What is a women?...

[Phil Allison]

IEEE Bill needs to be committed bill....@ieee.org wrote:
============================================

jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
===================================

My younger daughter was a baseball fan practically from birth. She
tried to play in the boys baseball leagues, but she wasn\'t strong
enough to hit homers, and the boys wouldn\'t accept her, even though
she is a great fielder.

So she cut over to girls softball and thrived. She was shortstop and
team captain at Cornell and is still in touch with her teammates.

** Women\'s sports are different from men\'s, plenty of skill on display but played in much fairer spirit.
I enjoy watching Golf and Tennis on TV, but lean strongly towards women\'s events.
Australia\'s world no 1 tennis player ( Ash Barty) retired a few days ago a the peak of her career - bugger.

If even ONE good male player entered women\'s Golf or Tennis, he would win every match and title on offer.

Idiot assertion.

** Totally CORRECT statement of fact.
------------------------------------------------------------

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Sexes_(tennis)

Billy Jean King wiped the floor with Bobby Riggs.

** ROTFLMAO !!

Totally FUCKING IRRELEVANT !!!!!
Did Bill even READ the damn Wiki ?

Women players are welcome to enter male Golf tournaments - they are literally \"open\" to all comers subject to a qualifying standard.
This was common years ago, until the women\'s tour was established.
Those who attempted it lately finished way down the list.
Men hit their tee shots so much further than women.

Most men...

** Wrong topic - you demented POS fuckhead.



...... Phil

 

[server]

On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 17:04:30 -0700 (PDT), Phil Allison
<pallison49@gmail.com> wrote:

Lizard Tuddenham wrote:
==========================
jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com> wrote:

If you want social justice you don\'t let a few a previous men compete
against the many women that have worked their whole lives to compete.

We have Special Olympics. We should have Trans Olympics.


** Never work.


Every team would need a makeup manager.

You have some very curious and outdated ideas about transpeople.

** It was a joke Joyce.

Most of us are trying to fit in and be unobtrusive;

** fFat chance.

very few ciswomen would wear makeup

** That is a horrible, derogatory term that women all hate.

As they say in Texas, call me anything you like just don\'t call me
late for dinner.



--

I yam what I yam - Popeye

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Wednesday, March 30, 2022 at 1:54:55 PM UTC+11, palli...@gmail.com wrote:

IEEE Bill needs to be committed bill....@ieee.org wrote:
===========================================
jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
===================================

My younger daughter was a baseball fan practically from birth. She
tried to play in the boys baseball leagues, but she wasn\'t strong
enough to hit homers, and the boys wouldn\'t accept her, even though
she is a great fielder.

So she cut over to girls softball and thrived. She was shortstop and
team captain at Cornell and is still in touch with her teammates.

** Women\'s sports are different from men\'s, plenty of skill on display but played in much fairer spirit.
I enjoy watching Golf and Tennis on TV, but lean strongly towards women\'s events.
Australia\'s world no 1 tennis player ( Ash Barty) retired a few days ago a the peak of her career - bugger.

If even ONE good male player entered women\'s Golf or Tennis, he would win every match and title on offer.

Idiot assertion.

** Totally CORRECT statement of fact.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Sexes_(tennis)

Billy Jean King wiped the floor with Bobby Riggs.

** ROTFLMAO !!

Totally FUCKING IRRELEVANT !!!!!
Did Bill even READ the damn Wiki ?

You snipped the bit where I did point out that Bobby Riggs had beaten Margaret Court earlier in the same year, which I did get from the Wiki. If you spent more time reading, and less time rolling around on the floor laughing, you might look less like a half-wit.

Your reading comprehension seems to be in the same self-serving state as Flyguy\'s. You can\'t notice anything that makes you look like the idiot you are.

Women players are welcome to enter male Golf tournaments - they are literally \"open\" to all comers subject to a qualifying standard.
This was common years ago, until the women\'s tour was established.
Those who attempted it lately finished way down the list.
Men hit their tee shots so much further than women.
Most men...

** Wrong topic - you demented POS fuckhead.

And why would you think that? It may make you feel good, but it does seem to be a self-serving delusion, which does make you look like a right twit.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Phil Allison]

IEEE Bill needs to be committed bill....@ieee.org wrote:
============================================

If even ONE good male player entered women\'s Golf or Tennis, he would win every match and title on offer.

Idiot assertion.

** Totally CORRECT statement of fact.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Sexes_(tennis)

** A staged joke of an event.

> You snipped the bit where I did point out that Bobby Riggs had beaten Margaret Court earlier in the same year,

** So even a 55 year old * has been* can beat a top female on a good day.
Imagine what a top, 25 year old male pro can do.

Women players are welcome to enter male Golf tournaments - they are literally \"open\" to all comers subject to a qualifying standard.
This was common years ago, until the women\'s tour was established.
Those who attempted it lately finished way down the list.
Men hit their tee shots so much further than women.

