The Democratic Presidential Debates

ecdanc

mickeyrat said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mrussel1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

rogan doesn't hate the left. that's laughable. he also isn't fucking transphobe. that's also just a talking point for outrage seekers. 

Buying into birtherism shows a lack of judgment though.  

that's the first i heard of that. that's admittedly a little concerning. 

Wait, you’re cool with his anti-trans bullshit, but you draw the line at birtherism?

he's not anti-trans. i've listened to him talk a lot about it, and he has no issue with people being trans. he has issues with trans women competing against cis women in sports, which i agree with. imagine if brock lesnar was a trans woman. you think that's a level playing field?

That’s anti-trans, champ. 

so by your logic champ, being protrans in this instance makes you anti-women

Nope. Not unless you’re a TERF. But fuck them. 

mrussel1

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mrussel1 said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mrussel1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

rogan doesn't hate the left. that's laughable. he also isn't fucking transphobe. that's also just a talking point for outrage seekers. 

Buying into birtherism shows a lack of judgment though.  

that's the first i heard of that. that's admittedly a little concerning. 

Wait, you’re cool with his anti-trans bullshit, but you draw the line at birtherism?

he's not anti-trans. i've listened to him talk a lot about it, and he has no issue with people being trans. he has issues with trans women competing against cis women in sports, which i agree with. imagine if brock lesnar was a trans woman. you think that's a level playing field?

That’s anti-trans, champ. 

no it isn't champ, it's common sense biology. 

Really doubling down on your own transphobia. Bold move. 

Struggling with your view here, so let me make sure I'm not just uninformed.  If Usain Bolt started taking hormone replacement therapy to transition to a woman, he (today) should be able to compete against cis women, and that's an equal playing field?

i asked the same thing using brock lesnar as an example. crickets. this whole all encompassing "you need to let (x group of people) do what they want or you are anti-(that group)!". it's nonsense. 

moving on.

Trans women are women. Period. What’s left to discuss?

So yes, Brock Lesnar should be let into the ring, Usain Bolt on the track.  Just by starting therapy.  Seems to be a very uneven playing field for competition.  And in the fighting example, very dangerous for a cis woman.  Do you care more about the feelings of a trans woman than the health of a cis one?  I have a hard time squaring all of this. We're talking about sports, not marriage, civil rights, etc.  It's a more complex argument.  

HughFreakingDillon

ecdanc said:

mcgruff10 said:

I 100% agree with Hugh and there is no way that view is anti trans. 

Sorry, man, I’ll defer to the experts over internet Hugh. 

https://jme.bmj.com/content/45/6/395

and i will defer to the science over internet ecdanc

ecdanc

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

brianlux said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mrussel1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

rogan doesn't hate the left. that's laughable. he also isn't fucking transphobe. that's also just a talking point for outrage seekers. 

Buying into birtherism shows a lack of judgment though.  

that's the first i heard of that. that's admittedly a little concerning. 

Wait, you’re cool with his anti-trans bullshit, but you draw the line at birtherism?

he's not anti-trans. i've listened to him talk a lot about it, and he has no issue with people being trans. he has issues with trans women competing against cis women in sports, which i agree with. imagine if brock lesnar was a trans woman. you think that's a level playing field?

That’s anti-trans, champ. 

no it isn't champ, it's common sense biology. 

Really doubling down on your own transphobia. Bold move. 

You obviously don't know where HFD is coming from.  Why are you bating like this?

I don’t care where he’s coming from. I care that he’s spouting anti-trans nonsense. That’s not baiting. I consider his views extremely harmful. 

how is it harmful to cite science? maybe instead of a women's division and men's division in sports, we create a more all-inclusive based on physical attributes or other types of criteria instead of just penis or vagina?

Did you come up with this idea before you started worrying about trans athletes? And why are we trusting science here? 

mrussel1

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

brianlux said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mrussel1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

rogan doesn't hate the left. that's laughable. he also isn't fucking transphobe. that's also just a talking point for outrage seekers. 

Buying into birtherism shows a lack of judgment though.  

that's the first i heard of that. that's admittedly a little concerning. 

Wait, you’re cool with his anti-trans bullshit, but you draw the line at birtherism?

he's not anti-trans. i've listened to him talk a lot about it, and he has no issue with people being trans. he has issues with trans women competing against cis women in sports, which i agree with. imagine if brock lesnar was a trans woman. you think that's a level playing field?

That’s anti-trans, champ. 

no it isn't champ, it's common sense biology. 

Really doubling down on your own transphobia. Bold move. 

You obviously don't know where HFD is coming from.  Why are you bating like this?

I don’t care where he’s coming from. I care that he’s spouting anti-trans nonsense. That’s not baiting. I consider his views extremely harmful. 

how is it harmful to cite science? maybe instead of a women's division and men's division in sports, we create a more all-inclusive based on physical attributes or other types of criteria instead of just penis or vagina?

