Unpopular Opinions You Hold

[Countryfox]

1 minute ago, leicsmac said:

... which excludes a statistically significant proportion of the population.

 

If there's no other choice but to do so, then fair enough, but I'm reasonably sure other solutions do exist for these problems.

You’ve lost me again Mac ..  who does it exclude ?

[Alf Bentley]

15 hours ago, Facecloth said:

Well we've not had a PM aged over 75 in living memory, I think it was the end the 1800 we last had one that old, so our woes can't be blamed on them being doddery old fools.

 

Churchill was about 76 when he started his final term in 1951 - and about 80 when he left office in 1955. A youngster in his late 60s during WW2, though.

[BenTheFox]

I've also found it pretty distasteful seeing people say words to the effect of "maybe the other athletes should just train harder" as though female athletes who were born female don't train exceptionally hard as it is. This is an extreme example, but if I was to hit the gym really hard I would still lose in a fight with a Gorilla. Likewise Usain Bolt in his prime would still have lost in a footrace with a Cheetah. 

[leicsmac]

8 minutes ago, Countryfox said:

You’ve lost me again Mac ..  who does it exclude ?

In sports, all trans people, assuming what you say regarding them only competing against their assigned gender at birth and the physical changes that result from transitioning are what they are.

 

I see no good reason to do that when a distinction based on something other than strict binary could perhaps be applied. Would be harder, but more inclusive.

 

NB. With respect to "bathroom" issues, predatory men are the real threat here and they hardly feel the need to transition in order to do what they want to do. Perhaps more should be done about that rather than focusing on a much more marginalised and much less harmful demographic.

 

Just now, BenTheFox said:

I've also found it pretty distasteful seeing people say words to the effect of "maybe the other athletes should just train harder" as though female athletes who were born female don't train exceptionally hard as it is. This is an extreme example, but if I was to hit the gym really hard I would still lose in a fight with a Gorilla. Likewise Usain Bolt in his prime would still have lost in a footrace with a Cheetah. 

Yep. And I'd lose a chess game against Magnus Carlsen or a computer.

 

All the more reason to make categories not based on gender, but on other qualities.

[Alf Bentley]

24 minutes ago, BenTheFox said:

I've also found it pretty distasteful seeing people say words to the effect of "maybe the other athletes should just train harder" as though female athletes who were born female don't train exceptionally hard as it is. This is an extreme example, but if I was to hit the gym really hard I would still lose in a fight with a Gorilla. Likewise Usain Bolt in his prime would still have lost in a footrace with a Cheetah. 

 

To be fair, the cheetah probably wouldn't win such a race as it would be disqualified for eating Usain Bolt. Bolt might even win if the cheetah got distracted eating people in the crowd.

 

You definitely have a potential TV ratings success here, though. I'd consider a Sky subscription to watch Bolt race a cheetah with a supporting bill of you fighting a gorilla. 

[Innovindil]

27 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

In sports, all trans people, assuming what you say regarding them only competing against their assigned gender at birth and the physical changes that result from transitioning are what they are.

 

I see no good reason to do that when a distinction based on something other than strict binary could perhaps be applied. Would be harder, but more inclusive.

 

NB. With respect to "bathroom" issues, predatory men are the real threat here and they hardly feel the need to transition in order to do what they want to do. Perhaps more should be done about that rather than focusing on a much more marginalised and much less harmful demographic.

 

Yep. And I'd lose a chess game against Magnus Carlsen or a computer.

 

All the more reason to make categories not based on gender, but on other qualities.

Any chance of some examples please? 

[BenTheFox]

4 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

To be fair, the cheetah probably wouldn't win such a race as it would be disqualified for eating Usain Bolt. Bolt might even win if the cheetah got distracted eating people in the crowd.

 

You definitely have a potential TV ratings success here, though. I'd consider a Sky subscription to watch Bolt race a cheetah with a supporting bill of you fighting a gorilla. 

Just wait until you hear my idea of a separate Olympics where all the athletes are under the influence of substances that are detrimental to performance. I would pay good money to watch Ket boxing! 

[Izzy]

1 hour ago, Countryfox said:

Transgender issues are fairly straightforward in my mind ..  with regard to situations like toilets and prisons for example where ‘men’ have been known to take advantage of the situation (rape etc) ..  use the toilet/prison specifically for the parts they have not how you dress. For sports they can only compete against people who are the same as how they were born. 

 

[leicsmac]

36 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

Any chance of some examples please? 

Off the top of my head, weight class in certain sports.

 

Some sports could be divided purely on performance/ability - this has been discussed before but I'm not having that women have an inherent disadvantage in the field of archery and shooting events, for instance. The gap there can easily be explained by increased opportunities for men (and therefore higher likelihood of elite performers and performances) as opposed to women over a long period of time.

[Jimothy]

1 hour ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Churchill was about 76 when he started his final term in 1951 - and about 80 when he left office in 1955. A youngster in his late 60s during WW2, though.

