What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Nice Planet: Screw It, I'm Outta Here

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Nice Planet: Screw It, I'm Outta Here

Kepler said:
The guys who wrote The Bell Curve were genuinely curious, too. Was that a bad idea? Yeah, probably.

"Objective research" along lines suggested by bigoted pre-conceptions, while theoretically well within the scientific method, is also generally speaking a bad idea. If nothing else untangling the public conception of both the research and the results is a public affairs nightmare, and designing experiments which are methodologically sound and don't run the risk of looking like Phrenology is 50 years also starts to look like a marginal return on the effort expended.

There is nothing wrong with an idea, in principle. "Political conservatism is correlated with, and perhaps either explanatory of or a symptom indicating a lack of ethics or intelligence" is, indeed, a testable hypothesis. It may even be intuitively accurate. But I'm not sure that's the hill you want to die on.
Click to expand...

He is just saying it will interesting to see how the rules change to deal with the new normal. I agree...

It isnt like he is saying trans people shouldnt compete...he is just wondering aloud how sports will deal with it as we learn more about various changes. Look at his questions again they arent even controversial.

We on the Left need to turn the dial down a little bit. We are on high alert for anything that possibly seems offensive. We dont need to be at "11" all the time. Otherwise we are no better than people we are fighting to stop.
 
Re: Nice Planet: Screw It, I'm Outta Here

Handyman said:
We on the Left need to turn the dial down a little bit. We are on high alert for anything that possibly seems offensive. We dont need to be at "11" all the time. Otherwise we are no better than people we are fighting to stop.
Click to expand...

Thank you for cis-splaining what matters and how we should talk about it.

Perhaps you'd like to white-splain about blacks later.

In the interim your concern has been noted and logged.
 
Last edited:
Re: Nice Planet: Screw It, I'm Outta Here

Handyman said:
It isnt like he is saying trans people shouldnt compete...he is just wondering aloud how sports will deal with it as we learn more about various changes. Look at his questions again they arent even controversial.
Click to expand...

Of all the things in the world to wonder aloud about, I wonder why this one keeps coming up...
 
Re: Nice Planet: Screw It, I'm Outta Here

Kepler said:
Thank you for cis-splaining what matters and how we should talk about it.

Perhaps you'd like to white-splain about blacks later.

In the interim your concern has been noted and logged.
Click to expand...

Ah yes. The people who aren’t X can’t have an opinion on X unless it’s complete capitulation to those who are.

The worst thing to happen to discourse in a long time.
 
Re: Nice Planet: Screw It, I'm Outta Here

dxmnkd316 said:
Ah yes. The people who aren’t X can’t have an opinion on X unless it’s complete capitulation to those who are.

The worst thing to happen to discourse in a long time.
Click to expand...

No, NO, NO! You can debate these issues no matter who you are -- e.g., having a vagina doesn't make one omniscient on all womens issues. What you cannot do is dismiss a persecuted group's claims of an attack as unreal. That's not critical analysis, it's entitlement leaking out like creamy filling.

Or, rather, you can, but it makes you an as-shole.

A privileged person telling a victimized person to "quiet down" makes me reach for a rusty machete.

This is why when black people have had enough they don't blame white racists they blame all white people. Because too many erstwhile liberal white allies still think they can say, "oh, but let's not ruffle feathers about every little imagined offense..." GFY. That is not for us to say.

When it comes to what constitutes racism or sexism or homophobia, no, the privileged group does not get a vote. What we do with that, how we handle it, what policies we enact -- yes, then we all vote. But the reality of the slight is in the eye of the victim, period, full stop.

We run the world. That's our consolation. We don't get to dictate what constitutes reality anymore. That's our "burden."
 
Last edited:
Re: Nice Planet: Screw It, I'm Outta Here

And I am not even saying where I think the lines should be, since I have no clue where they should be, hence my questions about the subject. There are so many variables going into what the regulations will end up being, it's crazy. And even after the first new set of regulations are made, there is most like going to be some sort of tweaking to them as things that weren't initially thought of occur.

And Kep, I've already mentioned that I'm aware of the haters, and again, that is NOT where *I* am coming from. Please try to keep up. Thank you.
 
Re: Nice Planet: Screw It, I'm Outta Here

The Rube said:
And Kep, I've already mentioned that I'm aware of the haters, and again, that is NOT where *I* am coming from. Please try to keep up. Thank you.
Click to expand...

I've lapped you. Go back and read my comment on that very thing.
 
