

This time you're again wrong about what you claim, you backed yourself into a corner by claiming this IS your area of expertise and by deriding others without personal hands on experience in the field, then you got the facts completely backwards....as usual...then hid from your mistakes....as usual.

Again, I'll ask for 3 examples of that 1/3 of what I say that's wrong. I post enough that you should be able to find 3 from yesterday alone. I don't really expect you'll answer, because I don't think you can.

Hee Hee.

It's just good fun. You pretend to know facts, so why not fight mud with mud?

Look, you're answer is no answer. Calling it murder makes you look unconscionably devoid. It has no merit. Also is an insult to the whole matter.

If life - other people's unformed, potential children - matter that much...then why not support Democrats?

They are the only ones seriously taking about national healthcare. NO GOP PLAN - isn't that true?

If you w/the holy staff, want children to be carried to full term, then prenatal care is a necessity. Data shows that the bulk of terminations are single parents with children. As a citizen of the USA, you KNOW that's tough enough. But no guy, no religious fart, that talks about "personal responsibility" yet offers no aid is sewer fodder.

Even adoption is a lie. Poll anyone at your church (if you do that sort of thing and are not independently enlightened) how many have adopted, bet it's not that much...if any.

It's a hard sell, amigo.

But do know there are foreseeable unintended deaths coming because of this bill if left in place - GO DOJ!!! Blissful Bob and his ilk will claim it did no such thing either.

Mean you no ill will (the devil you say) but your intent isn't being served by this notion that banning means solving.

[BTW: do you remember when the state of FL and Jeb Bush lost ~10,000 children in the foster care system? Sometime later he glowingly said they accounted for 99% of them? Meaning 100 kids could have been sex slaves, dead, or dating Matt Gaetz.]

You are projecting.

Marriage takes the honesty away from a relationship.
It's no longer me and you.
It's me and you and uncle sam.
I want *consensual* relations where me and my partner set our rules, not some 3rd party, and not when the rules are stacked against me.

Congratulations to your brother. Lucky him.

I never said women don't work.

I said that men make more personal sacrifices for their work - a true statement about men as a group. Exceptions don't alter the rule.

Yes, women under 35 out earn men now. And as legacy earners retire, we will be facing a situation where women out earn men at any age. Preferential admittance and hiring tend to have that effect. It's by design.

And women don't get paid less for the same work - the studies saying that don't account for hours worked and don't provide any breakdown of job title. E.g. Women doctors get paid less - because the type of doctor they choose to be is more likely to be a pediatrician than a heart surgeon or anesthesiologist. But within each category of doctor, per hour worked, and per year experience, their income is essentially identical.

And you don't need to be a home maker to get paid in a divorce. Just make less than your partner.
Historically the divorce rewards scale higher for women given mirror situations.

Why would I want to deal with a 50/50 split when I brought 90% of the assets into the marriage? A 50/50 split would set me back decades. I just want to keep my stuff, I did pay for it after all, which cost me money, which cost me time, which cost me life.

And why should /anyone/ have their life supported by anyone else?
(*context=spouses. Not interested in some bad faith out of context argument bringing up children or retirees supported by taxes, etc)
Are you able bodied? Then get working.
Is it tough? Too bad.
It's harder for both people supporting themselves alone, you aren't special. You were in this situation before you got married, you can go back to it.

In any case, the homemaker job argument is senseless. There are benefits (time with kids), and there are pitfalls (hole in your resume). You make your choice, and you deal with the consequences.
You are paid by the home over your head and the money you're given while you are a home maker. What other job do you get to leave and still be paid. People act as if the working partner was just chilling this whole time. Where are the working partner's continuing post divorce benefits?


I have no mindset about women. More projection.
I couldn't care less if I marry a stripper with 2 kids - so long as in the event of a divorce we go our separate ways with ZERO obligations to one another.

I have a mindset about the dangers of divorce, and the fact that most marriages end in divorce, and most divorces are initiated by the female partner.
I am on average more likely than not to face a divorce.
Hence the risk reduction by being more 'picky'.


I am in a nearly 20 year happy relationship - unmarried.
She's the boss of the relationship. And I'm fine with that because I *consent* to it. I can always walk away if I decide otherwise.

So long as laws and family court are how they are, I won't even consider marriage.

-scheherazade

After a year of lockdown I've witnessed a few vidcall tantrums (and to my shame have thrown one myself), but from the outside it's interesting to see the three visible professionals hold their reactions just about in check throughout the call. Besides the main event 5 minutes in, my award goes to the judge for her expression at the very end.

I certainly hope the defending attorney calmed down quickly and apologised hard. I'm not a fan of schadenfreude, and times is tough.

It can be kinda challenging getting rings off the deceased but I haven't failed yet. Thin necklaces with the really small clasps are tough to unlock when you're wearing rubber gloves with well trimmed fingernails.

Crazy. Tough stuff.

Never thought about breathing in the lead in the air from firing bullets.

I'm not sure "coddled" is the right word. I believe there are very deep reasons why bob is the way he is. One reason is I believe he loves his family and his friends. I also believe he is looking for real answers for the conflict in his life.

He wants something but he doesn't know what it is. This becomes a problem for him for which he has no answer. In his effort to find the answer to his problem, the only thing he can do is pass his problem onto others and see if they can give him the answers he is looking for.

My comment to bob that started this conversation was to illustrate the hypocrisy in his quote. My comment to him were HIS own words. Although the quote is a good one it can be looked at in two ways. Was it a light that just turned on for him or was it a message to the people who give him shit for his beliefs?

I don't hate bob. I also know he is in a deep hole where there seems to be no way out. I think bob also knows, deep down, that I would never hold anything against him because he is in tough spot.

He knows what good is but, he has to protect those he loves. He can't turn on his friends and family.

I think the real reason bob sticks around here is because he may find the answer he's been looking for. I think that day may come for him.

As far as lowering myself, sometimes you really need to reach deep.

----------------------------------

Thank you @StukaFox. For me, Christmas is every day.

Lol.
Stahl- "Are you ready for some tough questions?"
Trump- "No."

Most honest answer ever given by president low T. It should have ended right there.

Snowflake. Run and hide. The questions are going to be one hell of a lot tougher in court, little Donny.