Did you come up with this idea before you started worrying about trans athletes? And why are we trusting science here? 

Because we try to be enlightened and science has been the way since the middle ages.  What do you trust?  Your gut?  Trump the anti-science guy?  Is that a real counterargument?

HughFreakingDillon

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

brianlux said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mrussel1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

rogan doesn't hate the left. that's laughable. he also isn't fucking transphobe. that's also just a talking point for outrage seekers. 

Buying into birtherism shows a lack of judgment though.  

that's the first i heard of that. that's admittedly a little concerning. 

Wait, you’re cool with his anti-trans bullshit, but you draw the line at birtherism?

he's not anti-trans. i've listened to him talk a lot about it, and he has no issue with people being trans. he has issues with trans women competing against cis women in sports, which i agree with. imagine if brock lesnar was a trans woman. you think that's a level playing field?

That’s anti-trans, champ. 

no it isn't champ, it's common sense biology. 

Really doubling down on your own transphobia. Bold move. 

You obviously don't know where HFD is coming from.  Why are you bating like this?

I don’t care where he’s coming from. I care that he’s spouting anti-trans nonsense. That’s not baiting. I consider his views extremely harmful. 

how is it harmful to cite science? maybe instead of a women's division and men's division in sports, we create a more all-inclusive based on physical attributes or other types of criteria instead of just penis or vagina?

Did you come up with this idea before you started worrying about trans athletes? And why are we trusting science here? 

got it from the short article i posted. but of course you have no interest in reading it. 

mickeyrat

thread integrity, start a trans thread or find one if its been created already.

HughFreakingDillon

"why are we trusting science" is the only question you need to know about someone's thought processes and why they should be discounted and ignored. 

back to bernie..........

ecdanc

mrussel1 said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

brianlux said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mrussel1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

rogan doesn't hate the left. that's laughable. he also isn't fucking transphobe. that's also just a talking point for outrage seekers. 

Buying into birtherism shows a lack of judgment though.  

that's the first i heard of that. that's admittedly a little concerning. 

Wait, you’re cool with his anti-trans bullshit, but you draw the line at birtherism?

he's not anti-trans. i've listened to him talk a lot about it, and he has no issue with people being trans. he has issues with trans women competing against cis women in sports, which i agree with. imagine if brock lesnar was a trans woman. you think that's a level playing field?

That’s anti-trans, champ. 

no it isn't champ, it's common sense biology. 

Really doubling down on your own transphobia. Bold move. 

You obviously don't know where HFD is coming from.  Why are you bating like this?

I don’t care where he’s coming from. I care that he’s spouting anti-trans nonsense. That’s not baiting. I consider his views extremely harmful. 

how is it harmful to cite science? maybe instead of a women's division and men's division in sports, we create a more all-inclusive based on physical attributes or other types of criteria instead of just penis or vagina?

Did you come up with this idea before you started worrying about trans athletes? And why are we trusting science here? 

Because we try to be enlightened and science has been the way since the middle ages.  What do you trust?  Your gut?  Trump the anti-science guy?  Is that a real counterargument?

You might want to have a look at the history of how science has treated race, sex, gender, and sexuality before wholeheartedly embracing science's approach to areas in which social prejudice is widespread. 

HughFreakingDillon

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mrussel1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

rogan doesn't hate the left. that's laughable. he also isn't fucking transphobe. that's also just a talking point for outrage seekers. 

Buying into birtherism shows a lack of judgment though.  

that's the first i heard of that. that's admittedly a little concerning. 

Wait, you’re cool with his anti-trans bullshit, but you draw the line at birtherism?

he's not anti-trans. i've listened to him talk a lot about it, and he has no issue with people being trans. he has issues with trans women competing against cis women in sports, which i agree with. imagine if brock lesnar was a trans woman. you think that's a level playing field?

That’s anti-trans, champ. 

no it isn't champ, it's common sense biology. 

Really doubling down on your own transphobia. Bold move. 

yeah, i was literally at a fundraiser for trans manitoba, listening to speakers, singers, etc, LAST NIGHT. sure, pal, you pegged me. LOL

How many of them did you talk to about your views on trans athletes?

none. why would i? i was there to listen to them. 

ecdanc

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

brianlux said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mrussel1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

rogan doesn't hate the left. that's laughable. he also isn't fucking transphobe. that's also just a talking point for outrage seekers. 

Buying into birtherism shows a lack of judgment though.  

that's the first i heard of that. that's admittedly a little concerning. 

