I merely answered your question. And no, people don't switch back and forth from gender to gender. Are you taking a new med, jlisenbe?Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
|
I merely answered your question. And no, people don't switch back and forth from gender to gender. Are you taking a new med, jlisenbe?Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
I don't make claims I cannot support.
https://www.hli.org/resources/what-p...20of%20reasons.
Ah, pro-life, right-wing. Gotcha.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
You probably missed this section that I posted earlier:
Trans athletes vary in athletic ability just like cisgender athletes. “One high jumper could be taller and have longer legs than another, but the other could have perfect form, and then do better,” explains Andraya Yearwood, a student track athlete and ACLU client. “One sprinter could have parents who spend so much money on personal training for their child, which in turn, would cause that child to run faster,” she adds. In Connecticut, where cisgender girl runners have tried to block Andraya from participating in the sport she loves, the very same cis girls who have claimed that trans athletes have an “unfair” advantage have consistently performed as well as or better than transgender competitors.
Never mind. It's hopeless. The data was from the National Center for Gender Equality, hardly a "pro-life, right-wing," organization. But you just had to make a knee jerk comment rather than spend ten minutes actually reading the data.
Wouldn't you be much better served to simply admit you were wrong? It would certainly look better.
I will when you will.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
And what you posted was from hli.org, Human Life International,Catholic, Pro-Life Mission. We teach the world to value life and follow God's plan for the family.You first.Quote:
Wouldn't you be much better served to simply admit you were wrong? It would certainly look better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The comment above discusses violence to MtF transgenders, athletic ability factors, an anecdote in Connecticut, and the position of Dr. Joshua Safer who is the head of the Transgender Department in Mt. Sinai Hospital in New York. There is nothing directly claiming that MtFs do not have an advantage over women in women's sports. However, it is implied by the anecdote and by Dr. Safer who is the parent of an MtF. The implied claim is unsubstantiated in either case.
SPECIFICS:
The first three sentences discuss anti-MtF violence without discussing the issue at hand (sports advantages by MtFs).
The next three sentences discuss various differences in athletic ability among cisgenders based on parental care.
The last part is the Connecticut anecdote - an unsubstantiated claim of no difference in athletic ability between genders.
A sample anecdote from me is the answer the top tennis star Serena Williams gave when asked about competing with top male tennis stars. "No way", she said. "Their serves are far more powerful than mine. There is no way I could compete with that." This anecdote is not offered as proof, simply as an anecdote.
Dr. Safer's contribution is to state without substantiation that, “There is no inherent reason why her (transgender woman) physiological characteristics related to athletic performance should be treated differently from the physiological characteristics of a non-transgender woman.”
The link from ACLU is its opinion on the matter. It is not defended in any way.
Finally, it was subsequently asked, "Why have "men's" teams and "women's" teams? Why can't teams be made up of people, regardless of gender, who qualify?
I have no difficulty with teams being made up of people who qualify, regardless of gender.
CONCLUSION:
My position is derived from speculation based on common sense observation.
Your position is derived from speculation that is unsubstantiated and anecdotal.
Both positions are speculative.
The answer will be derived from statistical data calculated over a finite period of time. The time period is one month to three months depending upon accurate collection of data.
How about you and I do this collection and calculation of statistical data?Quote:
Originally Posted by Athos
Emma Weyant is the fastest FEMALE swimmer in the nation! The title that she rightfully won was taken from her by a male.
tomder, have your muscle mass evaluated and then take estrogen and progesterone for at least three years. After that, have your muscle mass reevaluated.
you can mutilate the body all you want to inside and out . A man is a man and a woman is a woman.
Nope, that's scientifically untrue. I ask you: What is a man? What is a woman?Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
(Btw, every human fetus begins as female.)
Aha, he won't answer my two questions -- so why is he stepping over them? (No high school or college biology?)
It's quite a comment on the deception our culture has entered into that such a plainly true statement would even be questioned. I suppose change of species in next? After all, what is a dog? What is a cat? What is a person?Quote:
A man is a man and a woman is a woman.
Ah, JL can't define them. And the definitions have nothing to do with external sex organs.
You criticize tomder for not answering your questions, yet you offer this as one of your answers. Trying to be funny is just another form of distraction from the issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
In case you are offering this as a serious reply, there is no way either one of us can perform a statistical survey on the issue. The only conclusion I can make from your reply is that you cannot defend your position.
