I am curious as to where the suddenly feminist Rojo stands on the issue of abortion. Rojo appears to be trying to heroically protect the rights of women in athletic competition but at the same time he is cheerleading for Republicans in the elections who would take away the right for a woman to do what she deems best for her own health and welfare. Interesting as hell and if you fall for it you are the dunce.
Agree thoroughly. My only quibble is giving Woke ideologues veto power by conceding subjective pronouns. Your pronouns choose *you,* not the other way around.
2022 is the 50th anniversary of when the NYC Marathon ended its sexist policy of barring women and finally allowed female runners to participate. So it seems more than a tad ironic that the way NYC Marathon officials have decided to mark this important anniversary is to come up with a brand new way to give a group of mediocre and midpack male runners a leg up over everyone else, to show blatant favoritism to males over females, and to give men preferential treatment by awarding them with medals and prize money for unexceptional finishing times. Solely because of the way these men claim to perceive themselves. The whole thing is a crock, and it's sexist as hell.
You cozy up to Rojo at your peril. You may be bed partners here but you appear to hate men and Rojo doesn’t really share your obsession with protecting the rights of women. That is not really what makes him passionate about this.
I'm perfectly capable of thinking for myself and watching out for myself, mate. But thanks for the unsolicited advice. Women just love it when blokes who are total strangers on the internet take the time to tell us what to do.
Also, men have been saying that women who stand up for women's rights are man-haters forever. Same old, same old.
You cozy up to Rojo at your peril. You may be bed partners here but you appear to hate men and Rojo doesn’t really share your obsession with protecting the rights of women. That is not really what makes him passionate about this.
I'm perfectly capable of thinking for myself and watching out for myself, mate. But thanks for the unsolicited advice. Women just love it when blokes who are total strangers on the internet take the time to tell us what to do.
Also, men have been saying that women who stand up for women's rights are man-haters forever. Same old, same old.
You ooze hatred for men. Many women who stand up for women’s rights do not appear to hate men. You do. You also appear to have contempt for transgender people. Where do you stand on abortion?
To Rojo, please tell me your thoughts on this observation:
If there is not a non-binary division, men will end up in the women’s race, and that would be far more detrimental to women’s sport than a 3rd division.
I know you may not like it Rojo, but in the cultural realities of today, doesn’t this arrangement keep a women only division and satisfy cultural demands?
Lastly, where does the non-binary prize money come from. The answer to that question may/could make the whole discussion nearly irrelevant.
what a classic cringe rojo take. love the association with the conservative woman for cover.
to say gender identity is "belief" is to deny nearly everything we know about gender identity. i thought we got past that in the 80s.
there are, i think, reasonable and not jaw dropping arguments as to why gender identity has no place in sport... but this isnt one of them.
Is "Gender identity" not a feeling though? And is a feeling close to a belief? The comparison to religion is a good one actually.
Biological sex (Men vs Women) is Science. Objective. Factual. Chromosomes. End of story.
The categories of competitive racing (be it for prize money or for a Golden Ticket to Western states 100 was was the case at Javelina) are based on clear cut scientific advantages between the two sexes.
There could be some rare cases where an individual has multiple genitalia and that could be a "gray area" when it comes to determining biological sex. Chromosomes and testosterone levels often don't lie though. These cases are less common than trans athletes or those that are biologically 100% a certain sex but feel/identify like they are the opposite sex.
By introducing another category into the race (not based on objective or scientific measures) we start to blur the line between all categories. This is especially true when you have biological males and females that may switch between categories at different times based on how they feel.
In that regard, gender and gender association has to do with the mind. And in the case of being "gender fluid" and/or non-binary at times, one is using subjective feelings of emotion or even desire to determine their category and place rather than quantitive and objective measures.
The winner is the first one across the line and they are ranked by time and corresponding place. These are objective measures and the whole sport is centered around numbers and facts and science.
what a classic cringe rojo take. love the association with the conservative woman for cover.
to say gender identity is "belief" is to deny nearly everything we know about gender identity. i thought we got past that in the 80s.
there are, i think, reasonable and not jaw dropping arguments as to why gender identity has no place in sport... but this isnt one of them.
Is "Gender identity" not a feeling though? And is a feeling close to a belief? The comparison to religion is a good one actually.