Wait, you’re cool with his anti-trans bullshit, but you draw the line at birtherism?

he's not anti-trans. i've listened to him talk a lot about it, and he has no issue with people being trans. he has issues with trans women competing against cis women in sports, which i agree with. imagine if brock lesnar was a trans woman. you think that's a level playing field?

That’s anti-trans, champ. 

no it isn't champ, it's common sense biology. 

Really doubling down on your own transphobia. Bold move. 

You obviously don't know where HFD is coming from.  Why are you bating like this?

I don’t care where he’s coming from. I care that he’s spouting anti-trans nonsense. That’s not baiting. I consider his views extremely harmful. 

how is it harmful to cite science? maybe instead of a women's division and men's division in sports, we create a more all-inclusive based on physical attributes or other types of criteria instead of just penis or vagina?

Did you come up with this idea before you started worrying about trans athletes? And why are we trusting science here? 

got it from the short article i posted. but of course you have no interest in reading it. 

Article is behind a paywall (maybe you have access; I do not), but I read a fair amount of that take when having a very similar discussion on Deadspin a few months back. I think that stance is misguided and privileges the "integrity" of sports--a common theme running through it, Joe Rogan, and many of those Deadspin commenters--over treating trans women/men as trans women/men. 

ecdanc

HughFreakingDillon said:

"why are we trusting science" is the only question you need to know about someone's thought processes and why they should be discounted and ignored. 

back to bernie..........

You would have been a real hoot with 19th century race science!! 

ecdanc

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mrussel1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

rogan doesn't hate the left. that's laughable. he also isn't fucking transphobe. that's also just a talking point for outrage seekers. 

Buying into birtherism shows a lack of judgment though.  

that's the first i heard of that. that's admittedly a little concerning. 

Wait, you’re cool with his anti-trans bullshit, but you draw the line at birtherism?

he's not anti-trans. i've listened to him talk a lot about it, and he has no issue with people being trans. he has issues with trans women competing against cis women in sports, which i agree with. imagine if brock lesnar was a trans woman. you think that's a level playing field?

That’s anti-trans, champ. 

no it isn't champ, it's common sense biology. 

Really doubling down on your own transphobia. Bold move. 

yeah, i was literally at a fundraiser for trans manitoba, listening to speakers, singers, etc, LAST NIGHT. sure, pal, you pegged me. LOL

How many of them did you talk to about your views on trans athletes?

none. why would i? i was there to listen to them. 

What did they have to say about trans athletes?

ecdanc

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

"why are we trusting science" is the only question you need to know about someone's thought processes and why they should be discounted and ignored. 

back to bernie..........

I mean, seriously, what the fuck kind of a stance is this? There are areas in which science can be useful (for instance, climate change) and others when it is downright horrific. Trying to cut through the snark a bit, but man, when it comes to questions of identity, equality, and human rights, science does NOT have a good track record. 

mrussel1

ecdanc said:

mrussel1 said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

brianlux said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mrussel1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

rogan doesn't hate the left. that's laughable. he also isn't fucking transphobe. that's also just a talking point for outrage seekers. 

Buying into birtherism shows a lack of judgment though.  

that's the first i heard of that. that's admittedly a little concerning. 

Wait, you’re cool with his anti-trans bullshit, but you draw the line at birtherism?

he's not anti-trans. i've listened to him talk a lot about it, and he has no issue with people being trans. he has issues with trans women competing against cis women in sports, which i agree with. imagine if brock lesnar was a trans woman. you think that's a level playing field?

That’s anti-trans, champ. 

no it isn't champ, it's common sense biology. 

Really doubling down on your own transphobia. Bold move. 

You obviously don't know where HFD is coming from.  Why are you bating like this?

I don’t care where he’s coming from. I care that he’s spouting anti-trans nonsense. That’s not baiting. I consider his views extremely harmful. 

how is it harmful to cite science? maybe instead of a women's division and men's division in sports, we create a more all-inclusive based on physical attributes or other types of criteria instead of just penis or vagina?

Did you come up with this idea before you started worrying about trans athletes? And why are we trusting science here? 

Because we try to be enlightened and science has been the way since the middle ages.  What do you trust?  Your gut?  Trump the anti-science guy?  Is that a real counterargument?

You might want to have a look at the history of how science has treated race, sex, gender, and sexuality before wholeheartedly embracing science's approach to areas in which social prejudice is widespread. 

Yeah, compared to religion and other 'reasoning' as well?  I have a pretty good grasp on history, thanks.  I don't get my medical advice from the barber though.  Join the anti-vax movement if you wish.  

Spiritual_Chaos

Remember that Sanders loves and accept everyone - except for assholes and tax-fleeling-billionaires. 

mrussel1

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Remember that Sanders loves and accept everyone - except for assholes and tax-fleeling-billionaires. 

But he's okay with tax fleeing millionaires like himself?  