Most men...

** Wrong topic - you demented POS fuckhead.

And why would you think that

** Cos \"most men\" are not top level pro golfers you

- you ASD FUCKED MORON



....... Phil

 

[John Doe]

A very long, insane rant...

--
Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:

Path: eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Subject: Re: What is a women?
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2022 19:15:23 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 92
Message-ID: <t20egb$kdd$1@dont-email.me
References: <t1keq0$tv7$1@dont-email.me
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2022 02:15:39 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host=\"5fdf629b4855e2cfedbffb1d324efcdd\"; logging-data=\"20909\"; mail-complaints-to=\"abuse@eternal-september.org\"; posting-account=\"U2FsdGVkX1/xlv2G+NJDniDXFSaVNsUu\"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:lKij1nUZHIXFUjnbpLXAZb8HdCE=
In-Reply-To: <t1keq0$tv7$1@dont-email.me
Content-Language: en-US
Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org sci.electronics.design:664547

On 3/25/2022 6:07 AM, amdx wrote:
From Google, \"Definitions fro Oxford Languages\"

How long before Googles deletes these definitions?

Female
Noun
an adult female human being.

Woman
adjective
of or denoting the sex that can bear offspring or produce eggs,
distinguished biologically by the production of gametes (ova)
which can be fertilized by male gametes.

Dictionaries constantly evolve.

You should, instead, ask what role you expect this \"qualification\"
to play.

Are you using it to determine the types of medical afflictions
the Pt is likely to experience?

Are you using it to determine how much you can afford NOT to pay
the job applicant? (oops!)

Or, to determine suitability to holding positions of power/authority,
advancement opportunities? (oops!)

Are you using it to determine whether or not you can exert control
over that entity\'s body? (oops!)

Are you using it to determine the suitability for that party to
perform a particular task? (spatial reasoning, digital dexterity)

Are you using it to gauge their body shape? (petite vs. large)

If, instead, you are using it to convince yourself that there is
(and should be!) some difference between \"women\" and \"men\" -- in
much the same way that you think there should be a substantive
difference between \"blacks\" and \"whites\", \"jews\" and \"gentiles\",
\"blonds\" and \"brunettes\", etc.) then I suspect you are just letting
your own, personal insecurities manifest.

I know \"men\" who are \"weaklings\" and \"women\" that you\'d never want
to engage in a bar fight! I know \"men\" who are chefs and \"women\"
who are engineers. (I know men with larger \"mammaries\" than many
women! Should I call them \"girls\" and the flatter-chested women
\"boys\"?)

I suspect most \"women\" would be more appreciative of your efforts to
ensure them equal pay, equal respect, equal promotion opportunities,
etc. than to come to the defense of women competing (at a disadvantage?)
with transwomen. (yet, I don\'t see any impassioned posts about \"equal
rights\"...)

Does your employer have different standards for female job applicants
than men? Perhaps we should divide society along those lines and
split the opportunities, responsibilities, etc. based on percentage
representation in the population?

Maybe women soldiers should wear pink uniforms so the opposing forces
can ensure only *their* women soldiers fire on YOUR women soldiers?
We can make that determination prior to issuing your uniform (at
short-arm inspection)...

Have HALF of your bosses been women? Half of your colleagues? Half
of your CEOs (just from your PERSONAL observations, not expecting you
to be able to know about the population as a whole)? Politicians?
Doctors? Lawyers? Auto-mechanics? Plumbers? Do you really think
there haven\'t been an equal number of \"females\" qualified for those roles?

[Personally, I\'ve never had a female boss. Nor employer. And, only
*once* had a boss that was an engineer -- so the \"male-STEM-bias\" can\'t
explain away that (I\'ve known several female engineers). OTOH, every
\"HR\" person I\'ve encountered has been female, save one.]

If sports wanted to be \"fair\", they would assess the ATHLETIC
qualities of the participants and qualify the competitions accordingly.

You don\'t see \"welter-weights\" boxing \"heavy-weights\"! Why not?
Shouldn\'t the *bigger* boxer be ALLOWED to clean the little guy\'s
clock? (\"Oh, but that wouldn\'t be *sporting*!\")

Do we sort *jockeys* based on length of penis?? Or, amount of leg hair?

How does \"sex/gender\" *meaningfully* act to sort competitors? (in ANY
competition -- sports or otherwise)

Entities/individuals exist in an N-dimensional space. \"Sex\", \"hair color\",
\"religious belief\", \"ethnicity\", \"BMI\", \"height\", \"weight\", ... can each
be used to subdivide that space. Only a fool resorts to simple subdivisions.

 

[Edward Hernandez]

The John Doe troll stated the following in message-id
<sdhn7c$pkp$4@dont-email.me>:

> The troll doesn\'t even know how to format a USENET post...

