The Refuge of the Toads

#46621

Malky wrote:Doesn't Semenya actually support the case that external genitalia are not sufficient to decide gender? In "her" case she has a male karyotype with female external genitalia - her hormonal status is clearly nearer to male than female mainly due to the presence of testes which would be in line with the preposition.

One not-so-minor correction. Your first sentence should be: "...external genitalia are not sufficient to decide sex?" Otherwise, I agree.

#46622

OK - since everyone seems to be so agreeable.

Isn't testosterone level also determined by race? Specifically, black people generally have higher levels.

Finally, sporting events can be segregated as they should always have been. I wonder if I can get any SJWs or BLM advocates to agree.

That gentleman at the 1936 olympics obviously wasn't wrong about everything.

#46623

MarcusAu wrote:Isn't testosterone level also determined by race? Specifically, black people generally have higher levels.

Yes, the means differ by race, but the distributions overlap quite a bit, so the odds of a person of a given race being the highest in a random sample (including many races) is not very strong. And, note also, that blacks don't have the highest mean; it's something like Indians or Egyptians, IIRC.

#46624

First: the 800m race winners are not trans.

Second:
Kirbmarc, I think your explanation (on immediate issue & much larger context) using Haidt's model was excellent.

Another article on Olympics, sex/gender, & the 800m:
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/08/20/sp ... eters.html (mobile link)

Written as opinion, posted as news.

Interesting to compare the top comments as rated by readers vs by NYT.

It's a complicated situation, & I thought the NY mag article added useful background info.

As others have pointed out, many top athletes have some in-born anatomical or physiologic feature that allows them to perform better in certain sports than most other athletes in those sports - though of course training , hard work, etc are also part of the equation.

But most sports are not organized by physiologic or anatomic features (weight class in wrestling being an exception). There isn't a distinction in competitive sports made between those with low, average, and high ability to carry & use oxygen; nor those with short, average, and long measurements (height, arm length, etc). And so on.

There is, however, a distinction made between men's divisions & women's divisions, in most sports at least.

Athletes have to be in 1 group or the other to compete (with rules now in place for those who transition, not just as athletes but in their lives overall, from M to F).

That means there to be some definition for candidacy to compete in the M group vs candidacy to compete in the F group, and that's what the decisions & challenges have been about.

Note that the T level seems to be what it's come down to, rather than chromosomes or gonads or build. (That doesn't seem unreasonable as the primary focus IMO, & would be consistent w/ the rules for trans women.)

Trying my hand at a Haidtian analysis, and apologies if this either repeats or mangles one of Kirbmarc's recent posts:
-The high "Care" position is using Fairness language: "it's unfair to even question whether she should be running in Women's races" (paraphrasing the NYT article linked above).
-The high "Fairness" position is that the rules should be equitable to the athletes whose sex hormones (at least T) are within (or even close to) the normal ranges for women overall. Normal being mean +/- a couple of standard deviations.

I don't know of examples of other individuals or groups facing possible disqualification - or requirements for medical treatment in order to qualify - based on in-born characteristics, but wrt gender/sex it's the coexistence of binary groups & nonbinary individuals that make a dilemma pretty much inevitable.

#46625

#46626

Above tweet on appropriation was his own reply to this:

#46627

Brive1987 wrote:http://i.imgur.com/KzYnLR8.jpg

The flowers are a nice feminine touch.

Semen what???

#46628

Oglebart wrote:And by way of comparison here are the 4th, 5th and 6th placed athletes
...
http://storage2.sportowefakty.pl.sds.o2 ... 624592.jpg

http://www.athleticsweekly.com/0/admin/ ... -Sharp.jpg

Fucking hell, what a carve up. Interested to see how this plays out, the BBc coverage was suitably craven, but Lynsey Sharp, the 6th place athlete from GB alluded to the unfairness of the competition rules in her post race interview.

I suddenly think I have some shopping to do in the Spar.

#46629

Billie from Ockham wrote: When typing the above-quoted paragraph, did you pause before writing "xe" or does that come naturally to you?

In fairness, my answer to the same question would be: "I paused for at least five seconds."