Spiritual_Chaos

mrussel1 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Remember that Sanders loves and accept everyone - except for assholes and tax-fleeling-billionaires. 

But he's okay with tax fleeing millionaires like himself?  

I will allow that you quote me. Not feeling a bit annoyed.

What do you mean with him being a tax fleeing millionaire ?

ecdanc

mrussel1 said:

ecdanc said:

mrussel1 said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

brianlux said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mrussel1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

rogan doesn't hate the left. that's laughable. he also isn't fucking transphobe. that's also just a talking point for outrage seekers. 

Buying into birtherism shows a lack of judgment though.  

that's the first i heard of that. that's admittedly a little concerning. 

Wait, you’re cool with his anti-trans bullshit, but you draw the line at birtherism?

he's not anti-trans. i've listened to him talk a lot about it, and he has no issue with people being trans. he has issues with trans women competing against cis women in sports, which i agree with. imagine if brock lesnar was a trans woman. you think that's a level playing field?

That’s anti-trans, champ. 

no it isn't champ, it's common sense biology. 

Really doubling down on your own transphobia. Bold move. 

You obviously don't know where HFD is coming from.  Why are you bating like this?

I don’t care where he’s coming from. I care that he’s spouting anti-trans nonsense. That’s not baiting. I consider his views extremely harmful. 

how is it harmful to cite science? maybe instead of a women's division and men's division in sports, we create a more all-inclusive based on physical attributes or other types of criteria instead of just penis or vagina?

Did you come up with this idea before you started worrying about trans athletes? And why are we trusting science here? 

Because we try to be enlightened and science has been the way since the middle ages.  What do you trust?  Your gut?  Trump the anti-science guy?  Is that a real counterargument?

You might want to have a look at the history of how science has treated race, sex, gender, and sexuality before wholeheartedly embracing science's approach to areas in which social prejudice is widespread. 

Yeah, compared to religion and other 'reasoning' as well?  I have a pretty good grasp on history, thanks.  I don't get my medical advice from the barber though.  Join the anti-vax movement if you wish.  

Oh FFS. Yes, compared to other forms of reasoning. We had abolitionists coexisting with racist science. We had 2nd-wave feminists talking about sexist science. Science is not now, nor has it ever been, the only way to look at things, and in many cases, brave people bucked the scientific "fact" of their era to do good things. Fetishizing science like you do isn't quite as ridiculous as rejecting all science, but it's not great. You know, there's a middle ground: you can actually evaluate science as it interacts with other areas. 

mrussel1

ecdanc said:

mrussel1 said:

ecdanc said:

mrussel1 said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

brianlux said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mrussel1 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

rogan doesn't hate the left. that's laughable. he also isn't fucking transphobe. that's also just a talking point for outrage seekers. 

Buying into birtherism shows a lack of judgment though.  

that's the first i heard of that. that's admittedly a little concerning. 

Wait, you’re cool with his anti-trans bullshit, but you draw the line at birtherism?

he's not anti-trans. i've listened to him talk a lot about it, and he has no issue with people being trans. he has issues with trans women competing against cis women in sports, which i agree with. imagine if brock lesnar was a trans woman. you think that's a level playing field?

That’s anti-trans, champ. 

no it isn't champ, it's common sense biology. 

Really doubling down on your own transphobia. Bold move. 

You obviously don't know where HFD is coming from.  Why are you bating like this?

I don’t care where he’s coming from. I care that he’s spouting anti-trans nonsense. That’s not baiting. I consider his views extremely harmful. 

how is it harmful to cite science? maybe instead of a women's division and men's division in sports, we create a more all-inclusive based on physical attributes or other types of criteria instead of just penis or vagina?

Did you come up with this idea before you started worrying about trans athletes? And why are we trusting science here? 

Because we try to be enlightened and science has been the way since the middle ages.  What do you trust?  Your gut?  Trump the anti-science guy?  Is that a real counterargument?

You might want to have a look at the history of how science has treated race, sex, gender, and sexuality before wholeheartedly embracing science's approach to areas in which social prejudice is widespread. 

Yeah, compared to religion and other 'reasoning' as well?  I have a pretty good grasp on history, thanks.  I don't get my medical advice from the barber though.  Join the anti-vax movement if you wish.  

Oh FFS. Yes, compared to other forms of reasoning. We had abolitionists coexisting with racist science. We had 2nd-wave feminists talking about sexist science. Science is not now, nor has it ever been, the only way to look at things, and in many cases, brave people bucked the scientific "fact" of their era to do good things. Fetishizing science like you do isn't quite as ridiculous as rejecting all science, but it's not great. You know, there's a middle ground: you can actually evaluate science as it interacts with other areas. 

What way to you recommend looking at this, if not science?  We are talking specifically about competitive athletics, not civil right, marriage, employment, etc.