NATION

PASSWORD

American Politics I: It's All Applesauce

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Glorious Hong Kong
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1357
Founded: Nov 01, 2019
Ex-Nation

Postby Glorious Hong Kong » Sat Dec 12, 2020 9:39 am

Trump's Supreme Court losses are further evidence that America remains as democratic, and the judiciary as independent, as ever. Nothing the President does between now and Inauguration Day can prevent Joe Biden from succeeding him. Donald Trump was never a threat to democracy because he never could be.

Had he been the president of the Philippines, I would, of course, have a very different take and I would never have supported him because dictatorships suck. But this is America we're talking about, not some Third World backwater or Second World post-communist state, or Hong Kong. Freedom and democracy will endure in America for generations to come.

That's unless the Democrats manage to win the Georgia Senate runoffs and pack the Supreme Court with hundreds of Democrat-appointed justices, undermining the separation of powers, judicial independence, and threatening the long-term health of American democracy. It means that Democrats will ironically be able to challenge any election result in court, win, and remain in power indefinitely. Corruption and authoritarianism will inevitably take hold and Democrat officials will be able to abuse their authority with complete impunity.

My country's judicial independence was significantly undermined for many years by a certain, slimy, Islamist, antisemitic P.O.S. whom I will not name, and countless elections were stolen by his party through their dirty tactics, unprecedented electoral fraud, and carefully-timed power outages. It took a record turnout, a massive corruption scandal, an unpopular goods & services tax, and a huge amount of public anger just to miraculously topple a corrupt, authoritarian, racist oligarchy of more than 60 years. Pretty much everything Trump has accused Democrats of doing happened in my country, and it will happen in America too if the Supreme Court is packed. The complete absence of an independent judiciary never ends well for ordinary people. Hong Kong is now going the same way.

Trump's only saving grace would be if his surrogates in Georgia win the runoffs next month and avert such an existential threat to democracy. I had no idea there could be more than nine justices. I thought the Constitution expressly forbade that. A Republican-controlled Senate is all that stands between democracy and tyranny if Biden and the Democrats push ahead with this insane idea. Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue have to win at all costs.

Those who loudly and openly advocate for court-packing, such as AOC, are the real threat to democracy. They are doing this purely to spite the millions of Americans who had the temerity and the sheer audacity to vote for the "wrong" candidate in 2016 and 2020. It's absolutely vindictive and petty. Not to mention the proposal to draw up lists of names of suspected Trump supporters such as myself, or send Antifa Blackshirts to physically intimidate and assault Trump supporters in the streets while chanting Black Lives Matter just as communist Whiteshirts have assaulted peaceful protesters and commuters in Hong Kong on multiple occasions and gotten away with it.

AOC and her far-left ilk and woke enablers seek to turn America into another totalitarian, communist-ruled Hong Kong. They will initially pretend to be the champions of the oppressed, the sworn enemies of systemic and entrenched injustice, and the torchbearers of "real" freedom and democracy, only to renege on their false promises the moment they're in power. The moment they taste real power, they will rapidly lose interest in "defunding the police". They will be even more pro-police and pro-law & order than Trump has ever been.

The moment moderate centrist Joe Biden and his ultra-woke, feminist, virtue-signaling, IdPol, SJW running mate Kamala Harris have outlived their usefulness, they will do everything in their power to replace him with someone more closely aligned with their far-left ideals. They will seek to purge moderate, neoliberal Democrats from the Party just like Hitler decapitated the Strasserist faction from the Nazi Party in the Night of the Long Knives and proclaimed himself Fuhrer. They will go on to seize absolute control of every aspect of American life and relinquish none of it. It always ends the same way with these crypto-communists. Always. No exceptions.

These communists seek to burn the West down and democracy along with it. They take their own freedoms for granted and hate their own countries so much they are prepared to wage a Cultural Revolution to eliminate liberal, Western values and even the slightest hint of wrongthink, and then proceed to deceive, threaten, and intimidate the rest of the world into submission with their totalitarian alternative to Western-style democracy just as Communist China is doing right now. Communism is an insidious, universal threat both to freedom and democracy as well as other, more conservative, centuries-old cultures and traditions, and requires a global, coordinated response from a coalition of classical liberals and liberal conservatives who cherish everything the West stands for.
LIBERATE HONG KONG. REVOLUTION OF OUR TIMES. CCP DELENDA EST.
VIVE LE FRANCE. JE SUIS SAMUEL PATY. I STAND WITH EUROPE AND ISRAEL AGAINST RADICAL ISLAM.
ALL LIVES MATTER.
Wuhan coronavirus is racist but Japanese encephalitis is A-OK. The CCP has nothing to do with this double standard whatsoever. Nothing to see here.
The case against communism
Definition of radical Islam

User avatar
Thermodolia
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 76278
Founded: Oct 07, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Thermodolia » Sat Dec 12, 2020 9:40 am

Omniabstracta wrote:
Flarbinia wrote:Really? You are slamming Tulsi for being opposed to Big Tech censorship? Spoiler alert! If the Big Tech monopolies are not broken up, there will be nothing to stop Google, Twitter, and Facebook from shadow banning you when your views are no longer in line with the Left's agenda.

Repealing or modifying section 230 does nothing to stop “internet censorship” or whatever the hell you want to call it. In fact, it would force social media companies to be more in moderating their content, and would also damage smaller forums and sites unable to expend the resources that a Twitter or Facebook has to automate or otherwise handle moderation of content, and unable to withstand legal challenges.

Now it wouldn’t say that modification of 230 wouldn’t do anything. Quite the opposite. You could definitely keep the part about liability there but demand that overt censorship stop unless it is an illegal act.
Male, State Socialist, Cultural Nationalist, Welfare Chauvinist lives somewhere in AZ I'm GAY! Disabled US Military Veteran
I'm agent #69 in the Gaystapo!
>The Sons of Adam: I'd crown myself monarch... cuz why not?
>>Dumb Ideologies: Why not turn yourself into a penguin and build an igloo at the centre of the Earth?
>Xovland: I keep getting ads for printer ink. Sometimes, when you get that feeling down there, you have to look at some steamy printer pictures.
Click for Da Funies

RIP Dya

User avatar
Asherahan
Minister
 
Posts: 2626
Founded: Dec 08, 2015
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Asherahan » Sat Dec 12, 2020 9:40 am

Ifreann wrote:
Asherahan wrote:I do not know the context so I ain't gonna yay or nay what Ifreann and Hediacrana say on the matter because they may be correct on Tulsi being a Transphobe but I do believe that Trans Girls and Vice Versa trans men should have their own categories in sports.

A separate category in sports for the one transgender kid in a school. I'm sure that'll work out great.

In serious sport completions Ifreann not in school. You are a smart person don't tell me you couldn't figure that I would say this.
Status: Serial Forum Lurker
Ideologically a Blanquist
Who Likes: Single Party Democracy | Democratic Centralism | State Capitalism | Blanquism | State Atheism | Sex Positive Feminism & Socialist Feminism
Former Resident of NSG CTALNH here since 2011 - Add like 10000 to my post number.