There is nothing wrong with believing something without being able to prove the belief. Faith is the prime example. When you claim that a belief in something is based on proven fact when it clearly is not, that is where you go off the rails and lose credibility.
Barring new actual factual evidence on the issue, I will leave the discussion at my post # 96 as the definitive answer to date and consider any further commentary as superfluous.
Nothing serious about this . While the world is blowing up America debates shemales as our contribution to demonstrate our decadence . The Babylon Bee has it right . They nominated Rachel Levine as man of the year .
Thomas' time in the 500 free style was 4:33.24.
Enough to take 1st place . How would he have done in the men's 500 free style ?
There is a comparison to last year's times . The NCAA champ swam it in 4:07.97. The slowest of the men swam it in 4:16.13, 17 seconds faster than Thomas’s winning time in the women’s event.
As I said above ,there is nothing serious about this debate except for how women are being deprived of the opportunity to fairly compete .
btw Twitter ;which has become the point of the spear for suppressing any thought that run counter to woke wisdom ,has cancelled Babylon Bee for their satirical post about Rachel Levin. They promise to reinstate the Bee if it recants .
removed comment
Sen. Marsha Blackburn asked Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to define the word “woman.”
“I can’t ” Jackson replied.
“You can’t?” Blackburn said.
“Not in this context. I’m not a biologist,” Jackson said.
“The meaning of the word woman is so unclear and controversial that you can’t give me a definition?” Blackburn asked. “The fact that you can’t give me a straight answer about something as fundamental as what a woman is underscores the dangers of the kind of progressive education that we are hearing about,”
Clueless nominated her because she was a Black Woman . Does she know if she is a woman ?
Feminism is dead .It died when the feminists allowed men to define who is a woman.
Blackburn asked what message allowing Thomas to compete sends to “girls who aspire to compete and win in sports?”
“Senator, I’m not sure what message that sends. If you’re asking me about the legal issues related to it — those are topics that are being hotly discussed, as you say, and could come to the court,” Jackson said
Blackburn countered “I think it tells our girls that their voices don’t matter .I think it tells them that they’re second-class citizens. And parents want to have a Supreme Court justice who is committed to preserving parental autonomy and protecting our nation’s children.”
Hilariously accurate.
From the Bee today.
U.S.—Hunter Biden's laptop has been validated by major new sources and the Babylon Bee has secured an exclusive look at the Google search history therein. Our team of Beexperts has been analyzing the search history for a couple of minutes and we are now ready to share the less horrifying ones with the world.
"find old laptop"
"where is Margaritaville?"
"what does a board of directors do?"
"what is oil?"
"Hunter Biden a star WArs Story"
"There Will Be Blood cliff notes"
"Barisma barista difference"
"prostitute reviews near me yelp"
"how muvch coccaime is to much cxocaine"
"are twinkies born with frosting inside them?"
"what is obama's last name?"
"can you get in trouble for taking bribes reddit"
"interstellar ending explained reddit"
"how to find multiple lost laptops"
"can you get someone pregnant in pool"
"presidents son average salary"
"epstein island flights + southwest airlines"
"How tell if someone you know has dementia"
"hey siri find my old lapdog"
"hey siri not lapdog lapdog"
"hey siri no i said lapdog"
"LAPDOG"
LAP. TOP."
"call dad"
"call joe biden"
"call + 'biden dad'"
"cat gifs"
"why am I in a bathtub?"
"computer please call dad"
"If you sleep with the Vice President does that make u President"
"laptop repair near me"
"Is the food good in jail"
So now a Supreme Court nominee cannot define what the word "woman" means. It certainly makes this comment from Tom Fitton relevant. "If one can't define what a ‘woman’ is, how can one protect ‘women’ from discrimination?"
What's YOUR definition?
P.S. EVERYONE must be protected from discrimination!
I’m happy to stand by Fitton’s quote. Any answer?
XX chromosomes. That’s the answer of science.
So we have to drag her to a doctor and get chromosomes checked before protecting her from discrimination? And no one with XY chromosomes is to be protected?Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
No and no. Can you answer fitton’s question absent the dramatics?
The question: "If one can't define what a ‘woman’ is, how can one protect ‘women’ from discrimination?"Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Your answers: no and no
Thus, you can't define what a woman is nor can you protect any woman from discrimination.