Biological sex (Men vs Women) is Science. Objective. Factual. Chromosomes. End of story.
The categories of competitive racing (be it for prize money or for a Golden Ticket to Western states 100 was was the case at Javelina) are based on clear cut scientific advantages between the two sexes.
There could be some rare cases where an individual has multiple genitalia and that could be a "gray area" when it comes to determining biological sex. Chromosomes and testosterone levels often don't lie though. These cases are less common than trans athletes or those that are biologically 100% a certain sex but feel/identify like they are the opposite sex.
By introducing another category into the race (not based on objective or scientific measures) we start to blur the line between all categories. This is especially true when you have biological males and females that may switch between categories at different times based on how they feel.
In that regard, gender and gender association has to do with the mind. And in the case of being "gender fluid" and/or non-binary at times, one is using subjective feelings of emotion or even desire to determine their category and place rather than quantitive and objective measures.
The winner is the first one across the line and they are ranked by time and corresponding place. These are objective measures and the whole sport is centered around numbers and facts and science.
I think that Rojo and Yamauchi win on logic here.
Sexual attraction also is a “feeling.” You appear to be implying that being gay is also like a religion because it is based on a feeling, which you claim is like a belief. Maybe you should stay in your lane.
You'd think a third category would satisfy those with the "men killing womens sports" argument. its irrelevant who got the prize money in the non-binary division because they all agreed to the terms by entering that division.
in order to argue that money was taken away from the binary divisions would require some proof that nyrr siphoned some of their binary prize money away for a third category. but i dont think thats how it works.
another peice written from emotion rather than reason. but i guess in this senario either way he'd argue that men took all the prize money in the non-binary division.
Is "Gender identity" not a feeling though? And is a feeling close to a belief? The comparison to religion is a good one actually.
Biological sex (Men vs Women) is Science. Objective. Factual. Chromosomes. End of story.
The categories of competitive racing (be it for prize money or for a Golden Ticket to Western states 100 was was the case at Javelina) are based on clear cut scientific advantages between the two sexes.
There could be some rare cases where an individual has multiple genitalia and that could be a "gray area" when it comes to determining biological sex. Chromosomes and testosterone levels often don't lie though. These cases are less common than trans athletes or those that are biologically 100% a certain sex but feel/identify like they are the opposite sex.
By introducing another category into the race (not based on objective or scientific measures) we start to blur the line between all categories. This is especially true when you have biological males and females that may switch between categories at different times based on how they feel.
In that regard, gender and gender association has to do with the mind. And in the case of being "gender fluid" and/or non-binary at times, one is using subjective feelings of emotion or even desire to determine their category and place rather than quantitive and objective measures.
The winner is the first one across the line and they are ranked by time and corresponding place. These are objective measures and the whole sport is centered around numbers and facts and science.
I think that Rojo and Yamauchi win on logic here.
Sexual attraction also is a “feeling.” You appear to be implying that being gay is also like a religion because it is based on a feeling, which you claim is like a belief. Maybe you should stay in your lane.
No, sexual attraction is not just a feeling in the mind or heart. Yes, sexual attraction is psychological and emotional, and thus it's a feeling. But sexual attraction is also very much a physical response.
When people who are undergoing or have completed puberty of adolescence experience sexual attraction, we typically evince telltale physical signs that can be objectively observed and measured. These include quickening of the pulse, dilation of the pupils, fluttering of the heart, increased salivation, sweaty palms, shortness of breath, hardening and elongation of the penis (erections), swelling of the testicles or labia, vaginal secretions (getting wet), vaginal lengthening, clitoral engorgement and enlargement, increased blood flow to and higher temperature in various body parts.
Some people swoon, faint, and get clumsy and tongue tied when in the throes of sexual attraction. Some people piss their pants, vomit, sneeze, get coughing fits. Some people find their vision becomes blurry or becomes extra clear and focused. Lots of people have funny feelings in their stomachs and groins that are probably measurable.
Many people have observable signs of physical sexual attraction to people they don't like and even find contemptible. I personally have felt very strong physical attraction to quite a few fellas I wouldn't want to touch with a barge pole.
Sexual attraction also is a “feeling.” You appear to be implying that being gay is also like a religion because it is based on a feeling, which you claim is like a belief. Maybe you should stay in your lane.