User avatar
Kowani
Post Czar
 
Posts: 44696
Founded: Apr 01, 2018
Democratic Socialists

Postby Kowani » Sat Dec 12, 2020 9:42 am

Unfortunately, GHK has me blocked, so I can’t respond to his bs.
But if someone could tell him that the court didn’t start at 9 justices for me, that would be wonderful.

Anyway, Bill Barr us under fire again.
Abolitionism in the North has leagued itself with Radical Democracy, and so the Slave Power was forced to ally itself with the Money Power; that is the great fact of the age.




The triumph of the Democracy is essential to the struggle of popular liberty


Currently Rehabilitating: Martin Van Buren, Benjamin Harrison, and Woodrow Wilson
Currently Vilifying: George Washington, Theodore Roosevelt, and Jimmy Carter

User avatar
Thermodolia
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 76278
Founded: Oct 07, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Thermodolia » Sat Dec 12, 2020 9:43 am

Glorious Hong Kong wrote:*long winded screed removed*

The democrats aren’t going to pack the court. Manchin, both AZ senators and both democrat candidates for senate in georgia have all said they will not support such action.

That’s five senators who would side with the republicans on court packing. It’s not going to happen
Male, State Socialist, Cultural Nationalist, Welfare Chauvinist lives somewhere in AZ I'm GAY! Disabled US Military Veteran
I'm agent #69 in the Gaystapo!
>The Sons of Adam: I'd crown myself monarch... cuz why not?
>>Dumb Ideologies: Why not turn yourself into a penguin and build an igloo at the centre of the Earth?
>Xovland: I keep getting ads for printer ink. Sometimes, when you get that feeling down there, you have to look at some steamy printer pictures.
Click for Da Funies

RIP Dya

User avatar
The Greater Ohio Valley
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7076
Founded: Jan 19, 2013
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby The Greater Ohio Valley » Sat Dec 12, 2020 9:44 am

Flarbinia wrote:

Really? You are slamming Tulsi for being opposed to Big Tech censorship? Spoiler alert! If the Big Tech monopolies are not broken up, there will be nothing to stop Google, Twitter, and Facebook from shadow banning you when your views are no longer in line with the Left's agenda.

As mentioned by Therm, Kowani and Omniabstracta above, removing Section 230 would make social media platforms crack down and apply even more censorship across the board since with it gone they would then be liable for anything their users post and they're gonna do literally everything they can to prevent from being sued for shit their users post on their sites.
Fly me to the moon on an irradiated manhole cover.
- Free speech
- Weapons rights
- Democracy
- LGBTQ+ rights
- Racial equality
- Gender/sexual equality
- Voting rights
- Universal healthcare
- Workers rights
- Drug decriminalization
- Cannabis legalization
- Due process
- Rehabilitative justice
- Religious freedom
- Choice
- Environmental protections
- Secularism
ANTI
- Fascism/Nazism
- Conservatism
- Nationalism
- Authoritarianism/Totalitarianism
- Traditionalism
- Ethnic/racial supremacy
- Racism
- Sexism
- Transphobia
- Homophobia
- Religious extremism
- Laissez-faire capitalism
- Warmongering
- Accelerationism
- Isolationism
- Theocracy
- Anti-intellectualism
- Climate change denialism

User avatar
Repubblica Fascista Sociale Italiana
Minister
 
Posts: 3230
Founded: Sep 01, 2019
Ex-Nation

Postby Repubblica Fascista Sociale Italiana » Sat Dec 12, 2020 9:46 am

Ifreann wrote:Turns out Tulsi Gabbard is a transphobe, so it's probably for the best that she didn't get anywhere in the primary.

Stealing a post from the trans thread:

She realizes suffering from a clinical psychological condition doesn’t allow them to have an unfair advantage in sports

At this point, the term "transphobia" really has no meaning anymore
Not an adherent of Italian Fascism anymore, leaning more and more towards Falangist Syndicalism
Corporatism and Corporatocracy are completely different things
9axes
Pro: Falange, Command Economy, Class-Cooperation, Cultural Nationalism, Authoritarianism, Third Positionism, Border Security
Anti: Communism, Laissez-Faire Capitalism, Trump, Globalism, Racism, Democracy, Immigration

User avatar
The Greater Ohio Valley
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7076
Founded: Jan 19, 2013
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby The Greater Ohio Valley » Sat Dec 12, 2020 9:46 am

Glorious Hong Kong wrote:Trump's Supreme Court losses are further evidence that America remains as democratic, and the judiciary as independent, as ever. Nothing the President does between now and Inauguration Day can prevent Joe Biden from succeeding him. Donald Trump was never a threat to democracy because he never could be.

Had he been the president of the Philippines, I would, of course, have a very different take and I would never have supported him because dictatorships suck. But this is America we're talking about, not some Third World backwater or Second World post-communist state, or Hong Kong. Freedom and democracy will endure in America for generations to come.

That's unless the Democrats manage to win the Georgia Senate runoffs and pack the Supreme Court with hundreds of Democrat-appointed justices, undermining the separation of powers, judicial independence, and threatening the long-term health of American democracy. It means that Democrats will ironically be able to challenge any election result in court, win, and remain in power indefinitely. Corruption and authoritarianism will inevitably take hold and Democrat officials will be able to abuse their authority with complete impunity.

My country's judicial independence was significantly undermined for many years by a certain, slimy, Islamist, antisemitic P.O.S. whom I will not name, and countless elections were stolen by his party through their dirty tactics, unprecedented electoral fraud, and carefully-timed power outages. It took a record turnout, a massive corruption scandal, an unpopular goods & services tax, and a huge amount of public anger just to miraculously topple a corrupt, authoritarian, racist oligarchy of more than 60 years. Pretty much everything Trump has accused Democrats of doing happened in my country, and it will happen in America too if the Supreme Court is packed. The complete absence of an independent judiciary never ends well for ordinary people. Hong Kong is now going the same way.

Trump's only saving grace would be if his surrogates in Georgia win the runoffs next month and avert such an existential threat to democracy. I had no idea there could be more than nine justices. I thought the Constitution expressly forbade that. A Republican-controlled Senate is all that stands between democracy and tyranny if Biden and the Democrats push ahead with this insane idea. Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue have to win at all costs.

Those who loudly and openly advocate for court-packing, such as AOC, are the real threat to democracy. They are doing this purely to spite the millions of Americans who had the temerity and the sheer audacity to vote for the "wrong" candidate in 2016 and 2020. It's absolutely vindictive and petty. Not to mention the proposal to draw up lists of names of suspected Trump supporters such as myself, or send Antifa Blackshirts to physically intimidate and assault Trump supporters in the streets while chanting Black Lives Matter just as communist Whiteshirts have assaulted peaceful protesters and commuters in Hong Kong on multiple occasions and gotten away with it.

AOC and her far-left ilk and woke enablers seek to turn America into another totalitarian, communist-ruled Hong Kong. They will initially pretend to be the champions of the oppressed, the sworn enemies of systemic and entrenched injustice, and the torchbearers of "real" freedom and democracy, only to renege on their false promises the moment they're in power. The moment they taste real power, they will rapidly lose interest in "defunding the police". They will be even more pro-police and pro-law & order than Trump has ever been.