Seriously, what's xur problem?

#46630

Skep tickle wrote: Another article on Olympics, sex/gender, & the 800m:
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/08/20/sp ... eters.html (mobile link)

Written as opinion, posted as news.

What part of "The New York Times" don't you get?

#46631

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
Billie from Ockham wrote: When typing the above-quoted paragraph, did you pause before writing "xe" or does that come naturally to you?

In fairness, my answer to the same question would be: "I paused for at least five seconds."
Seriously, what's xur problem?

My problem is that I've had tenure for close to 20 years, so the way I grade tests is by throwing them down stairs and seeing which step they land on. I have extended this procedure from tests to testes. And it takes at least five seconds to get Semen-Ya et al. to stand at the top of a staircase.

#46632

Kirbmarc wrote: I don't have enough evidence for my idea, and I'd love to see some decent work on this subject*, but I suspect that people like Zinnia or Muscato who claim to be trans but intentionally keep their "girlcocks" or don't even care about signaling their gender identity don't suffer from actual gender dysphoria (which I think exists and might instead have a neurological origin) but have other reasons to see themselves as women (possibly even paraphilic and fetishistic ones).

uh oh -- you've just committed the Autogynephilia Heresy.

* c.f. Dreger, Blanchard & Bailey.

#46633

MarcusAu wrote: Isn't testosterone level also determined by race?

Yes -- you're allowed 8x the testosterone in the 800m as the 100m.

#46634

Tigzy wrote:\
I can only see it generating a real outrage if it eventually affects the womens' combat sports - boxing, Judo and Taekwondo. In boxing especially, a woman could get seriously busted up in facing one of the quoteunquote women. True, Fallon Fox seems to have sorta gotten away with it as regards MMA, but MMA doesn't as yet have the impact and reach of the Olympics. Here's hoping it doesn't come to that, in any case.

I would say that MMA is bigger than the Olympics. Fallon Fox is an awful person but she didn't really get away with anything. She only ever had 6 professional fights. And those were never with any major federation. She hasn't had a fight and two years and she is about 40. Any woman who matters in MMA has made it clear they are not going to risk their careers by having a match with Fallon. Whether she wants to admit it (and she hasn't that I know of) she is done in MMA.

#46635

Malky wrote:
Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
This case completely destroys two SJW fantastical claims:
2) That the appearance of the external genitalia is not a sufficient criterion for assigning sex. (For, in Castor's case, they do want it to be.)
Doesn't Semenya actually support the case that external genitalia are not sufficient to decide gender? In "her" case she has a male karyotype with female external genitalia - her hormonal status is clearly nearer to male than female mainly due to the presence of testes which would be in line with the preposition.

SJWs are always quick to point out that external genitalia do not determine sex (the whole gripe about amab & afab.) But in Semenya's case, per the SJWs, xir* external genitalia are sufficient to make xir a woman, in spite of the otherwise decidedly masculine physique, deep voice, testes, & XY sex chromosomes.

* Yes, it comes naturally now.

#46636

comhcinc wrote: I would say that MMA is bigger than the Olympics.

In the US, perhaps. Here, not so much. It's known, but is still regarded as a fairly niche thing. Dunno how it's perceived beyond the US and UK, but it certainly doesn't set things alight on a worldwide scale the same way as the Olympics does.

#46637

jimhabegger wrote:We've lived in this apartment for three years without roaches, and now all of a sudden we have roaches.

Without cock? Then they can't procreate now can they.

#46638

Skep tickle wrote:Above tweet on appropriation was his own reply to this:

I don't understand the psychology that allows a 23-year-old android to expect everyone to obey her orders.

#46639

Tigzy wrote:
comhcinc wrote: I would say that MMA is bigger than the Olympics.
In the US, perhaps. Here, not so much. It's known, but is still regarded as a fairly niche thing. Dunno how it's perceived beyond the US and UK, but it certainly doesn't set things alight on a worldwide scale the same way as the Olympics does.

The Olympics happen ever four years and yeah is a cultural event that lots of people pay attention to for a couple of weeks. MMA events happen almost every night of the week every year with the big dog of the group UFC doing an almost monthly PPV that gets a couple of millions buys at about $60 US.