Plainly you can’t.
*giggle* You made me laugh. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
The justice is lying . She knows what a woman is ;but is afraid to give an answer to the committee .She has continuously lied and evaded answers throughout the hearing as most nominees do. The last nominee that gave complete truthful answers was Bork ;and he was rejected for his candor.
She takes the cake and has brought this to a new level with nonsense answers like her exchange above and even refusing to answer simple pertinent questions about what her judicial philosophy is.She claims not to have formed a judicial philosophy she can describe, even after a decade as ajudge. She never answers that and uses a dodge describing her methodology in coming to a decision. It is clear that her methodology is to predetermine a decision based on an unstated philosophy.
As to the question at hand ;Clueless specifically selected her because she is a Black WOMAN . How do we know she is a woman ? She hid behind an increasingly used dodge by the left and the 'party of science' .... "I am not a biologist " . Well I am not a brain surgeon .But I know what a brain is. What she fails to say in her walk on egg shells is that a woman cannot be identified scientifically if anyone who "identifies " as a woman is a woman in the woke world .7 years of a Harvard education on full display and a decade on the bench as an activist judge.
For someone who cannot identify what a woman is ,she has used the word a number of times in responses to other questions . In her opening statement she said she stands "on the shoulders of so many who have come before me, including Judge Constance Baker Motley, who was the first African-American woman to be appointed to the bench.”......“I am humbled and honored to have the opportunity to serve in this capacity and to be the first and only black woman to serve on the United States Supreme Court,” ....“I gave a speech about black women in the civil rights movement, most of the speech if not all of the speech was focused on African American women, their contributions to the civil rights movement, unsung contributions in many cases, and then some of the more recent African American women who have made claims, who have done things in our society.”
She used the word in answers about abortion. “Roe and Casey are the settled law of the Supreme Court concerning the right to terminate a woman’s pregnancy,”
Her judicial record is chock full of times she made decisions about woman issues. Too many to mention in fact.
Judges have learned that they can be evasive in confirmation testimony and then do as they will in a lifetime appointment. That is why I believe it is critically important that these black robed oligarchs be held accountable with term limits .They should periodically be re-confirmed where their record can be scrutinized and questioned .
This is still the question of the day here, unanswered for the same reason that Ketanji Brown Jackson refused to answer. An honest answer makes many people feel uncomfortable. They don't like the implications of such honesty, so the question is simply evaded. As Tom said above, "She knows what a woman is ;but is afraid to give an answer to the committee." Evade, evade, evade has become the MO for nominees.
"If one can't define what a ‘woman’ is, how can one protect ‘women’ from discrimination?"
At least we know that this calculated evasiveness is nothing new.
Jesus answered them, “I also will ask you one question, and if you tell me the answer, then I also will tell you by what authority I do these things. 25 The baptism of John, from where did it come? From heaven or from man?” And they discussed it among themselves, saying, “If we say, ‘From heaven,’ he will say to us, ‘Why then did you not believe him?’ 26 But if we say, ‘From man,’ we are afraid of the crowd, for they all hold that John was a prophet.” 27 So they answered Jesus, “We do not know.”
How does she interpret Title IX ? How does she interpret the 19th Amendment ?
How can anyone state that she will be the first black WOMAN on the Supreme Court?
Please review the entirety of the question and state, what was the context?
***Sen. Marsha Blackburn asked Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to define the word “woman.”
“I can’t ” Jackson replied.
“You can’t?” Blackburn said.***
“Not in this context. I’m not a biologist,” Jackson said.
tomder, what a lot of gibberish you and your lap dog are spewing -
WG just blew your entire argument out of the water by a simple recitation of the truth clearly shown in the context.
Still the unanswered question. "If one can't define what a ‘woman’ is, how can one protect ‘women’ from discrimination?"
A Supreme Court nominee who cannot define what it is to be a woman. Wow. What's next?
Neither can you apparently.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Post 66 was my answer.
I would say it's your turn, but I already know you will not. You will simply respond with a question of some sort or an unrelated statement. It's what you always do. That is not at all intended to be an ugly or disrespectful comment. It simply reflects what I have encountered here. I sincerely hope you will prove me wrong at this point.
And STILL the unanswered question. "If one can't define what a ‘woman’ is, how can one protect ‘women’ from discrimination?"
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:31 AM. |