The moment moderate centrist Joe Biden and his ultra-woke, feminist, virtue-signaling, IdPol, SJW running mate Kamala Harris have outlived their usefulness, they will do everything in their power to replace him with someone more closely aligned with their far-left ideals. They will seek to purge moderate, neoliberal Democrats from the Party just like Hitler decapitated the Strasserist faction from the Nazi Party in the Night of the Long Knives and proclaimed himself Fuhrer. They will go on to seize absolute control of every aspect of American life and relinquish none of it. It always ends the same way with these crypto-communists. Always. No exceptions.

These communists seek to burn the West down and democracy along with it. They take their own freedoms for granted and hate their own countries so much they are prepared to wage a Cultural Revolution to eliminate liberal, Western values and even the slightest hint of wrongthink, and then proceed to deceive, threaten, and intimidate the rest of the world into submission with their totalitarian alternative to Western-style democracy just as Communist China is doing right now. Communism is an insidious, universal threat both to freedom and democracy as well as other, more conservative, centuries-old cultures and traditions, and requires a global, coordinated response from a coalition of classical liberals and liberal conservatives who cherish everything the West stands for.

You do know that the number of SCOTUS justices hasn't always remained the same, right?
Fly me to the moon on an irradiated manhole cover.
- Free speech
- Weapons rights
- Democracy
- LGBTQ+ rights
- Racial equality
- Gender/sexual equality
- Voting rights
- Universal healthcare
- Workers rights
- Drug decriminalization
- Cannabis legalization
- Due process
- Rehabilitative justice
- Religious freedom
- Choice
- Environmental protections
- Secularism
ANTI
- Fascism/Nazism
- Conservatism
- Nationalism
- Authoritarianism/Totalitarianism
- Traditionalism
- Ethnic/racial supremacy
- Racism
- Sexism
- Transphobia
- Homophobia
- Religious extremism
- Laissez-faire capitalism
- Warmongering
- Accelerationism
- Isolationism
- Theocracy
- Anti-intellectualism
- Climate change denialism

User avatar
The Greater Ohio Valley
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7076
Founded: Jan 19, 2013
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby The Greater Ohio Valley » Sat Dec 12, 2020 9:47 am

Kowani wrote:Unfortunately, GHK has me blocked, so I can’t respond to his bs.
But if someone could tell him that the court didn’t start at 9 justices for me, that would be wonderful.

Ask and you shall receive.
Fly me to the moon on an irradiated manhole cover.
- Free speech
- Weapons rights
- Democracy
- LGBTQ+ rights
- Racial equality
- Gender/sexual equality
- Voting rights
- Universal healthcare
- Workers rights
- Drug decriminalization
- Cannabis legalization
- Due process
- Rehabilitative justice
- Religious freedom
- Choice
- Environmental protections
- Secularism
ANTI
- Fascism/Nazism
- Conservatism
- Nationalism
- Authoritarianism/Totalitarianism
- Traditionalism
- Ethnic/racial supremacy
- Racism
- Sexism
- Transphobia
- Homophobia
- Religious extremism
- Laissez-faire capitalism
- Warmongering
- Accelerationism
- Isolationism
- Theocracy
- Anti-intellectualism
- Climate change denialism

User avatar
Kowani
Post Czar
 
Posts: 44696
Founded: Apr 01, 2018
Democratic Socialists

Postby Kowani » Sat Dec 12, 2020 9:48 am

The Greater Ohio Valley wrote:
Kowani wrote:Unfortunately, GHK has me blocked, so I can’t respond to his bs.
But if someone could tell him that the court didn’t start at 9 justices for me, that would be wonderful.

Ask and you shall receive.

If I am ever in Ohio, I shall buy you something
Maybe donuts, everyone loves donuts
Abolitionism in the North has leagued itself with Radical Democracy, and so the Slave Power was forced to ally itself with the Money Power; that is the great fact of the age.




The triumph of the Democracy is essential to the struggle of popular liberty


Currently Rehabilitating: Martin Van Buren, Benjamin Harrison, and Woodrow Wilson
Currently Vilifying: George Washington, Theodore Roosevelt, and Jimmy Carter

User avatar
The Greater Ohio Valley
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7076
Founded: Jan 19, 2013
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby The Greater Ohio Valley » Sat Dec 12, 2020 9:52 am

Kowani wrote:
The Greater Ohio Valley wrote:Ask and you shall receive.

If I am ever in Ohio, I shall buy you something
Maybe donuts, everyone loves donuts

Mmmmm, donuts.
Fly me to the moon on an irradiated manhole cover.
- Free speech
- Weapons rights
- Democracy
- LGBTQ+ rights
- Racial equality
- Gender/sexual equality
- Voting rights
- Universal healthcare
- Workers rights
- Drug decriminalization
- Cannabis legalization
- Due process
- Rehabilitative justice
- Religious freedom
- Choice
- Environmental protections
- Secularism
ANTI
- Fascism/Nazism
- Conservatism
- Nationalism
- Authoritarianism/Totalitarianism
- Traditionalism
- Ethnic/racial supremacy
- Racism
- Sexism
- Transphobia
- Homophobia
- Religious extremism
- Laissez-faire capitalism
- Warmongering
- Accelerationism
- Isolationism
- Theocracy
- Anti-intellectualism
- Climate change denialism

User avatar
Thermodolia
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 76278
Founded: Oct 07, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Thermodolia » Sat Dec 12, 2020 9:54 am

Repubblica Fascista Sociale Italiana wrote:
Ifreann wrote:Turns out Tulsi Gabbard is a transphobe, so it's probably for the best that she didn't get anywhere in the primary.

Stealing a post from the trans thread:

She realizes suffering from a clinical psychological condition doesn’t allow them to have an unfair advantage in sports

At this point, the term "transphobia" really has no meaning anymore

Much like racist, fascist, and hundreds of other terms
Male, State Socialist, Cultural Nationalist, Welfare Chauvinist lives somewhere in AZ I'm GAY! Disabled US Military Veteran
I'm agent #69 in the Gaystapo!
>The Sons of Adam: I'd crown myself monarch... cuz why not?
>>Dumb Ideologies: Why not turn yourself into a penguin and build an igloo at the centre of the Earth?
>Xovland: I keep getting ads for printer ink. Sometimes, when you get that feeling down there, you have to look at some steamy printer pictures.
Click for Da Funies

RIP Dya

User avatar
Kowani
Post Czar
 
Posts: 44696
Founded: Apr 01, 2018
Democratic Socialists

Postby Kowani » Sat Dec 12, 2020 9:54 am

Abolitionism in the North has leagued itself with Radical Democracy, and so the Slave Power was forced to ally itself with the Money Power; that is the great fact of the age.