I will take your word for that small island you live on but I know it's big in the US, South America, Japan, and France.

#46640

comhcinc wrote: The Olympics happen ever four years and yeah is a cultural event that lots of people pay attention to for a couple of weeks. MMA events happen almost every night of the week every year with the big dog of the group UFC doing an almost monthly PPV that gets a couple of millions buys at about $60 US.

I will take your word for that small island you live on but I know it's big in the US, South America, Japan, and France.

Whatevs. The Olympics is bigger, end of. You might perceive otherwise, but then you live in a country which has 'world series' baseball. lol.

#46641

CommanderTuvok wrote:Re: the 800 metres and intersex athletes....

....isn't it a bit ironic that the political correctness on display here will only affect and harm women athletes. The blokes are not affected by any of this.

Yeps, but irony is not something the SJWs are apt to recognise when it paints itself purple and plays harpsichord on top of their head, singing, happy irony is here again*.

Note that trans and black both trump white or woman. Also, a trans woman is a real woman, always been.

(*) free after Lord Blackadder

#46642

More on Haidt:

Much of our present research involves applying the theory to political "cultures" such as those of liberals and conservatives. The current American culture war, we have found, can be seen as arising from the fact that liberals try to create a morality relying primarily on the Care/harm foundation, with additional support from the Fairness/cheating and Liberty/oppression foundations. Conservatives, especially religious conservatives, use all six foundations, including Loyalty/betrayal, Authority/subversion, and Sanctity/degradation. The culture war in the 1990s and early 2000s centered on the legitimacy of these latter three foundations. In 2009, with the rise of the Tea Party, the culture war shifted away from social issues such as abortion and homosexuality, and became more about differing conceptions of fairness (equality vs. proportionality) and liberty (is government the oppressor or defender?). The Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street are both populist movements that talk a great deal about fairness and liberty, but in very different ways

It's interesting to note that while it's relatively easy to see why Care, Loyalty and Authority might be evolutionary beneficial to the survival until fertile age of individual in a group of hunter-gatherers (Care emphasizes in-group assistance in moments of need and also the tools for child rearing, Loyalty provides the group with cohesion, Authority provides it with a structure that allows room for planning, both of which ensure an efficient organization of hunting and gathering and so more chance of survila) and why Sanctity/Purity is rather clearly evolutionary beneficial to the members of the group (by promoting lifestyle choices which reduce long-term harm to one's health, productivity and fertility) a very superficial analysis would find it hard to justify Fairness and Liberty on evolutionary terms and would attribute their rise to cultural elements of organized agricultural societies where multiple groups had to interact (Fairness reduces tensions between different groups, Liberty provides cohesion between different groups towards a common oppressor).

In this respect one would expect conservative leaders (who are driven by carrying on the rules and "identity" of a group) to use a language steeped in Loyalty and Authority or Purity concerns rather than Fairness and Liberty.

However it's evident from the example provided (Tea Party vs. Occupy Wall Street) that protest groups from both sides of aisle (Conservatives and Progressives) use the language of Fairness and Liberty as a reaction to what is perceived to be a lack of reaction to a challenge (like an economic crisis) from the authorities and in general lack of innovation and a stasis and disproportionate advantages for the authority.

This gives support to the idea that Fairness and Liberty also provide an evolutionary advantage: they allow for change and reactions to difficult times for the group. It's easy to see that a hierarchy which is too rigidly authoritarian and too unfair can lead a group to an evolutionary disadvantage by sticking to the wrong decisions. Human creativity has provided us with tools to react to challenges: innovations like stone-cutting or fire or archery provided huge advantages to the survival of hunter-gatherers far before organized agricultural society. Creativity, however, requires a degree of unconscious support for Liberty. Extreme Authority and robotic reliance on traditional wisdom can easily stifle new (and potentially advantageous) ideas.

This would associate Liberty with the opposite of tradition, however the other hand the opposite can also be true. A new idea can be quickly approved by an authority even if turns out not to be beneficial to the group. In this respect Liberty can also be reactive to bad new decisions of an authority, and actually be compatible with traditionalism.