Yeah I was thinking people who hadn't been PM previously, either with a gap or winning a second term straight after the first.

[Innovindil]

10 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Off the top of my head, weight class in certain sports.

 

Some sports could be divided purely on performance/ability - this has been discussed before but I'm not having that women have an inherent disadvantage in the field of archery and shooting events, for instance. The gap there can easily be explained by increased opportunities for men (and therefore higher likelihood of elite performers and performances) as opposed to women over a long period of time.

Some, I agree. Snooker and darts are both sports *ish* and have had men and women compete against each other. So no reason why shooting and the like couldn't be for all. 

 

Not sure how weight limits help though. Men and women at the same weight boxing and the like? I was under the impression that even at the same weight men held a physical advantage over women? 

 

What about other sports, like football? Or rugby? 

[leicsmac]

Just now, Innovindil said:

Some, I agree. Snooker and darts are both sports *ish* and have had men and women compete against each other. So no reason why shooting and the like couldn't be for all. 

 

Not sure how weight limits help though. Men and women at the same weight boxing and the like? I was under the impression that even at the same weight men held a physical advantage over women? 

 

What about other sports, like football? Or rugby? 

Good question tbh, and one I don't have an answer for.

 

However, I'm hoping that someone smarter than me might come up with a solution that makes things more inclusive than they are now, which is why I floated it in the first place. Perhaps in time we can make distinctions based on physical qualities that are pertinent to the sport like muscle mass etc.

[leicsmac]

1 hour ago, BenTheFox said:

Just wait until you hear my idea of a separate Olympics where all the athletes are under the influence of substances that are detrimental to performance. I would pay good money to watch Ket boxing! 

Tbh I want to see a version of the Olympics where performance enhancers are allowed, I get this.

[BenTheFox]

16 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

Some, I agree. Snooker and darts are both sports *ish* and have had men and women compete against each other. So no reason why shooting and the like couldn't be for all. 

 

Not sure how weight limits help though. Men and women at the same weight boxing and the like? I was under the impression that even at the same weight men held a physical advantage over women? 

 

What about other sports, like football? Or rugby? 

I know the RFU have carried out or have at least thought about carrying out physical tests for transgender people over a certain height and weight in the interest of the other players' safety. 

[Countryfox]

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

In sports, all trans people, assuming what you say regarding them only competing against their assigned gender at birth and the physical changes that result from transitioning are what they are.

 

I see no good reason to do that when a distinction based on something other than strict binary could perhaps be applied. Would be harder, but more inclusive.

 

But that's exactly it ...  they can compete in whatever they want but only against people who were born the same as them ...  then there would be no big advantage over others ...   I honestly don't see any problem with that whatsoever.  You say you see no good reason to do it ..  look at the swimming ..  it makes a mockery of the sport and stops those born a woman from ever winning.   And who exactly wouldn't be happy with that ?????

 

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

 

NB. With respect to "bathroom" issues, predatory men are the real threat here and they hardly feel the need to transition in order to do what they want to do. Perhaps more should be done about that rather than focusing on a much more marginalised and much less harmful demographic.

 

Again that is exactly the point I am making ...  (sometimes you seem so quick to argue that you miss the point of what I am saying) ..   for example ..  a big hairy man walks into the female toilet for his own gratification  ...  a woman might feel intimidated and notify security or the police for assistance ...   if the man has his tackle intact he shouldn't be in there.  If he walks into a mans toilet with his wig and smart dress on who gives a fvck !??   Toilets and prisons are designed for men and women and if it is based on your tackle , or lack of, then so many problems would be avoided.  And to be perfectly honest if it is a big issue for someone then avoid going there in the first place !!

 

[urban.spaceman]

You should be able to apply for voluntary expulsion/exile from your home country.

[Sampson]

7 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

You should be able to apply for voluntary expulsion/exile from your home country.

You can revoke your citizenship, but I guess then you can still visit on a tourist visa.

[leicsmac]

18 minutes ago, Countryfox said:

But that's exactly it ...  they can compete in whatever they want but only against people who were born the same as them ...  then there would be no big advantage over others ...   I honestly don't see any problem with that whatsoever.  You say you see no good reason to do it ..  look at the swimming ..  it makes a mockery of the sport and stops those born a woman from ever winning.   And who exactly wouldn't be happy with that ?????

 

Such an outcome wouldn't be fair for anyone - trans women would have disadvantages compared to blokes, trans men would (probably) have advantages compared to women.

 

As I said, there needs to be better categorisation than that, depending on the sport.

 

21 minutes ago, Countryfox said:

Again that is exactly the point I am making ...  (sometimes you seem so quick to argue that you miss the point of what I am saying) ..   for example ..  a big hairy man walks into the female toilet for his own gratification  ...  a woman might feel intimidated and notify security or the police for assistance ...   if the man has his tackle intact he shouldn't be in there.  If he walks into a mans toilet with his wig and smart dress on who gives a fvck !??   Toilets and prisons are designed for men and women and if it is based on your tackle , or lack of, then so many problems would be avoided.  And to be perfectly honest if it is a big issue for someone then avoid going there in the first place !!