The triumph of the Democracy is essential to the struggle of popular liberty


Currently Rehabilitating: Martin Van Buren, Benjamin Harrison, and Woodrow Wilson
Currently Vilifying: George Washington, Theodore Roosevelt, and Jimmy Carter

User avatar
The Greater Ohio Valley
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7076
Founded: Jan 19, 2013
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby The Greater Ohio Valley » Sat Dec 12, 2020 10:03 am

Repubblica Fascista Sociale Italiana wrote:
Ifreann wrote:Turns out Tulsi Gabbard is a transphobe, so it's probably for the best that she didn't get anywhere in the primary.

Stealing a post from the trans thread:

She realizes suffering from a clinical psychological condition doesn’t allow them to have an unfair advantage in sports

At this point, the term "transphobia" really has no meaning anymore

Transphobia is a catch-all term for intolerance, hatred, disgust, discomfort, anger, fear of and discrimination and violence against trans people because the meanings and definitions of words tend to change with time and society and that's what the meaning and defintion of Transphobia has settled on with the current time and society. Can't help that things don't remain stagnant in their meanings forever.
Fly me to the moon on an irradiated manhole cover.
- Free speech
- Weapons rights
- Democracy
- LGBTQ+ rights
- Racial equality
- Gender/sexual equality
- Voting rights
- Universal healthcare
- Workers rights
- Drug decriminalization
- Cannabis legalization
- Due process
- Rehabilitative justice
- Religious freedom
- Choice
- Environmental protections
- Secularism
ANTI
- Fascism/Nazism
- Conservatism
- Nationalism
- Authoritarianism/Totalitarianism
- Traditionalism
- Ethnic/racial supremacy
- Racism
- Sexism
- Transphobia
- Homophobia
- Religious extremism
- Laissez-faire capitalism
- Warmongering
- Accelerationism
- Isolationism
- Theocracy
- Anti-intellectualism
- Climate change denialism

User avatar
Flarbinia
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5690
Founded: Apr 29, 2012
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Flarbinia » Sat Dec 12, 2020 10:12 am

Kowani wrote:Also, Google, Twitter, and Facebook don’t ban you because “your beliefs don’t align” they do it because your beliefs are unprofitable.

What's the difference?

User avatar
Omniabstracta
Diplomat
 
Posts: 950
Founded: Mar 24, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Omniabstracta » Sat Dec 12, 2020 10:24 am

Thermodolia wrote:
Omniabstracta wrote:Repealing or modifying section 230 does nothing to stop “internet censorship” or whatever the hell you want to call it. In fact, it would force social media companies to be more in moderating their content, and would also damage smaller forums and sites unable to expend the resources that a Twitter or Facebook has to automate or otherwise handle moderation of content, and unable to withstand legal challenges.

Now it wouldn’t say that modification of 230 wouldn’t do anything. Quite the opposite. You could definitely keep the part about liability there but demand that overt censorship stop unless it is an illegal act.

I’m not particularly convinced that such a provision would pass constitutional muster. Tip-toeing the line between “neutrality” and “compelled speech” is difficult, and looking at the history of something like the FCC fairness doctrine, such a restriction has only been upheld under very limited circumstances. Back in the sixties, when radio bands and television channels were severely limited, “fairness” was upheld because of scarcity, because if no licensed broadcaster gave airtime to certain views then those views wouldn’t be heard at all. That perception had already fallen by the wayside by 1985; in the modern world where literally anybody can create a website to host their opinions, thoughts, and news, the idea that enforcing neutrality on platforms would do anything but further chill first amendment discourse is a bit of a strange one.

This is a more in-depth look at the idea.
Last edited by Omniabstracta on Sat Dec 12, 2020 10:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
"It was golden, purple, violet, gray and blue. It lighted every peak, crevasse and ridge of the nearby mountain range with a clarity and beauty that cannot be described but must be seen to be imagined. It was that beauty that the great poets dream about but describe most poorly and inadequately..."

User avatar
The Black Forrest
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 55602
Founded: Antiquity
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby The Black Forrest » Sat Dec 12, 2020 10:35 am

Glorious Hong Kong wrote:Trump's Supreme Court losses are further evidence that America remains as democratic, and the judiciary as independent, as ever. Nothing the President does between now and Inauguration Day can prevent Joe Biden from succeeding him. Donald Trump was never a threat to democracy because he never could be.


Trump is not happy his assumed lackeys didn’t support him. He has already ran a twitter rant about it.

Trump is a threat. His endless lies and the fact for whatever reason his followers rarely if ever question anything are a threat.

“The election was rigged”.
“How?”
“If just was!”

That is the logic of many many people.

Had he been the president of the Philippines, I would, of course, have a very different take and I would never have supported him because dictatorships suck. But this is America we're talking about, not some Third World backwater or Second World post-communist state, or Hong Kong. Freedom and democracy will endure in America for generations to come.


That makes no sense. The fact he is a wannabe authoritarian dictator makes it ok?

You support him. Just embrace it.

That's unless the Democrats manage to win the Georgia Senate runoffs and pack the Supreme Court with hundreds of Democrat-appointed justices, undermining the separation of powers, judicial independence, and threatening the long-term health of American democracy. It means that Democrats will ironically be able to challenge any election result in court, win, and remain in power indefinitely. Corruption and authoritarianism will inevitably take hold and Democrat officials will be able to abuse their authority with complete impunity.


“Court packing” isn’t against the law. The amount of SCOTUS judges has changed sixteen times.

You complain about democratic appointed justices and yet you are silent about the republican justices. The republicans said only a conservative should be allowed to replace Scalia. They ignored that argument when RBG died.

Seriously; the world is ending when only the other side is doing something gets old.

My country's judicial independence was significantly undermined for many years by a certain, slimy, Islamist, antisemitic P.O.S. whom I will not name, and countless elections were stolen by his party through their dirty tactics, unprecedented electoral fraud, and carefully-timed power outages. It took a record turnout, a massive corruption scandal, an unpopular goods & services tax, and a huge amount of public anger just to miraculously topple a corrupt, authoritarian, racist oligarchy of more than 60 years. Pretty much everything Trump has accused Democrats of doing happened in my country, and it will happen in America too if the Supreme Court is packed. The complete absence of an independent judiciary never ends well for ordinary people. Hong Kong is now going the same way.


:D. No comments about all the things Trump said, tried, and did. Funny that.

Trump's only saving grace would be if his surrogates in Georgia win the runoffs next month and avert such an existential threat to democracy. I had no idea there could be more than nine justices. I thought the Constitution expressly forbade that. A Republican-controlled Senate is all that stands between democracy and tyranny if Biden and the Democrats push ahead with this insane idea. Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue have to win at all costs.


Trump’s save grace was losing and losing badly. He is a “one trick” pony. What worked in 2016 didn’t carry it. People get pissed when you fail to manage things like a pandemic. People get pissed when you tell lies all the time.....even lie when you don’t have to. He was dumb when it came to mailin ballots and tried to make them more or less illegal. Of course, he had a different message about Florida when he learned Florida uses them all the time and they are a Republican strong hold.