Fairness can be about avoiding hoarding. By reacting negatively to a massive concentration of goods and of positive results in the hands of the authorities and their families, Fairness ensures that a larger number of individuals in the group can survive. Bear in mind that bands of hunter-gatherers probably counted roughly 30-50 individuals in order to function effectively, so more than a single family. Due to evolutionary pressure people are more likely to be biased in favor of their next of kin.

In a group of 30-50 individuals not everyone is going to be a relative of the figures of authority. An unfair treatment would reduce the chances of survival of those who aren't the family of the leader(s). This would, in the long term, damage the entire band/group.

On the other hand Fairness can also be about recognizing and promoting individual skills. Positive contributions to the group are rewarded, and negative ones are punished.

I'd wager that conservative groups tend to focus on the reactive aspects of Liberty and on the tit-for-tat approach to Fairness, while progressive ones focus more on creativity and lack of hoarding. Libertarians focus more on creativity, but tend see Fairness as tit-for-tat just like conservatives do.

#46643

Tigzy wrote:
comhcinc wrote: The Olympics happen ever four years and yeah is a cultural event that lots of people pay attention to for a couple of weeks. MMA events happen almost every night of the week every year with the big dog of the group UFC doing an almost monthly PPV that gets a couple of millions buys at about $60 US.

I will take your word for that small island you live on but I know it's big in the US, South America, Japan, and France.
Whatevs. The Olympics is bigger, end of. You might perceive otherwise, but then you live in a country which has 'world series' baseball. lol.

And you live in country that plays cricket which is baseball's ugly retarded cousin. ;)

#46644

dogen wrote:Well, that's autogynephilia, innit?

Isn't that the sexual attraction to women in fast cars?

#46645

Skep tickle wrote:Above tweet on appropriation was his own reply to this:

Whippets.png: (115.39 KiB) Downloaded 135 times

Um, Whippets and sodomy? Auto-complete error or Freudian Slip?

http://i.ebayimg.com/images/i/291525604 ... -l1000.jpg

#46646

comhcinc wrote: And you live in country that plays cricket which is baseball's ugly retarded cousin. ;)

This hardly flatters baseball, given the fact that the ugly retarded cousin is far more popular on a global scale (yes, I know, but please do check out cricket's reach in places like Australia, India and Pakistan).

#46647

As I tweeted earlier - if Shanley is so against appropriating things from edgy sexual practices, then why does she make herself look like a neckbeard's sex doll?

#46648

Tigzy wrote:
comhcinc wrote: And you live in country that plays cricket which is baseball's ugly retarded cousin. ;)
This hardly flatters baseball, given the fact that the ugly retarded cousin is far more popular on a global scale (yes, I know, but please do check out cricket's reach in places like Australia, India and Pakistan).

I have pretty low opinion of baseball. As for cricket's global reach it's really popular in places you sent your criminals and places you conquered. It's almost as if you have to force people to like it?

#46649

Tigzy wrote:As I tweeted earlier - if Shanley is so against appropriating things from edgy sexual practices, then why does she make herself look like a neckbeard's sex doll?

I quit paying attention to her but she is either completely batshit insane or a troll. Neither hold interest to me.

#46650

feathers wrote:
dogen wrote:Well, that's autogynephilia, innit?
Isn't that the sexual attraction to women in fast cars?

Yep. Problem is, most Americans immediately think of Danica Patrick or (maybe, if they're my age) Shirley Muldowney, but have never heard of Michèle Mouton.

#46651

Suet Cardigan wrote:Um, Whippets and sodomy? Auto-complete error or Freudian Slip?

or US slang for nitrous oxide

#46652

comhcinc wrote: I have pretty low opinion of baseball. As for cricket's global reach it's really popular in places you sent your criminals and places you conquered. It's almost as if you have to force people to like it?