Re: Nice Planet: Screw It, I'm Outta Here

Kepler said:
No, NO, NO! You can debate these issues no matter who you are -- e.g., having a vagina doesn't make one omniscient on all womens issues. What you cannot do is dismiss a persecuted group's claims of an attack as unreal. That's not critical analysis, it's entitlement leaking out like creamy filling.

Or, rather, you can, but it makes you an as-shole.

A privileged person telling a victimized person to "quiet down" makes me reach for a rusty machete.

This is why when black people have had enough they don't blame white racists they blame all white people. Because too many erstwhile liberal white allies still think they can say, "oh, but let's not ruffle feathers about every little imagined offense..." GFY. That is not for us to say.

When it comes to what constitutes racism or sexism or homophobia, no, the privileged group does not get a vote. What we do with that, how we handle it, what policies we enact -- yes, then we all vote. But the reality of the slight is in the eye of the victim, period, full stop.

We run the world. That's our consolation. We don't get to dictate what constitutes reality anymore. That's our "burden."
Click to expand...

Lapped me? Then why repeat something that isn't happening? ;)
 
Re: Nice Planet: Screw It, I'm Outta Here

Kepler said:
When it comes to what constitutes racism or sexism or homophobia, no, the privileged group does not get a vote. What we do with that, how we handle it, what policies we enact -- yes, then we all vote. But the reality of the slight is in the eye of the victim, period, full stop.
Click to expand...

I disagree with this. If you're going to make it that subjective, then everything, or nothing, is racist, sexist or homophobic.
 
Re: Nice Planet: Screw It, I'm Outta Here

Just Listen to Teacher:

On where it affects or doesn't affect me:

Where it doesn't affect me are local races, such as the Jimmy's Cheese Shack 10K.

However, I also compete in several races that check ID. For example, before surgery, I was slated to compete in the Michigan Titanium (Michigan's answer to Ironman.) The race director had lobbied USA Triathlon (the sport's governing body) to let me compete as a female, knowing that hormones had made me significantly weaker. I hadn't heard anything since March, so I am wagering her request was flat out denied. Also, for major races, such as the Chicago and New York marathons, they do check ID, and with an M still on my driver's license, I could not compete as a female.

There is a trickle of events now letting trans people compete as their (preferred) gender. The Boston marathon now lets transgender athletes compete as their preferred gender, pending blood work and qualifying. So does the Western States 100 mile race, pending blood work and qualifying time. The US Olympic Committee lets transgender athletes compete, pending blood work. Their standard is <10 ng/dl testosterone for over a year. If I were an elite athlete, if I kept my current T level of 6 ng/dl testosterone into June 2020, the USOC would let me compete as a female.

This is where we're going, or so I feel. More events will let trans athletes compete as preferred gender, pending blood work at least. As my endocrinologist told me, it doesn't really matter where the estrogen level is... what matters is the testosterone. If I were an event director, you are correct, I would not let anyone pre-HRT compete as their preferred gender. Same thing in high school. The age of consent for HRT in teenagers is 16. After a year, check blood work, and see where this person is.

And Kepler is right: I have rules for allies:

1. Listen to me.
2. Let me speak for myself and back me up when necessary.
3. If you screw up, such as with name and pronouns, quickly correct and move on.
4. It's not all about you.
5. Oh, you gave yourself a temporary Facebook profile picture celebrating Pride month. Have that same enthusiasm July 1.

Truth is, I feel the lot of you aren't listening. I also feel you're saying I can't be angry over things that genuinely concern me. I also feel that when I go to speak up, you basically cut me off, or when I do speak, you gloss right over it. I find myself saying "f-cking cishets (cisgender heterosexual)" on a daily basis. Even here, I find myself saying "f-cking cishets." I also know the L, G, and B part of that alphabet don't care much for the T. Basically, I feel myself, along with my fellow trans people, are on our own.
 
Re: Nice Planet: Screw It, I'm Outta Here

MissThundercat said:
Just Listen to Teacher:

On where it affects or doesn't affect me:

Where it doesn't affect me are local races, such as the Jimmy's Cheese Shack 10K.

However, I also compete in several races that check ID. For example, before surgery, I was slated to compete in the Michigan Titanium (Michigan's answer to Ironman.) The race director had lobbied USA Triathlon (the sport's governing body) to let me compete as a female, knowing that hormones had made me significantly weaker. I hadn't heard anything since March, so I am wagering her request was flat out denied. Also, for major races, such as the Chicago and New York marathons, they do check ID, and with an M still on my driver's license, I could not compete as a female.

There is a trickle of events now letting trans people compete as their (preferred) gender. The Boston marathon now lets transgender athletes compete as their preferred gender, pending blood work and qualifying. So does the Western States 100 mile race, pending blood work and qualifying time. The US Olympic Committee lets transgender athletes compete, pending blood work. Their standard is <10 ng/dl testosterone for over a year. If I were an elite athlete, if I kept my current T level of 6 ng/dl testosterone into June 2020, the USOC would let me compete as a female.