No, sexual attraction is not just a feeling in the mind or heart. Yes, sexual attraction is psychological and emotional, and thus it's a feeling. But sexual attraction is also very much a physical response.
When people who are undergoing or have completed puberty of adolescence experience sexual attraction, we typically evince telltale physical signs that can be objectively observed and measured. These include quickening of the pulse, dilation of the pupils, fluttering of the heart, increased salivation, sweaty palms, shortness of breath, hardening and elongation of the penis (erections), swelling of the testicles or labia, vaginal secretions (getting wet), vaginal lengthening, clitoral engorgement and enlargement, increased blood flow to and higher temperature in various body parts.
Some people swoon, faint, and get clumsy and tongue tied when in the throes of sexual attraction. Some people piss their pants, vomit, sneeze, get coughing fits. Some people find their vision becomes blurry or becomes extra clear and focused. Lots of people have funny feelings in their stomachs and groins that are probably measurable.
Many people have observable signs of physical sexual attraction to people they don't like and even find contemptible. I personally have felt very strong physical attraction to quite a few fellas I wouldn't want to touch with a barge pole.
Yes of course you are correct but it is likely that gender identification is more than a feeling in the sense that there are some concomitant physiological symptoms in those who are wanting to transition or in the process of transition or having transitioned. Consequently, to dismiss their experiences as mere feelings with no accompanying physiological component appears to be symptomatic of ignorance and close mindedness. I was utilizing the other poster’s language to illustrate a point but not declaring a position on the use of their language. Kudos to you for perceiving their potentially erroneous use of language but it can also be utilized potentially against your position, depending on exactly what your position is…
Is "Gender identity" not a feeling though? And is a feeling close to a belief? The comparison to religion is a good one actually.
Biological sex (Men vs Women) is Science. Objective. Factual. Chromosomes. End of story.
The categories of competitive racing (be it for prize money or for a Golden Ticket to Western states 100 was was the case at Javelina) are based on clear cut scientific advantages between the two sexes.
There could be some rare cases where an individual has multiple genitalia and that could be a "gray area" when it comes to determining biological sex. Chromosomes and testosterone levels often don't lie though. These cases are less common than trans athletes or those that are biologically 100% a certain sex but feel/identify like they are the opposite sex.
By introducing another category into the race (not based on objective or scientific measures) we start to blur the line between all categories. This is especially true when you have biological males and females that may switch between categories at different times based on how they feel.
In that regard, gender and gender association has to do with the mind. And in the case of being "gender fluid" and/or non-binary at times, one is using subjective feelings of emotion or even desire to determine their category and place rather than quantitive and objective measures.
The winner is the first one across the line and they are ranked by time and corresponding place. These are objective measures and the whole sport is centered around numbers and facts and science.
I think that Rojo and Yamauchi win on logic here.
Sexual attraction also is a “feeling.” You appear to be implying that being gay is also like a religion because it is based on a feeling, which you claim is like a belief. Maybe you should stay in your lane.
No, sexual attraction is not just a feeling in the mind, psyche or figurative heart.
Sexual attraction is psychological and emotional, and thus it's a feeling in that sense. But sexual attraction is also very much a physical response which leads to distinct bodily sensations.
When people who are undergoing or have completed puberty of adolescence experience sexual attraction, we typically evince telltale physical signs and sensations that can be objectively observed and measured. These include quickening of the pulse, dilation of the pupils, fluttering of the heart, increased salivation, sweaty palms, shortness of breath, hardening and elongation of the penis (erections), swelling of the testicles or labia, vaginal secretions (getting wet), vaginal lengthening, clitoral engorgement and enlargement, increased blood flow to and higher temperature in various body parts.
Some people swoon, faint, and get clumsy and tongue tied when in the throes of sexual attraction. Some people piss their pants, vomit, sneeze, get coughing fits, experience involuntary toe and finger curling. Some people when sexually attracted find their vision becomes blurry or becomes extra clear and focused.
Lots of people when sexually attracted have funny feelings in their stomachs and groins such as "butterflies" and flip-flopping that are probably measurable.
Many people have observable signs of physical sexual attraction to people they don't like and even find contemptible. I personally have felt very strong physical attraction to quite a few fellas I've seen in media and met in RL that I wouldn't want to touch with a barge pole.
