|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
The Washington Post recently flirted with suggesting that there’s room to argue that boys shouldn’t be competing against girls in sports.
The Post editorial board brought itself to utter heretical phrases such as “the realities of human biology raise legitimate questions about any notion that trans women should always and everywhere be treated exactly like cisgender women.”
“In athletic competition, male puberty confers significant advantages. While those biological differences vary by skill and sport, a 2023 paper by medical researchers in the United States and Italy noted that “it is well established that the best males always outperform the best females when the sport relies on muscle power, muscle endurance, or aerobic power.” The hormone therapy that many trans women take reduces some of those advantages over time, but research into how much those advantages can be mitigated, and over what time frame, is still ongoing. Other advantages, such as height, are fixed by the end of puberty. This poses obvious fairness and safety questions.”
“Notice that we say “questions.” The public needs more and better research to make those decisions. But unless the data show that transitioning can fully erase the effects of male puberty, the country will also need a frank and open debate about the trade-offs between inclusion on the one hand and safety and fairness on the other.”
“And yet too often, efforts have been made to avoid or prevent discussion of those trade-offs by labeling debate inherently transphobic. This is not how a healthy democracy makes decisions.”
That’s reasonable. But where was this sweet reason for the last ten years?
High school girls have been suspended and sanctioned for refusing to compete against men.
Did the Post editorial board just now discover basic human biology? Of course not. To see what’s really going on here, move on to the next paragraph.
“A 2023 Gallup poll showed that almost 70 percent of Americans think sports participation should follow birth sex, not gender identity. Pressuring Democratic politicians to side with the minority, without giving sufficient space to the other side’s argument, is a recipe for irresolution and resentment.”
Translation: Forcing Dems to advocate for something everyone hates is a losing strategy.
The Post is not proposing to uphold debate instead of cancel culture because it realizes that calling 70% of the country bigots was intellectually and ethically wrong.
It’s doing so because it decided that you can’t win elections by calling 70% of the country bigots.
And that’s the problem here. Like an alcoholic waking up in a back alley, parts of the party hit bottom and decided to get sober. They don’t regret anything they did. They’re not committing to never doing it again. For the moment they’re pondering the idea that drunken rampages are not conducive to winning elections.
This is not the Washington Post saying it was wrong. Tomorrow if it decides that the party can get away with sending the entire middle class to gulags, it may well do that.
lol, that’s funny. Great humor, thanks Daniel 🙂
What struck me is that the left just popped up this transgender narrative against 2400+ years of scientific research going back to Aristotle.
They’ve gone all postmodernist so they don’t believe in the existence of objective fact. Their narratives are all that’s important, at least to them. That’s one of the reasons their policies have such awful consequences. What sane people call “reality” doesn’t care at all about their narratives.
Yeah, I was thinking back trying to remember Aristotle’s theories about male and female, they really didn’t know much about it back then. Now that we made 2400 years or so of progress in understanding it, the left wants to go back to primitive ignorance.
Here is one of the strange ideas (there are lots more) they had starting out back in Ancient Greece trying to understand these issues, just to show how far we’ve come:
“if a man has strong semen, he will have sons who resemble him, while if the semen is weak, he will have daughters who resemble their mother.”
Very few normal and decent humans today understand the nature of our enemy: the religion of leftoxenomorphism.
Leftoxenomorphism is an emerging and very aggressive religion bent on world conquest.
They have already managed to destroy America, Trump or no Trump, our CR died in 2020.
They have already taken over eurabia and keep destroying it by the same replacement strategy we here call “open borders”
Import enough 3rd world orcs and elevate them to a very high rung on the leftoxenomorph ladder of victimhood and religious standing, making them unassailable no matter what they do and you can dilute enough of Western civilization to destroy it and bring about the globalist leftoxenomorph 4th Reich.
“Climate change” (no such thing, at all), the covidiocy-scamdemic, feminazism, trans-nazism, the destruction of education and its replacement by the Frankfurt_School_culturally_marxist-leftoxenomorphizised-feminazi-mis-mal-dis-education-system and so on and so forth.
The religion of leftoxenomorphism is reaping thousands of years of religious indoctrination of humans into fearing the magical and being ashamed of themselves and considering themselves “guilty” by definition and by birth.
A neat trick that is doing the religion of leftoxenomorphism wonders in saved indoctrination because humans are more than ready to listen to a magical fantasy they already know.
Humans are “guilty” Humans ought to humble themselves and obey the “holy mother church”, blah, blah, blah.
Only this time is the religion of leftoxenomorphism doing to talking and millions doing the listening, the accepting and the obeying.
Who do you think gave kuntala hoerris all the votes she got?
And the very few of us that do the warning about this are shoved aside because people are too frightened of the notion because it strikes to close to home.
I have a question for the left.
If two people, a male and a female, are both transgender, and are also gay, and attracted to each other, does that make them heterosexual?
not if they’re also neurodivergent ( don’t get me started).
I think the more important question is should men that identify as dogs (a real thing) compete at the Westminster Dog Show?
The “reductio ad absurdum” argument works well here to illustrate how stupid it is to ignore biology for someone’s disordered thinking and feelings.