Well nowadays, they're quite free to give it up if they want. Little chance of that happening, least of all in India and Pakistan. You'll never see a more graphic illustration of Orwell's 'sport is war without the weapons' dictum than a typical India vs Pakistan match. It's also a good illustration of how truly bigoted them brown folks can be - have a chat with an Indian or Pakistani pal when their countries are playing against each other, and ask them about the opposition. More often then not, freakin hilarious. And not very PC.

#46653

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
Kirbmarc wrote: I don't have enough evidence for my idea, and I'd love to see some decent work on this subject*, but I suspect that people like Zinnia or Muscato who claim to be trans but intentionally keep their "girlcocks" or don't even care about signaling their gender identity don't suffer from actual gender dysphoria (which I think exists and might instead have a neurological origin) but have other reasons to see themselves as women (possibly even paraphilic and fetishistic ones).
uh oh -- you've just committed the Autogynephilia Heresy.

* c.f. Dreger, Blanchard & Bailey.

I'm not sure about what Dreger, Blanchard and Bailey think, but it seems to me that they promoted the idea that gender dysphoria doesn't exist. I could be wrong of course.

I think that both gender dysphoria and autogynephilia exist (although I don't have much in the way of solid evidence for the latter), but one causes people to want to physically become the opposite sex because they have an ego-dystonic and distressing reaction to their own sex (possibly because of neurological reasons) while the other, if it exists, is a paraphilia which causes people to be sexually aroused by the idea of themselves as a member of the opposite sex.

Truly dysphoric people would tend (not always, be on average) to be attracted to the sex which is opposite to the one they identify as (men for trans women), while autogynephilic individuals would tend to be attracted to the same sex they identify as (women for those who fantasize about being women).

If this is true then a misdiagnosis one way or another could be potentially harmful. Truly dysphoric people might acquire an ego-syntonic relationship with their body through surgery and hormone therapy, but the same might not be true for autogynephilic individuals. Although autogynephilic individuals might not want surgery to begin with. In some cases (like possibly Muscato) they might not even want to physically resemble their ideal image, possibly because they actually don't want to change, but only to fantasize about their differently gender self to get aroused.

Neither mental feature would justify invasive or demonstrably harmful therapy: dysphoric individuals could find mental solace in their new bodies, and as for the autogynephilic sexual fantasies which include what is basically masturbation over an idea of the self are pretty harmless. However by conflating different phenomena under the same idea of "trans identity" we could complicate and confuse matters.

If autogynephilia is real it has actually little to do with genuine dysphoria.

#46654

Billie from Ockham wrote:
Suet Cardigan wrote:Um, Whippets and sodomy? Auto-complete error or Freudian Slip?
or US slang for nitrous oxide

Using the nitrous charge intended to propel whipped cream to achieve a very transitory but intense high. They may have given me dain bramage.

#46655

feathers wrote:
dogen wrote:Well, that's autogynephilia, innit?
Isn't that the sexual attraction to women in fast cars?

https://thenypost.files.wordpress.com/2 ... wxriwi.gif

#46656

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:SJWs are always quick to point out that external genitalia do not determine sex (the whole gripe about amab & afab.) But in Semenya's case, ... external genitalia are sufficient to make {her} a woman, in spite of the otherwise decidedly masculine physique, deep voice, testes, & XY sex chromosomes. ...

Born a girl, with female external genitalia. Raised a girl. Started running as a girl. Always considered to be female by family & community & herself. Effects of elevated T probably did not become apparent until puberty, many years after gender identity was established.

#46657

comhcinc wrote:
Tigzy wrote:As I tweeted earlier - if Shanley is so against appropriating things from edgy sexual practices, then why does she make herself look like a neckbeard's sex doll?

I quit paying attention to her but she is either completely batshit insane or a troll. Neither hold interest to me.

She's both. She was in a sexual relationship with the infamous ubertroll and white supremacist (and possibly self-hating Jew) Andrew Auhenheimer (weev). He said it and she admitted that it was true. Weev is batshit insane and so is she. According his account of events he taught Shanley how to troll and she was, at that time, a white supremacist herself.

Those aren't normal people. They've trolls with serious mental issues.