Even now; he has been the best weapon for turning Georgia Blue. “It’s all rigged!!!!!!!, they cheated, blah blah blah”. Now many conservative/republican voters are saying they won’t bother as it’s rigged. :D. He is such a moron.

Those who loudly and openly advocate for court-packing, such as AOC, are the real threat to democracy. They are doing this purely to spite the millions of Americans who had the temerity and the sheer audacity to vote for the "wrong" candidate in 2016 and 2020.


Again; not illegal to do. The sky isn’t falling. AOC could have simply suggested that as a political stunt with the republicans efforts to pack the courts. You seem to be rather silent about old McC’s efforts to make sure judges all have a certain ideological bent.

It's absolutely vindictive and petty. Not to mention the proposal to draw up lists of names of suspected Trump supporters such as myself, or send Antica Blackshirts to physically intimidate and assault Trump supporters in the streets while chanting Black Lives Matter just as communist Whiteshirts have assaulted peaceful protesters and commuters in Hong Kong on multiple occasions and gotten away with it.


Lists? The last time lists were used were Republicans. The only thing that is probably happening are labels. Many people view maga supporters to be of lessor intelligence.

Why would you mention yourself? You are not in the US?....well at least claimed to be.

AOC and her far-left ilk and woke enablers seek to turn America into another totalitarian, communist-ruled Hong Kong. They will initially pretend to be the champions of the oppressed, the sworn enemies of systemic and entrenched injustice, and the torchbearers of "real" freedom and democracy, only to renege on their false promises the moment they're in power. The moment they taste real power, they will rapidly lose interest in "defunding the police". They will be even more pro-police and pro-law & order than Trump has ever been.


Meh. You really need examples rather then the sky is falling!!!

The moment moderate centrist Joe Biden and his ultra-woke, feminist, virtue-signaling, IdPol, SJW running mate Kamala Harris have outlived their usefulness, they will do everything in their power to replace him with someone more closely aligned with their far-left ideals. They will seek to purge moderate, neoliberal Democrats from the Party just like Hitler decapitated the Strasserist faction from the Nazi Party in the Night of the Long Knives and proclaimed himself Fuhrer. They will go on to seize absolute control of every aspect of American life and relinquish none of it. It always ends the same way with these crypto-communists. Always. No exceptions.


Sorry I just checked the only thing falling right now is the rain.

These communists seek to burn the West down and democracy along with it. They take their own freedoms for granted and hate their own countries so much they are prepared to wage a Cultural Revolution to eliminate liberal, Western values and even the slightest hint of wrongthink, and then proceed to deceive, threaten, and intimidate the rest of the world into submission with their totalitarian alternative to Western-style democracy just as Communist China is doing right now. Communism is an insidious, universal threat both to freedom and democracy as well as other, more conservative, centuries-old cultures and traditions, and requires a global, coordinated response from a coalition of classical liberals and liberal conservatives who cherish everything the West stands for.


So much anger. I would offer you a pint or a joint(it is legal here).

Relaaaax dude. AOC is a flash in the pan. She is great at getting headlines and attention. To have a revolution; you need to be able to sway enough people. You also have to keep those people engaged. Trump had his revolution and failed to keep enough people engaged. Stacey Abrams beat his behind in Georgia. The other states which lost him the election?.....he did that all on his own.
*I am a master proofreader after I click Submit.
* There is actually a War on Christmas. But Christmas started it, with it's unparalleled aggression against the Thanksgiving Holiday, and now Christmas has seized much Lebensraum in November, and are pushing into October. The rest of us seek to repel these invaders, and push them back to the status quo ante bellum Black Friday border. -Trotskylvania
* Silence Is Golden But Duct Tape Is Silver.
* I felt like Ayn Rand cornered me at a party, and three minutes in I found my first objection to what she was saying, but she kept talking without interruption for ten more days. - Max Barry talking about Atlas Shrugged

User avatar
Necroghastia
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9634
Founded: May 11, 2019
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Necroghastia » Sat Dec 12, 2020 10:38 am

Glorious Hong Kong wrote:That's unless the Democrats manage to win the Georgia Senate runoffs and pack the Supreme Court with hundreds of Democrat-appointed justices, undermining the separation of powers, judicial independence, and threatening the long-term health of American democracy. It means that Democrats will ironically be able to challenge any election result in court, win, and remain in power indefinitely. Corruption and authoritarianism will inevitably take hold and Democrat officials will be able to abuse their authority with complete impunity.

Just like the Republicans right? Oh wait...

Trump's only saving grace would be if his surrogates in Georgia win the runoffs next month and avert such an existential threat to democracy. I had no idea there could be more than nine justices. I thought the Constitution expressly forbade that. A Republican-controlled Senate is all that stands between democracy and tyranny if Biden and the Democrats push ahead with this insane idea. Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue have to win at all costs.

As others have already mentioned, the SCOTUS wasn't always 9. It's been raised before.
Those who loudly and openly advocate for court-packing, such as AOC, are the real threat to democracy. They are doing this purely to spite the millions of Americans who had the temerity and the sheer audacity to vote for the "wrong" candidate in 2016 and 2020. It's absolutely vindictive and petty.

Rich, coming from the guy who wants WW3 to happen.
Not to mention the proposal to draw up lists of names of suspected Trump supporters such as myself, or send Antifa Blackshirts to physically intimidate and assault Trump supporters in the streets while chanting Black Lives Matter just as communist Whiteshirts have assaulted peaceful protesters and commuters in Hong Kong on multiple occasions and gotten away with it.

I'll take "Things That Never Happened" for $1000.
AOC and her far-left ilk and woke enablers seek to turn America into another totalitarian, communist-ruled Hong Kong.

HK is not communist.
They will initially pretend to be the champions of the oppressed, the sworn enemies of systemic and entrenched injustice, and the torchbearers of "real" freedom and democracy, only to renege on their false promises the moment they're in power. The moment they taste real power, they will rapidly lose interest in "defunding the police". They will be even more pro-police and pro-law & order than Trump has ever been.

lol
Yeah it makes sense you can't fathom the idea that some people have principles.
The moment moderate centrist Joe Biden and his ultra-woke, feminist, virtue-signaling, IdPol, SJW running mate Kamala Harris

Dear fucking god I wish she was as cool as you made her sound.
have outlived their usefulness, they will do everything in their power to replace him with someone more closely aligned with their far-left ideals. They will seek to purge moderate, neoliberal Democrats from the Party

Would that I could have as much faith as you.
just like Hitler decapitated the Strasserist faction from the Nazi Party in the Night of the Long Knives and proclaimed himself Fuhrer. They will go on to seize absolute control of every aspect of American life and relinquish none of it. It always ends the same way with these crypto-communists. Always. No exceptions.

These communists seek to burn the West down and democracy along with it. They take their own freedoms for granted and hate their own countries so much they are prepared to wage a Cultural Revolution to eliminate liberal, Western values and even the slightest hint of wrongthink, and then proceed to deceive, threaten, and intimidate the rest of the world into submission with their totalitarian alternative to Western-style democracy

Source?
just as Communist China

Not a thing that exists.
is doing right now. Communism is an insidious, universal threat both to freedom and democracy as well as other, more conservative, centuries-old cultures and traditions, and requires a global, coordinated response from a coalition of classical liberals and liberal conservatives who cherish everything the West stands for.