IMHO, those who claim that sexual attraction is just a feeling in the mind/psyche are approaching human sexuality from a place of inexperience and ignorance. Makes me wonder how much face to face, in the flesh RL sexual interactions LRC user Geore has had.
Sorry, everyone. I didn't mean to post the same stuff multiple times. LRC software, which is always hinky for me, seems particularly off tonight. Which is fitting for this thread since the issue here is whether software (self-concepts, people's inner feelings about themselves held in their minds) should take precedence over hardware (the physical sex of people's bodies).
Yes of course you are correct but it is likely that gender identification is more than a feeling in the sense that there are some concomitant physiological symptoms in those who are wanting to transition or in the process of transition or having transitioned. Consequently, to dismiss their experiences as mere feelings with no accompanying physiological component appears to be symptomatic of ignorance and close mindedness. I was utilizing the other poster’s language to illustrate a point but not declaring a position on the use of their language. Kudos to you for perceiving their potentially erroneous use of language but it can also be utilized potentially against your position, depending on exactly what your position is…
Please spell out exactly what are those physiological symptoms are and provide the evidence documenting them.
Yes of course you are correct but it is likely that gender identification is more than a feeling in the sense that there are some concomitant physiological symptoms in those who are wanting to transition or in the process of transition or having transitioned. Consequently, to dismiss their experiences as mere feelings with no accompanying physiological component appears to be symptomatic of ignorance and close mindedness. I was utilizing the other poster’s language to illustrate a point but not declaring a position on the use of their language. Kudos to you for perceiving their potentially erroneous use of language but it can also be utilized potentially against your position, depending on exactly what your position is…
Please spell out exactly what are those physiological symptoms are and provide the evidence documenting them.
You are not very bright if you cannot grasp that we are IGNORANT of much that exists. Try to keep up. Are you so stupid that you do not believe that physiological processes govern everything, including gender identity issues?
You'd think a third category would satisfy those with the "men killing womens sports" argument. its irrelevant who got the prize money in the non-binary division because they all agreed to the terms by entering that division.
in order to argue that money was taken away from the binary divisions would require some proof that nyrr siphoned some of their binary prize money away for a third category. but i dont think thats how it works.
another peice written from emotion rather than reason. but i guess in this senario either way he'd argue that men took all the prize money in the non-binary division.
But this new category is not for male athletes who have been or could be involved in "men killing women's sports." It's for people of both sexes who say they are non-binary, which means they believe themselves to be both male and female, or sexless - neither male or female.
The "men killing women's sports" don't claim to be non-binary. They claim to be women, girls, female.
I understand the rationale for creating a new category - or two new categories - to accommodate females who take exogenous testosterone for gender identity reasons and males who reduce their testosterone also for gender identity reasons. I have no problem with a new division, or two new division, for people who are "trans" and have altered their bodies accordingly.
But the new non-binary category is a different kettle of fish entirely. It's a free-for-all that advantages and favors males over females. From the start, it's been clear that male narcissists, grifters, chancers, trolls, cheaters, attention-seekers, money-grubbers will exploit the new non-binary category to the hilt.
This is really a bit more subjectively layered than what Mara Yamauchi and Robert Johnson are putting forward in their article. There is disambiguation and conflation of the the term "Non-Binary" with the actual physical characteristics of an individual who was born "Intersexual" - possessing duel genitalia in varying degrees some being more male than female, and some more female than male (how this is pejoratively determined is scientifically biased in some cases) People who identify as "Non-Binary" individuals, may or may not be physiologically 'Intersexual' which cannot be determined by hormonal levels alone - Caster Semenya being a good example. Gender identity can be fluid for some if they elect selective surgery and or drug therapy, but others do not. So in some ways, I agree with you that a 'personal choice' of gender identity that someone has a right to make should not supersede the biological fact of their anatomy that gives them an obvious advantage in some cases, but not all. If one can prove their physiological ambiguity, (not mental) then they could in effect, rightly call themselves "Non-Binary" and therefore compete within that category fairly and receive prize money. But 'Intersexual doping' is potentially just as problematic now as gay, straight or bi individuals who frain their physiological gender for completely legitimate moral, ethical and spiritual reasons.