#46658

Tigzy wrote:
comhcinc wrote: I have pretty low opinion of baseball. As for cricket's global reach it's really popular in places you sent your criminals and places you conquered. It's almost as if you have to force people to like it?
Well nowadays, they're quite free to give it up if they want. Little chance of that happening, least of all in India and Pakistan. You'll never see a more graphic illustration of Orwell's 'sport is war without the weapons' dictum than a typical India vs Pakistan match. It's also a good illustration of how truly bigoted them brown folks can be - have a chat with an Indian or Pakistani pal when their countries are playing against each other, and ask them about the opposition. More often then not, freakin hilarious. And not very PC.

It's pretty clear that due to years of abuse by you evil overlords these poor brown people have a deep internalized racism. You should be ashamed of yourself!

#46659

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:
Spike13 wrote:
Couch wrote:

My duaghter has been instructed by her teacher to put a "trigger warning" on her groups school project video because it referenced suicide.

You cannot, will not win.
There is a new Facebook page "Trigger me timbers" it has send up's of triggering. Not quite up to Slymepit standards. But good non the less.
Seems like Failbook took it down.

Campain by Rose Garston had it taken down, this morning it reappeared as " Trigger me timbers 2.0."
Let's see how long it stays up. Meanwhile ISIL still has pages with beheadimgs on it.... We should have a hashtag.
#Nothingtoseehere

#46660

Kirbmarc wrote:
comhcinc wrote:
Tigzy wrote:As I tweeted earlier - if Shanley is so against appropriating things from edgy sexual practices, then why does she make herself look like a neckbeard's sex doll?

I quit paying attention to her but she is either completely batshit insane or a troll. Neither hold interest to me.
She's both. She was in a sexual relationship with the infamous ubertroll and white supremacist (and possibly self-hating Jew) Andrew Auhenheimer (weev). He said it and she admitted that it was true. Weev is batshit insane and so is she. According his account of events he taught Shanley how to troll and she was, at that time, a white supremacist herself.

Those aren't normal people. They've trolls with serious mental issues.

Even more reason to just not engage with her.

Even more so when this gives ShoeOnHead and Armour Skeptic more of an excuse to share their increasingly creepy sounding sex life.

In five years time time that dude is going to go off the deep end.

#46661

Sunder wrote:I recall the most disturbing thing I ever read concerning Haidt's moral foundations was a Kos commenter who said they looked forward to future liberals completely abandoning the Liberty axis to focus solely on Care.

Comrade Stalin, here we come...

#46662

Hahaha. Skepticon is still happening this year, for some reason. They are attempting to shake off their declining attendance/decreased overall interest in these kinds of events by doing something really radical and different: Inviting Rebecca Watson to speak.

You know its going to be in interesting, engaging presentation, when the speakers bio hasnt changed in >7 years. Hahahahaha. Christ.

#46663

Billie from Ockham wrote:
Suet Cardigan wrote:Um, Whippets and sodomy? Auto-complete error or Freudian Slip?
or US slang for nitrous oxide

I see plenty of evidence (every week, if not every day) - that it is popular in the UK too:

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/arc ... 90410b.jpg(

#46664

Kirbmarc wrote: She's both. She was in a sexual relationship with the infamous ubertroll and white supremacist (and possibly self-hating Jew) Andrew Auhenheimer (weev). He said it and she admitted that it was true. Weev is batshit insane and so is she. According his account of events he taught Shanley how to troll and she was, at that time, a white supremacist herself.

Those aren't normal people. They've trolls with serious mental issues.

Bride of Chucky is at least useful in making the SJW look bad. If this is by design or accident - well, who cares? Milk that doll-faced droid for all the lulz you can get, I say - even if she thinks she's playing you, it's all to the greater good.

#46665

comhcinc wrote:
Tigzy wrote:
comhcinc wrote: I would say that MMA is bigger than the Olympics.
In the US, perhaps. Here, not so much. It's known, but is still regarded as a fairly niche thing. Dunno how it's perceived beyond the US and UK, but it certainly doesn't set things alight on a worldwide scale the same way as the Olympics does.
The Olympics happen ever four years and yeah is a cultural event that lots of people pay attention to for a couple of weeks. MMA events happen almost every night of the week every year with the big dog of the group UFC doing an almost monthly PPV that gets a couple of millions buys at about $60 US.