*Authoritarianism, not communism. Which you would know if you actually bothered to read anything on the relevant subjects.
The Land of Spooky Scary Skeletons!

Pronouns: she/her

User avatar
The Archregimancy
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 29249
Founded: Aug 01, 2005
Democratic Socialists

Postby The Archregimancy » Sat Dec 12, 2020 10:42 am

Glorious Hong Kong wrote:I had no idea there could be more than nine justices. I thought the Constitution expressly forbade that.


The number of justices is not set in the US Constitution, and has fluctuated over time.

The Court originally consisted of six justices - the Chief Justice and five associate justices. Initial custom was for the number of justices to reflect the number of judicial circuits in the United States. So the number of justices grew with the number of circuits; to seven in 1807, nine in 1837, and then ten in 1863. An attempt was made in 1866 to reduce the number of justices to seven by not replacing retiring justices, but shortly after it was reduced to eight justices, Congress then increased the number back up to nine in 1869. The size of the Court has remained unchanged since; the last serious attempt to change its size was under Franklin Roosevelt, when he introduced proposals in 1937 that could have increased the Court up to 15, depending on the number of justices over the age of 70 who decided not to retire.

Anyway, short version is that it's Congress that sets the size of the Supreme Court, not the US Constitution, and the number of justices fluctuated regularly between the ratification of the Constitution and 1869.

Any Originalist would presumably therefore be fine with Congress deciding to change the size of the Court again given that it was the clear intent of the Founders that this power should reside with the Legislative Branch. Were the original custom followed of keeping the number of justices in line with the number of judicial circuits, then the Supreme Court should be increased to 11 justices (excluding the District of Columbia Circuit and the Federal Circuit).

User avatar
Genivaria
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 69785
Founded: Mar 29, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Genivaria » Sat Dec 12, 2020 11:00 am

The Archregimancy wrote:
Glorious Hong Kong wrote:I had no idea there could be more than nine justices. I thought the Constitution expressly forbade that.


The number of justices is not set in the US Constitution, and has fluctuated over time.

The Court originally consisted of six justices - the Chief Justice and five associate justices. Initial custom was for the number of justices to reflect the number of judicial circuits in the United States. So the number of justices grew with the number of circuits; to seven in 1807, nine in 1837, and then ten in 1863. An attempt was made in 1866 to reduce the number of justices to seven by not replacing retiring justices, but shortly after it was reduced to eight justices, Congress then increased the number back up to nine in 1869. The size of the Court has remained unchanged since; the last serious attempt to change its size was under Franklin Roosevelt, when he introduced proposals in 1937 that could have increased the Court up to 15, depending on the number of justices over the age of 70 who decided not to retire.

Anyway, short version is that it's Congress that sets the size of the Supreme Court, not the US Constitution, and the number of justices fluctuated regularly between the ratification of the Constitution and 1869.

Any Originalist would presumably therefore be fine with Congress deciding to change the size of the Court again given that it was the clear intent of the Founders that this power should reside with the Legislative Branch. Were the original custom followed of keeping the number of justices in line with the number of judicial circuits, then the Supreme Court should be increased to 11 justices (excluding the District of Columbia Circuit and the Federal Circuit).

One could also argue that an Originalist would support it being brought back down to 5 since that was the original de facto number.
The logic of "Just because it doesn't say we can't change it doesn't mean we should."

At least if I'm understanding correctly.
Anarcho-Communist, Democratic Confederalist
"The Earth isn't dying, it's being killed. And those killing it have names and addresses." -Utah Phillips

User avatar
Sicilian Imperial-Capitalist Empire
Diplomat
 
Posts: 773
Founded: Oct 27, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby Sicilian Imperial-Capitalist Empire » Sat Dec 12, 2020 11:27 am

Welp, there's GHK's extremely hot take.

Most Americans here are probably not taking that rant seriously, considering we know how our politics work better than anyone else, and what GHK is saying makes no sense if you know the context it's written in.

We only call things communist to scare people, not because they're actually communist. There's no real danger coming from either political party, they're too moderate to do anything to reform this country or destroy it entirely.

In addition, to add insult to injury, when you're on that lifetime position of the supreme court, you don't have to rule strategically anymore. That's why, for example, Roe V. Wade was decided in a "conservative" court. That's also why ACB and the Supreme Court now didn't even bother looking at Trump's court cases.

tl;dr, Supreme Court justices act more as referees and interpreters on the laws rather than an extension of partisan politics. Any fear mongering from Democrats and Republicans can easily be dismissed by the facts and evidence presented.
Last edited by Sicilian Imperial-Capitalist Empire on Sat Dec 12, 2020 11:34 am, edited 2 times in total.
I'm a master at arguing right after I hit "submit"

Veni, Vidi, Vici. I came, I saw, I conquered.

User avatar
Ifreann
Post Overlord
 
Posts: 159079
Founded: Aug 07, 2005
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Ifreann » Sat Dec 12, 2020 11:32 am

Glorious Hong Kong wrote:Trump's Supreme Court losses are further evidence that America remains as democratic, and the judiciary as independent, as ever. Nothing the President does between now and Inauguration Day can prevent Joe Biden from succeeding him. Donald Trump was never a threat to democracy because he never could be.

The fact that he is failing does not mean that he is not a threat to American democracy, such as it is. On the contrary, the fact that you need the judiciary shows that he is a threat, in the same way that needing to use a panic room shows that there is a threat, even if the panic room is protecting you from it.


Asherahan wrote:
Ifreann wrote:A separate category in sports for the one transgender kid in a school. I'm sure that'll work out great.

In serious sport completions Ifreann not in school. You are a smart person don't tell me you couldn't figure that I would say this.

Democratic congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard has introduced a bill that would use Title IX rules to block transgender girls from competing in women's sports programs and activities run by federally funded schools.

https://www.newsweek.com/tulsi-gabbard- ... ts-1554068


Repubblica Fascista Sociale Italiana wrote:
Ifreann wrote:Turns out Tulsi Gabbard is a transphobe, so it's probably for the best that she didn't get anywhere in the primary.

Stealing a post from the trans thread:

She realizes suffering from a clinical psychological condition doesn’t allow them to have an unfair advantage in sports

Being transgender isn't "suffering from a clinical psychological condition".

At this point, the term "transphobia" really has no meaning anymore

Attempts to limit and simplify vocabulary is one of the features of ur-fascism identified by Umberto Eco in his essay of the same name, so it makes sense that a fascist would prefer it if words that describe their hateful beliefs were seen as meaningless.