This is where we're going, or so I feel. More events will let trans athletes compete as preferred gender, pending blood work at least. As my endocrinologist told me, it doesn't really matter where the estrogen level is... what matters is the testosterone. If I were an event director, you are correct, I would not let anyone pre-HRT compete as their preferred gender. Same thing in high school. The age of consent for HRT in teenagers is 16. After a year, check blood work, and see where this person is.

And Kepler is right: I have rules for allies:

1. Listen to me.
2. Let me speak for myself and back me up when necessary.
3. If you screw up, such as with name and pronouns, quickly correct and move on.
4. It's not all about you.
5. Oh, you gave yourself a temporary Facebook profile picture celebrating Pride month. Have that same enthusiasm July 1.

Truth is, I feel the lot of you aren't listening. I also feel you're saying I can't be angry over things that genuinely concern me. I also feel that when I go to speak up, you basically cut me off, or when I do speak, you gloss right over it. I find myself saying "f-cking cishets (cisgender heterosexual)" on a daily basis. Even here, I find myself saying "f-cking cishets." I also know the L, G, and B part of that alphabet don't care much for the T. Basically, I feel myself, along with my fellow trans people, are on our own.
Click to expand...

Thank you for the detailed input. This is a big part of what I am wondering about in the future.
 
Re: Nice Planet: Screw It, I'm Outta Here

SJHovey said:
I disagree with this. If you're going to make it that subjective, then everything, or nothing, is racist, sexist or homophobic.
Click to expand...

You're relying on one of two logical fallacies, I'm not sure which one, maybe both. Also I don't remember their fancy Latin names but hopefully somebody will.

1. To the degree that something is subjective it isn't real.

This could be called the "Logical Positivist Fallacy" or, better, the "Vienna Circle Jerk." It comes from logicians who said because metaphysical claims cannot be represented as valid syntax in their logic therefore metaphysical claims are not valid. Obviously what they missed is that it just meant their logical system wasn't all-embracing of reality and there are domains which are both real and also not valid within their syntax. That one's easy and basically every engineer educated in the last 75 years is guilty of it so no shame there.

2. If you can't find a precise value then it could be any value.

This could be called the Reification of Precision Fallacy. Fetus Fondlers use it all the time. "If you can't tell me exactly when life begins then it must always be life 1 millisecond before any time you pick, therefore it is always life." This is the same fallacy that lies behind some of Zeno's paradoxes.
 
Re: Nice Planet: Screw It, I'm Outta Here

Kepler said:
You're relying on one of two logical fallacies, I'm not sure which one, maybe both. Also I don't remember their fancy Latin names but hopefully somebody will.

1. To the degree that something is subjective it isn't real.

This could be called the "Logical Positivist Fallacy" or, better, the "Vienna Circle Jerk." It comes from logicians who said because metaphysical claims cannot be represented as valid syntax in their logic therefore metaphysical claims are not valid. Obviously what they missed is that it just meant their logical system wasn't all-embracing of reality and there are domains which are both real and also not valid within their syntax. That one's easy and basically every engineer educated in the last 75 years is guilty of it so no shame there.

2. If you can't find a precise value then it could be any value.

This could be called the Reification of Precision Fallacy. Fetus Fondlers use it all the time. "If you can't tell me exactly when life begins then it must always be life 1 millisecond before any time you pick, therefore it is always life." This is the same fallacy that lies behind some of Zeno's paradoxes.
Click to expand...

Let's say I walk up to a couple and offer to shake hands with the man before the woman. Let's say that 50 out of 100 women consider that act sexist on my part, because I introduced myself to the man first, while 50 out of a hundred didn't even notice the order or consider it. Does that make my act sexist?

To follow your logic, it's sexist 50% of the time because those women perceived and defined it as such, while it's not sexist the other 50% of the time?
 
Re: Nice Planet: Screw It, I'm Outta Here

SJHovey said:
Let's say I walk up to a couple and offer to shake hands with the man before the woman. Let's say that 50 out of 100 women consider that act sexist on my part, because I introduced myself to the man first, while 50 out of a hundred didn't even notice the order or consider it. Does that make my act sexist?

To follow your logic, it's sexist 50% of the time because those women perceived and defined it as such, while it's not sexist the other 50% of the time?
Click to expand...

No. My logic is the hundred women get together and hash out what they think while the hundred men go drink and watch the game.

Now, see, that's sexist.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top