I will take your word for that small island you live on but I know it's big in the US, South America, Japan, and France.

Glad to see that you're an MMA fan, but the buys rates for PPVs that you listed is way off. Big events, like last nights fight between Conor MacGregor, and Nick Diaz, do anywhere from 900k to 1.5 million buys. Events with lesser stars will have buy rates of 300k to 500k or so. Events with no starts have trouble topping 125k these days

#46666

Skep tickle wrote:
Matt Cavanaugh wrote:SJWs are always quick to point out that external genitalia do not determine sex (the whole gripe about amab & afab.) But in Semenya's case, ... external genitalia are sufficient to make {her} a woman, in spite of the otherwise decidedly masculine physique, deep voice, testes, & XY sex chromosomes. ...
Born a girl, with female external genitalia. Raised a girl. Started running as a girl. Always considered to be female by family & community & herself. Effects of elevated T probably did not become apparent until puberty, many years after gender identity was established.

It is sad for her, to be sure. But what about the other competitors? At what point do you actually say "this is in essence doping" with regards to these conditions? Perhaps intersex should get a separate category. I don't have the answers, but I do know that some Olympic medal dreams were squashed, and at least some of them have good question as to the fairness of letting biological men compete in their events. We accomadate a rare birth defect to extremes and throw the majority of women athletes under the bus?

I also note another SJW hypocrisy in the runner's appearance. We're told little girls must see role models, PIC that look like them in the fields in which we want more diversity. But then we have three winners in the 800m women's that look and sound very much like men.

#46667

Wow, lotta typos there, sorry. Accommodate and POC.

#46668

ERV wrote:Hahaha. Skepticon is still happening this year, for some reason. They are attempting to shake off their declining attendance/decreased overall interest in these kinds of events by doing something really radical and different: Inviting Rebecca Watson to speak.

You know its going to be in interesting, engaging presentation, when the speakers bio hasnt changed in >7 years. Hahahahaha. Christ.

She hasn't added her surfing career? She pops in now and again to the pit to tell us about it.

#46669

Billie from Ockham wrote:
feathers wrote:
dogen wrote:Well, that's autogynephilia, innit?
Isn't that the sexual attraction to women in fast cars?

Yep. Problem is, most Americans immediately think of Danica Patrick or (maybe, if they're my age) Shirley Muldowney, but have never heard of Michèle Mouton.

[youtube][/youtube]

#46670

Speaking of :L7, guess who was at this show in 1991 ?

[youtube][/youtube]

#46671

BarnOwl wrote:
Spike13 wrote:
Many folks don't really see themselves as they actually present to other people.

Pizzy has cultivated his "frumpy professor" look for some time. I guess he sees that as the ideal for himself. Tossled, unkempt, rumpled. As if the act of dressing and hygiene are beyond his concern. He us bigger things to occupy his time, his mind too full scientific inquirery for such mundane concerns.

But there is a fine line between stylish precise disarray and looking like a slob. Pizzy has more than crossed the line, he's down the street and around the corner. Greasy looking hair, outgrown pubic hair looking beard, always wrinkled clothes. I've never met him, but he looks like he smells awful. I would be hesitant to strike up a conversation for fear of having to endure BO or halitosis breath. It's quite off putting, and rude to those around you, that you couldn't be bothered to show up presentable.

And the ugly? That's your nasty vindictive little man personality where that truly comes through.
I can pretty much guarantee that he's emulating some of his grad school professors, some of whom are/were indeed brilliant scientists, and many of whom cultivated a disheveled, too-busy-thinking-great-thoughts appearance. For some academic scientists I've worked with, the rumpledness extends to indifferent grooming habits and poor personal hygiene. For US universities, the attitude can be a manifestation of male privilege - I can think of maybe one woman I've known who had a similar disregard for personal appearance (and she's a National Academy member and has an extremely well-funded research lab, so basically she can tell critics to fuck off). But lots of men in science, who have varying levels of success, cultivate the disheveled appearance, and some will in fact openly criticize female students and colleagues for appearing to spend any amount of thought or effort on clothing, grooming, make-up, etc. Ask me how I know. They might even use those Chinese grad students who don't seem to care about appearance and grooming as an example of how to behave.