User avatar
Tarsonis
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 27311
Founded: Sep 20, 2017
Democratic Socialists

Postby Tarsonis » Sat Dec 12, 2020 1:12 pm

I know it's tradition for the Commander and Chief to be present at the Army Navy Game, but..*long beleaguered sigh*
NS Keyboard Warrior since 2005
Ecclesiastes 1:18 "For in much wisdom is much vexation, and those who increase knowledge increase sorrow"
Thucydides: “The society that separates its scholars from its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting by fools.”
1 Corinthians 5:12 "What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?"
Galatians 6:7 "Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for you reap whatever you sow."
T. Stevens: "I don't hold with equality in all things, but I believe in equality under the Law."
James I of Aragon "Have you ever considered that our position is Idolatry to the Rabbi?"
Debating Christian Theology with Non-Christians pretty much anybody be like

User avatar
Kargintina the Third
Senator
 
Posts: 4070
Founded: Dec 17, 2019
Ex-Nation

Postby Kargintina the Third » Sat Dec 12, 2020 1:16 pm

Tarsonis wrote:I know it's tradition for the Commander and Chief to be present at the Army Navy Game, but..*long beleaguered sigh*

It’s ten minutes away from me
Representative Earl Tenson (R-MT-All)

Senate candidate Christina Mudale (R-AL)

Senator Nickolai Dernilski (D-OH)

Houston Mayor Harold Baines (D-TX)

User avatar
Ranoria
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 19790
Founded: Mar 29, 2013
Capitalizt

Postby Ranoria » Sat Dec 12, 2020 1:22 pm

Ifreann wrote:
Shrillland wrote:
Meh, it's purely symbolic at this point, she'll be out of Congress in a few weeks.

Sure, but it's symbolism for other transphobes that she hates trans people too.


Asherahan wrote:I do not know the context so I ain't gonna yay or nay what Ifreann and Hediacrana say on the matter because they may be correct on Tulsi being a Transphobe but I do believe that Trans Girls and Vice Versa trans men should have their own categories in sports.

A separate category in sports for the one transgender kid in a school. I'm sure that'll work out great.


Ranoria wrote:Trans women most definitely shouldn't be allowed in women's sports, if fairness is your primary concern. The argument to be made is whether or not it's worth sacrificing an equal playing field in order to be more inclusive to those who are going through/have been through a transition.

I hate to break it to you but there are biological differences there that don't go away for a very, very long time. It takes around 10-15 years for the effects of heightened levels of testosterone to disappear from the skeletal muscles. It'd take me a few minutes do dig up the links, and they were done on former AAS users, but the concept still applies. It's actually a great comparison, probably similar to a woman being on AAS. While a male starting AAS typically does 500 mg per week, a woman is probably going to be closer to 3-6 mg per day if she's using actual T. Men generate 6 mg, on average, daily. So at the most, a women doing steroids has the testosterone levels of a natural guy.

(point being, above, that the effect of having more testosterone through AAS lasts for 10-15 years, and that only women on the highest recommended dosages of test when using AAS even get to a natural man's test production)

More commonly used for women is anavar at 5-10 mg every day, but again at much lower ranges than what a man would take(50 mg daily). Anavar, like any anabolic, causes the 10-15 year competitive advantages I described above


(It has to do with the half-lives of the myonuclei in the muscles and how long they last for. Basically, going to the dark side and juicing up will give you a competitive advantage for 10-15 years after you stop using, barring other side effects of AAS)

Your speculation about trans women competing in sports effectively being on anabolic steroids relative to cis women is fascinating, not least because these conversations seem to always revolve around trans women competing against cis women and never trans men, non-binary people, or intersex people, but it's thoroughly irrelevant. Trans women already compete against cis women in a variety of sports. If they have such a huge advantage then instead of talking about athletes taking steroids, show us all the trans women dominating every women's sport they're allowed to compete in.

Further, we're talking about children's school sports here. Do you remember being a teenager? When I was 13 a bunch of girls in my class were head and shoulders taller than me and most of the other boys. By the time I was 18 I was taller than them. Would you say that I actually had an advantage in sports the whole time? Over people who were significantly taller, faster, and probably stronger than me?


I'm not far removed from my teenage years. I'm going to tell you right now that if you're arguing that the average woman is at the same level as the average man in terms of strength, speed, or athletics in general, you have no basis for any of this, and you're completely throwing any credibility you have on the topic out the window. If we were to simply merge men's and women's sports, there would be very, very few girls who would start. You can look at HS level, professional, olympic, any of it, women cannot, in most sports, perform to a man's level. That's a fact. Assuming the same level of training, yes, you would have an advantage. Now, height we can't change, but assuming the same level/effort in training and nutrition, yes, you have a distinct advantage.

You do understand there's a reason that testosterone is the most popular performance enhancing drug in the world, right? Discounting it's effects, again, makes your credibility on the topic nonexistent.

Honestly, do you work out? Do you or have you ever done any serious strength training, running anything, for a long period of time? I don't mean showing up to the gym, I mean do you or have you ever consistently worked out seriously, with an understanding of what you're doing? Have you ever competed in athletics? Your lack of understanding on the topic is baffling if you have. And it's okay if you haven't! Seriously, fitness/athletics aren't a priority for everyone and that's totally fine. If that's the case, it explains why you have the perception that men and women's sports being separated is unreasonable.

The most any woman I know has squatted is 340 pounds, and I was beyond impressed. That is more than most men can squat, maybe more than most men ever will. But that takes someone busting their ass to outperform others. To simply toss work out the window, which is what I assume you're doing, means you have no argument. I can rattle off at least a dozen guys I know who can do that much weight no problem. And take into account that women are normally shorter, which helps in that regard.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_O ... _athletics

Or we can point out track and field records for the Olympics, ability to dunk in the NBA/WNBA, strength records, where the 100kg+ weight class(largest) for women is comparable to the 62 kg(smallest) class for men.

Having separate categories for trans men and women is a decent and maybe the best solution, but it would be difficult to implement due to sheer numbers, distance, mileage, etc. However, based on how smaller schools allow their students to participate in other schools' sports if they don't sponsor that sport, perhaps either a club system could be established or certain schools could pool together to make their teams. Difficult, but certainly not impossible.

So effectively ban trans people from school sports. Cool.

I literally never said that. I actually proposed a solution that has some precedent with other smaller sports that schools can't individually support. In the United States some schools don't actually have lacrosse or rugby teams and the like, so athletes who want to participate in lacrosse or rugby will drive to another school nearby in order to play. It isn't perfect, but it could work.

But if you're arguing that trans women can fairly participate in women's sports, consider that there's a reason most sports are separated in the first place.

Conservative social beliefs around the physical inferiority of women to men.

What, did you think it was based on science? Broad trends in men being stronger than women in certain respects are just that, broad trends. That doesn't translate to it always being unfair for men to compete against women in every sport. Not every sport is a simple competition of muscular strength, and even when they are, there are plenty of women who are stronger than a lot of men.


Broad trends that are largely true. I'm not even sure what point you're trying to make here. That a woman with a very significantly higher level of training is stronger than a man? Sure. Guess what? Athletes aren't untrained. If you start a 14 year old boy and girl in the exact same weight training program, assuming they start out at the same strength, it would very quickly become apparent who has an advantage.