 

If a pre-SRS trans woman, on a couple years of HRT and physically indistinguishable from a AFAB woman apart from that quality goes into a women's bathroom, uses it and then walks out again, not even making eye contact with anyone, much less interacting in any leery way, why shouldn't she be in there?

 

I apologise if I appear confrontational, but this is a reductive approach to an issue that is incredible complex and needs a complex solution to match. And additionally, it ticks me off that good friends of mine - trans women and men - face discrimination, often out in the world, sometimes institutionalised, despite never threatening anyone in their lives - purely because their body and their brain didn't match up and they took measures to try and help themselves, sometimes saving their own lives by doing so.

 

As per above, yes, some folks are angry. Perhaps they have the right to be.

[Countryfox]

2 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Such an outcome wouldn't be fair for anyone - trans women would have disadvantages compared to blokes, trans men would (probably) have advantages compared to women.

 

As I said, there needs to be better categorisation than that, depending on the sport.

 

If a pre-SRS trans woman, on a couple years of HRT and physically indistinguishable from a AFAB woman apart from that quality goes into a women's bathroom, uses it and then walks out again, not even making eye contact with anyone, much less interacting in any leery way, why shouldn't she be in there?

 

I apologise if I appear confrontational, but this is a reductive approach to an issue that is incredible complex and needs a complex solution to match. And additionally, it ticks me off that good friends of mine - trans women and men - face discrimination, often out in the world, sometimes institutionalised, despite never threatening anyone in their lives - purely because their body and their brain didn't match up and they took measures to try and help themselves, sometimes saving their own lives by doing so.

 

As per above, yes, some folks are angry. Perhaps they have the right to be.

 

Trouble here is I haven't got all day to post lengthy replies ...    if this happened in the real world then no one would be offended and there is no issue ...  what I am trying so hard to say is that it would stop abuse of this situation.  With regard to sports I'm sorry but I totally disagree with you, letting 'men' compete in events now that they are 'women' is a complete farce.

[leicsmac]

5 minutes ago, Countryfox said:

 

Trouble here is I haven't got all day to post lengthy replies ...    if this happened in the real world then no one would be offended and there is no issue ...  what I am trying so hard to say is that it would stop abuse of this situation.  With regard to sports I'm sorry but I totally disagree with you, letting 'men' compete in events now that they are 'women' is a complete farce.

It happens every day, every minute even, in the real world.

 

WRT sports, I agree it's a farce which is why I've been saying all along better categorisation is needed.

 

Honestly, like I said, I mean no ill will. I'm just tired of the trans community being treated like a legislative (and sometimes actual) punchbag in a way practically no other demographic is in the OECD in this supposedly more enlightened era.

[ozleicester]

18 hours ago, Countryfox said:

No one over 75 should be allowed to become a prime minister ..  or a president ..  

or vote 

[Countryfox]

16 minutes ago, ozleicester said:

or vote 

It was all tongue in cheek Oz but seems to have ruffled a few feathers .. 

Crinkles is right there should be no restrictions on age but Sleepy Joe sometimes makes me despair .. but if you only choose someone because the alternative is even worse then something is very wrong. 

[LiberalFox]

I think a lot of people just don't understand what trans people actually are. If you actually accept trans people's right to exist and you believe people's gender identity should be respected then the conversation looks a little different and you aren't going to be saying things that are deeply offensive to most trans people.

 

Trans people until recently have mostly had one option to compete : they have had to compete in the gender category assigned at birth and have had no option to do that while transitioning. Now at least in some countries trans people are looking to compete in their actual gender. So really it's a case of women wanting to compete as women and men wanting to compete as men. 

 

Sports governing bodies have always had to deal with balancing inclusiveness with maintaining fair competition. That often leads to controversy. We've had issues like therapeutic exemptions for medications that could enhance performance and claims that athletes were trying to use those to gain advantage. Women whose bodies naturally produce higher than average levels of testosterone have been banned from competing unless they take drugs to lower them. I think this is similar but I do think as a minimum people should have the option to compete as their gender identity. 

[Nalis]

There should be a time limit on compensation payments on wrongs of the past, eg, slavery, that dated back over 100 years ago.

 

Almost all of the world's population were even born so why punish them when all of those responsible for the wrongs of the past are dead?

Edited 26 March 2022 by Nalis

[leicsmac]

3 minutes ago, Nalis said:

There should be a time limit on compensation payments on wrongs of the past, eg, slavery, that dated back over 100 years ago.

 

Almost all of the world's population were even born so why punish them when all of those responsible for the wrongs of the past are dead?

This is a properly thorny topic.

 

Of course folks shouldn't have to answer for what their ancestors did. But then...them inhabiting a world that is so much easier for them and benefiting because of heinous acts their ancestors did doesn't exactly strike one as entirely fair, either.

 

How do we reconcile this fairly and get closer to an ideal of egalitarianism? No damn idea.