At medical schools there's often a huge disconnect between the dress and grooming habits of the clinicians and those of the basic scientists. Some of this has to do with pay disparity, but most of it is probably cultural. I direct a med school course with two clinicians (also women), and they always look like a million bucks. Hair, make-up, clothes, shoes, jewelry, etc. No way can I afford to match that, but I do keep my clothes clean and ironed, and I'm a well-groomed person who's rather vain about her hair. :P

I remember one of my old professors telling us a story of a friend of his. Whenever he went to apply for a grant he wore frumpy clothes, messed up his hair and buttoned up his shirt the wrong way. Never had any trouble getting a grant, stereotypes are fun.

#46672

Barbie's Boyfriend wrote:Speaking of :L7, guess who was at this show in 1991 ?

[youtube][/youtube]

So who was it? Some of us don't remember faces very well.

#46673

PZ has written an account of his first date and kiss.

It explains a lot.

Plus Mary needs to be disciplined for providing hope where none was warranted.

But she actually kissed me! She couldn’t have had more of an effect if she’d triggered the spring-loaded trap door in the floor and launched me to Puyallup. For the very first time ever, I felt like maybe somebody liked me and there was a bit of hope in my future. I remember every millisecond of that kiss even now.

http://archive.is/F7EAW

#46674

ERV wrote:Hahaha. Skepticon is still happening this year, for some reason. They are attempting to shake off their declining attendance/decreased overall interest in these kinds of events by doing something really radical and different: Inviting Rebecca Watson to speak.

You know its going to be in interesting, engaging presentation, when the speakers bio hasnt changed in >7 years. Hahahahaha. Christ.

I'm surprised it doesn't still have SGU in there.

#46675

Brive1987 wrote:What's all that there? Roach shit? Or mice? :shock: :o

That was all from roaches.

That was in the cabinet under the sink in our kitchen. I sprayed some Raid in there, and later found five or more big roaches in there. We also found four or five running around in various places around the apartment, so I'm not sure we got them all. Probably not.

We've been in this apartment for three years, and never saw any sign of any roaches until a few months ago. Then we started seeing one once every two or three weeks, but I had no idea there were so many until I looked under the sink last week and saw that.

#46676

Billie from Ockham wrote:
feathers wrote:
dogen wrote:Well, that's autogynephilia, innit?
Isn't that the sexual attraction to women in fast cars?
Yep. Problem is, most Americans immediately think of Danica Patrick or (maybe, if they're my age) Shirley Muldowney, but have never heard of Michèle Mouton.

I was thinking of Jayne Mansfield...what can I say, everyone likes head.

#46677

So do you think the olympic committee would be amenable to Harrison Bergeron'ing this shit - to provide a level playing field for all the competitors?

If we can do it for horses why can't we do it for human beings*?

*and otherkin

#46678

Brive1987 wrote:PZ has written an account of his first date and kiss.

It explains a lot.

Plus Mary needs to be disciplined for providing hope where none was warranted.

But she actually kissed me! She couldn’t have had more of an effect if she’d triggered the spring-loaded trap door in the floor and launched me to Puyallup. For the very first time ever, I felt like maybe somebody liked me and there was a bit of hope in my future. I remember every millisecond of that kiss even now.
http://archive.is/F7EAW

Good thing ipads didn't exist in 1976 or the magic would never have happened.

#46679

Skep tickle wrote:Above tweet on appropriation was his own reply to this:

Whippets and sodomy (top right)? It's clearly a dog-fuck-dog world.

#46680

Bourne Skeptic wrote:
jimhabegger wrote:We've lived in this apartment for three years without roaches, and now all of a sudden we have roaches.

https://c2.staticflickr.com/9/8144/2904 ... 0fd349.jpg

roaches by Jim Habegger, on Flickr
You joined the Pit and shortly after roaches appeared........interesting :think:

Nah the roaches are Rationalia.com PeeZee said so.