JK Rowling is one reward club sticker away from joining the Full Nazi fan club

[pmv]

The simple reality is that almost everything people do is wasteful and destructive. Another simple reality is that we're competitive. We compete in everything that's measurable, and a lot of stuff that's subjective. We find ways of measuring things so we can pronounce ourselves superior than group X. That's never going to change.

There aren't a huge number of things as wasteful and destructive as the Olympics, though. And that wretched jamboree of glory-seeking and solipsism gets cloaked in such a lot of sanctimony and false-piety, that's what irritates me.

 

[Greenman]

There aren't a huge number of things as wasteful and destructive as the Olympics, though. And that wretched jamboree of glory-seeking and solipsism gets cloaked in such a lot of sanctimony and false-piety, that's what irritates me.

That's kind of the description of a nation.
I get what you're saying, and to a large extant agree, but it appears that the symbolism is every bit as important as the games themselves. I don't think there was any way of not injecting politics into the games. All that said, I like figure skating and will never understand why curling is part of the games.

 

[nakedfrog]

Again tell me, why was Title 9 so important to liberals in the 70s, and apparently not all important to liberals today? Why should women be forced to compete with genetical males, unless there is scienific proof there is no sex based advantage (for example, never went through puberty as a male)? Why aren't you demanding inclusion for other things, like why ban pilots that have been medically prescribed opiates?

Equating being trans while doing sport with piloting a plane while being prescribed opioids. Interesting comparison.

 

[Greenman]

Equating being trans while doing sport with piloting a plane while being prescribed opioids. Interesting comparison.

Trans sports, opioids, planes, and pilots. That would be a Saturday night I'd never forget.

 

[cytg111]

Apparently, I have become a leading expert on human and sex development. Basically, I am a doctor that has spent a lot of time reviewing medical literature on physiology, genetics, development, psychiatry, neurology and speaking up. I can nerd talk about this stuff for hours. I've spent time studying various world cultures and history regarding intersex and transgender individuals. I work with both intersex and transgender individuals. I also collaborate with other doctors and research centers across the country and world. I have also worked with various government entities, large medical organizations, and religious entities. I would dare to venture "I've done my research" and "I know my s***."

In its simplest terms, biologic sex is more complicated than we give credit. Our current definition, as penned in Webster's dictionary, is woefully inadequate and part of the problem. I will slightly paraphrase, "of, or related to the sex that produces sperm or eggs." Obviously, male and female, respectively. According to most, those are two definitions, in reality, it is four. Those who produce sperm. Those who produce eggs. Those that produce neither and the rare occasion where someone can produce both. The "neither" is far more common than we think. That definition, BTW, is consistent across the English speaking world and other languages and cultures. Historically, however, the definition has evolved. There are various historical dictionaries online, but I ordered a few to watch the evolution of the definitions. My all time favorite was this definition of female, "not male."

When I ask medical students what the "of, or related to" means in those definitions I get blank stares. Most will say chromosomes. Others will say external anatomy. We divide sex biologic sex based on primary and secondary attributes. The primary attributes are identified as gametes, gonads, internal anatomy, external anatomy, genetics (not just chromosomes), hormones, the adrenal gland, and the pituitary gland. Eight characteristics that must work together to make the "of, or related to." The secondary characteristics develop as a consequence of the primary. These are the attributes we see from day to day and are the consequence of puberty. These include face structure, body fat composition, breast growth, hair distribution, skeletal growth and so on. Each one of the above characteristics have an infinite number of variations. It's not just the sequences of DNA or genes, we now look at the function and development of those genes over time. Called epigenetics.

To help put this in perspective, we can look at genetics as layers:
1) The chromosomal layer - this is where most people's education lies. They think simple Mendelian genetics and is frequently where they make their arguments
2) the gene layer - this layer has been developing since about 1995, but the first gene sequencers came about in the 1980s and were ridiculously slow.
3) the epigenetic layer - this is a new scientific research focus that has evolved from about the 2010s. This layer studies are the genes behave over time and includes concepts like "imprinting"
4) the phenotypic layer - this is what is the effect of the above

This is just looking at the body development and status. The brain develops semi-independently of gonadal development. The genes involved in brain development are different than gonadal development. There is communication between the two with hormonal signals and cell-to-cell communication, but they are otherwise independent.

In utero, a fetus has both male and female structures at the gonadal ridge. The mesonephros and paramesonephros ducts. (Wolffian and Mullerian ducts or typically male and female development pathways, respectively). In reality, both males and females have remnant structures of these processes. For males, they have the remnant "female" structure, the appendix testes and for females, they have the Gartner ducts. Genetic pathways of human development requires advancing the expected biologic sex and suppression of the alternate. Since, there are 100s of genes involved, the process can and does go awry of what is expected. This is where we get intersex conditions or variations of sexual development. This is also where and why we get individuals with gender dysphoria and are transgender.