Of course there are some women who are stronger than some men. With the same level of training and nutrition and the like, a man will outperform a women almost every time. I don't even know what point you're trying to make here. Yeah, a woman who strength trains (with a good bit of time and dedication) is going to be stronger than a guy who doesn't normally. A woman participating in a similar training program as a man (such as two basketball players), won't be.

As much of a hot-button this issue is, reality can't be ignored. Beyond that, most trans women aren't able to succeed in getting T levels to that of a normal female range.
Only the highest suppressing quartile of trans women successfully suppress their testosterone levels to normal ranges. The next quartile are almost always below male ranges, but not at female ranges. One quartile failed to achieve significant suppression of testosterone

And again, 10-15 years before the effects of heightened testosterone are gone.

Levels of T in Men, Women, Trans Women
Sex         average range
Male 270-1070 ng/dL
Female 15-70 ng/dL
Trans Female


Ridiculous difference, right?

What difference? You haven't put any average range for trans women. And even if you did, it's absurd to suggest that fairness in sports is a simple function of average ranges of testosterone. And again, trans women do compete against cis women. Trans women are allowed to compete in women's events in the Olympics. Instead of talking about the amount of testosterone in their blood, show me the medal tables that are full of trans women taking gold, silver, and bronze and leaving cis women in the dust. That would show a clear advantage.

Okay.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/ ... 856486002/
My daughter would have qualified for the New England regionals in the 55-meter dash in Spring 2019, but instead, the top two spots went to biological boys who identify as girls. She lost her chance to compete and instead had to watch from the stands.


https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/voices/2019/09/27/transgender-athletes-supreme-court-sex-equality-column/2421776001/
And track isn’t the only impacted sport. A biological male competing as a female powerlifter after undergoing 11 months of hormone replacement therapy set multiple world records in the women's category at a 100% Raw Powerlifting Federation competition in April. Just one month longer, and the athlete's hormone therapy regimen would have been considered complete...

In 2014, a transgender athlete who was born male and underwent sex reassignment surgery competed in a female mixed martial arts competition. Not only was opponent Tamikka Brents tko'd (a technical knockout), she was left with a concussion and a broken skull. Biological males are even beating out biological females for qualification to compete in female-only Olympic competitions.


https://www.wired.com/story/the-gloriou ... up-sports/

And I did provide plenty of links to articles advising that only 25% of trans women are able to suppress testosterone levels to normal female ranges, and that another 25% never achieved notable suppression. Notably, there's also a relatively low number of transgender women, and there have been none on record who competed in the Olympics openly.

It's not fair but it's true. So the issue of a level playing field is probably where whoever you were talking about is coming from. Because what we're looking at is that 1/4 of trans women would have no competitive advantage 10 years after achieving steady suppression. But that isn't practical, obviously

Like I said though, an argument can be made that in the interest of inclusivity, trans women should be allowed to participate in women's sports at the cost of the other women involved. My take on this is that it would be much more practical for team sports (i.e. basketball or volleyball) than it would be for an individual (wrestling), because in a team sport very rarely is one athlete going to be able to do it all. But I can see where you're coming from in that sense.

I don't know why you think you can see where I'm coming from when talking about something you said, not me.

iirc you were advocating for trans women being allowed to participate in women's athletics. I was pointing out that you cannot make an argument for a level playing field, but you can make a strong argument for doing so for inclusivity's sake.

Now, here's a more fringe argument that I find intriguing (but not one I particularly agree with): Some men have a shitload more testosterone than others. I can dig up this link to, but a dude that got busted for getting steroids to Olympic athletes without getting caught for years legitimately thought he was promoting fairness in the sport. So maybe the dividing line should be based off of T levels? Just a thought.

Olympic swimmer Michael Phelps owes his success in part to a quirk of his biology. His body naturally produces less lactic acid than most other people. Lactic acid build-up is what causes your muscles to hurt after prolonged use, and Phelps just doesn't experience that as much as other people. This advantage has nothing to do with the amount of testosterone in his blood.
[/quote]

Oh, it helps. But that's called a mutation, it's an outlier. Phelps is not the only male swimmer who has outperformed women. There's also stuff called the "Hercules Gene," it's a myostatin deficiency. I'm not sure what Michael Phelps, alone, has to do with the conversation. Men largely outperform women when it comes to Olympic swimming, and almost anyone competing in the Olympics, male or female, is a genetic freak as well as an incredibly hard worker.Again I'll point to Olympic records.

TLDR: Trans women cannot participate in women's sports, on a level playing field, in a practical time frame based on our current medicines and whatnot. An argument can, however, be made that they should be allowed to participate based for the sake of conclusiveness. An alternative, if radical and perhaps impossible, solution might be to separate sports based on testosterone levels rather than gender.

edit: for a second disclaimer, I know way more about AAS than I should.

Trans women do compete in women's sports. The advantages that you claim they have should bear out in the results of actual competitions rather than just blood tests.


Okay, here's some more.
Karolinksa Institute in Sweden also conducted research that suggested testosterone suppression for transgender women has little effect on reducing muscle strength.

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/782557v1

https://www.bbc.com/sport/cycling/50097423
McKinnon won her qualifying race in 11.649 seconds - a record in the female 35-39 sprint category - with American Dawn Orwick second in 12.063.


At the 1988 Olympics, Florence Griffith-Joyner established a women’s record of 10.49 seconds in the 100-meter dash that no one has come close to touching ever since (in fact, there are unfounded suspicions that she was using a performance-enhancing drug).

Her epic sprint was ho-hum for a male. According to the International Association of Athletics Federations, there were 15 men in the United States whose best time was 10.49 in the 100-meter in 2018, and they were merely tied for 217th fastest last year.


Just another point, women vs men in running.

Now, here's a biggie: You claim that my beliefs are conservative, and wrong, regarding physical capabilities. So in that case, are you just saying women don't work as hard as men? Don't keep up with their diet as well? Fill me in. If it isn't biology, then what is the difference? I've given you plenty of information here on the differences in the raw physical ability of men and women.

I'll also point out that I never really said whether or not trans women should or should not compete against women. I'm not sure what the answer is there. It's level playing field vs inclusivity. It's a tough question. The only point I made is that, if you are arguing for trans women being allowed to play against women, then inclusivity is the argument, because there is no real debate in terms of physical ability or competitive advantages that come with being born male.
Last edited by Ranoria on Sat Dec 12, 2020 1:26 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Fan of football, the Murican kind. But soccer is cool too! Just not really my thing. C(:^D/-<
I go by Ran. Unless, of course, you want to type out Ranoria. That's your decision.
Lumi is my NS mom
Champions: NSCF 20, NSCF 22, NSCF 27, World Bowl 42, World Bowl 43, World Bowl 46

Hosting: Co-Host WB 44, Host WB 46

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Cetaros, Divided Free Land, Duvniask, El Lazaro, Eternal Algerstonia, Google [Bot], Hispida, Hurdergaryp, Necroghastia, Neo-American States, Port Caverton, Quessia, Senkaku, Shrillland, Snake Worship Football Club, Tarsonis, The Acolyte Confederacy, The Jamesian Republic, Vistulange

Advertisement

Remove ads