Want a cool example of genetic imprinting? Angelman and Prader-Willi.
25% of Turner's patient are mosaic XO/XY
10% of miscarriages are fetuses with Turner's genetics
There are over 4000 congenital conditions like Down's, Turner's and Klinefelter's
There are over 65 "disorders" of sexual development - like CAIS, PAIS, CAH, CHH, Kallman's, Swyer, De la Chappelle, etc
50% of XY individuals with ambiguous genitalia do not have a discernible genetic cause
3% of worldwide individuals born, according to the World Health Organization, have a congenital condition, sometimes multiple
It is estimated that variations of sexual development affect 1-2% of the world population

Very interesting, thanks.
Unfortunately you deal in something that is out of fashion at the moment, science and facts.
If you can convince a low-information individual that the left has gone crazy and wants men to cut their dicks off so to dominate women in sports... then that's what you do for personal gain and power. That's really at the core of it. Low information individuals (that somehow figured out how to vote) getting conned by assholes.

 

[feralkid]

The simple reality is that almost everything people do is wasteful and destructive. Another simple reality is that we're competitive. We compete in everything that's measurable, and a lot of stuff that's subjective. We find ways of measuring things so we can pronounce ourselves superior than group X. That's never going to change.

It might if we keep working at it.

 

[pmv]

The simple reality is that almost everything people do is wasteful and destructive. Another simple reality is that we're competitive. We compete in everything that's measurable, and a lot of stuff that's subjective. We find ways of measuring things so we can pronounce ourselves superior than group X. That's never going to change.

Oddly-enough, I tend to share that negative assessment of human nature, in the most general sense (I have come to believe humans are selfish and hypocritical by nature).

But I don't see that it follows that society has to endorse and incentivize competitiveness in areas where it isn't really necessary (as opposed to competitiveness over things that actually perform useful functions, where there's genuinely a zero-sum game between 'fairness' and needing a job done as well as possible).

And, Lord, so much rubbish is talked about elite-level sport, e.g. the idea that it somehow improves the physical fitness of the population, when most of that population just sit on their arses watching the elite competitors run around, while munching the junk food produced by the sponsors of the various competitions - its also striking how overweight so many of those FIFA and IOC and other elite sporting body officials seem to be - too many expense-account lunches, I guess).

 

[Greenman]

Oddly-enough, I tend to share that negative assessment of human nature, in the most general sense (I have come to believe humans are selfish and hypocritical by nature).

But I don't see that it follows that society has to endorse and incentivize competitiveness in areas where it isn't really necessary (as opposed to competitiveness over things that actually perform useful functions, where there's genuinely a zero-sum game between 'fairness' and needing a job done as well as possible).

And, Lord, so much rubbish is talked about elite-level sport, e.g. the idea that it somehow improves the physical fitness of the population, when most of that population just sit on their arses watching the elite competitors run around, while munching the junk food produced by the sponsors of the various competitions - its also striking how overweight so many of those FIFA and IOC and other elite sporting body officials seem to be - too many expense-account lunches, I guess).

You left "stupid" out of your first sentence. A simple oversight I'm sure.

 

[pmv]

You left "stupid" out of your first sentence. A simple oversight I'm sure.

Actually I think genuine stupidity is pretty rare. Stupidity is usually strategic, being a function of that selfishness, that is, people choose not to understand things because it benefits them not to do so.

I don't know, my thoughts about the awfulness of human nature is a complete dead-end, as I then have to concede it applies to me as well, and the theory then undermines itself (maybe I only see all humans as selfish hypocrites because it suits my own selfishness to believe that?).

 

[dank69]

Trans persons in sports. I mean I get it.

BUT.

But try for a second being that centrist independent voter. Christofacist anti abortion clowns to the left of me and trans-women knocking women out in the octagon jokers to the right. Here I am. Stuck in the middle with noone.(RFK?)

I mean, it should be such an easy choice with Roe and all.

So easy to not fuck it up. So why? Baby steps.

Here's the thing though: not a single Democrat has said anything about transgender sports, let alone campaigned on it. That's how you get "centrist independents." They're merely people who actively seek any reason, real or imagined, to hate Democrats.

 

[cytg111]

Here's the thing though: not a single Democrat has said anything about transgender sports, let alone campaigned on it. That's how you get "centrist independents." They're merely people who actively seek any reason, real or imagined, to hate Democrats.

Sure, this only lives in the online culture wars medium - but it does reach peoples personal feeds. Algorithms and shit.