And the John Doe troll stated the following in message-id
<sg3kr7$qt5$1@dont-email.me>:

The reason Bozo cannot figure out how to get Google to keep from
breaking its lines in inappropriate places is because Bozo is
CLUELESS...

And yet, the clueless John Doe troll has continued to post incorrectly
formatted USENET articles that are devoid of content (latest example on
Wed, 30 Mar 2022 10:37:09 -0000 (UTC) in message-id
<t21bsk$a6s$1@dont-email.me>).

NOBODY likes the John Doe troll\'s contentless spam.

Further, Troll Doe stated the following in message-id
<svsh05$lbh$5@dont-email.me> posted Fri, 4 Mar 2022 08:01:09 -0000
(UTC):

Compared to other regulars, Bozo contributes practically nothing
except insults to this group.

Yet, since Wed, 5 Jan 2022 04:10:38 -0000 (UTC) Troll Doe\'s post ratio
to USENET has been 54.1% of its posts contributing \"nothing except
insults\" to USENET.

This posting is a public service announcement for any google groups
readers who happen by to point out that the John Doe troll does not even
follow the rules it uses to troll other posters.

SwwaBHeYvuiT

 

[Liz Tuddenham]

Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:

On 3/25/2022 6:07 AM, amdx wrote:
From Google, \"Definitions fro Oxford Languages\"

How long before Googles deletes these definitions?

Female
Noun
an adult female human being.

Woman
adjective
of or denoting the sex that can bear offspring or produce eggs,
distinguished biologically by the production of gametes (ova)
which can be fertilized by male gametes.

Dictionaries constantly evolve.

You should, instead, ask what role you expect this \"qualification\"
to play.

Are you using it to determine the types of medical afflictions
the Pt is likely to experience?

Are you using it to determine how much you can afford NOT to pay
the job applicant? (oops!)

Or, to determine suitability to holding positions of power/authority,
advancement opportunities? (oops!)

Are you using it to determine whether or not you can exert control
over that entity\'s body? (oops!)

Are you using it to determine the suitability for that party to
perform a particular task? (spatial reasoning, digital dexterity)

Are you using it to gauge their body shape? (petite vs. large)

If, instead, you are using it to convince yourself that there is
(and should be!) some difference between \"women\" and \"men\" -- in
much the same way that you think there should be a substantive
difference between \"blacks\" and \"whites\", \"jews\" and \"gentiles\",
\"blonds\" and \"brunettes\", etc.) then I suspect you are just letting
your own, personal insecurities manifest.

I know \"men\" who are \"weaklings\" and \"women\" that you\'d never want
to engage in a bar fight! I know \"men\" who are chefs and \"women\"
who are engineers. (I know men with larger \"mammaries\" than many
women! Should I call them \"girls\" and the flatter-chested women
\"boys\"?)

I suspect most \"women\" would be more appreciative of your efforts to
ensure them equal pay, equal respect, equal promotion opportunities,
etc. than to come to the defense of women competing (at a disadvantage?)
with transwomen. (yet, I don\'t see any impassioned posts about \"equal
rights\"...)

Does your employer have different standards for female job applicants
than men? Perhaps we should divide society along those lines and
split the opportunities, responsibilities, etc. based on percentage
representation in the population?

Maybe women soldiers should wear pink uniforms so the opposing forces
can ensure only *their* women soldiers fire on YOUR women soldiers?
We can make that determination prior to issuing your uniform (at
short-arm inspection)...

Have HALF of your bosses been women? Half of your colleagues? Half
of your CEOs (just from your PERSONAL observations, not expecting you
to be able to know about the population as a whole)? Politicians?
Doctors? Lawyers? Auto-mechanics? Plumbers? Do you really think
there haven\'t been an equal number of \"females\" qualified for those roles?

[Personally, I\'ve never had a female boss. Nor employer. And, only
*once* had a boss that was an engineer -- so the \"male-STEM-bias\" can\'t
explain away that (I\'ve known several female engineers). OTOH, every
\"HR\" person I\'ve encountered has been female, save one.]

If sports wanted to be \"fair\", they would assess the ATHLETIC
qualities of the participants and qualify the competitions accordingly.

You don\'t see \"welter-weights\" boxing \"heavy-weights\"! Why not?
Shouldn\'t the *bigger* boxer be ALLOWED to clean the little guy\'s
clock? (\"Oh, but that wouldn\'t be *sporting*!\")

Do we sort *jockeys* based on length of penis?? Or, amount of leg hair?

How does \"sex/gender\" *meaningfully* act to sort competitors? (in ANY
competition -- sports or otherwise)

Entities/individuals exist in an N-dimensional space. \"Sex\", \"hair color\",
\"religious belief\", \"ethnicity\", \"BMI\", \"height\", \"weight\", ... can each
be used to subdivide that space. Only a fool resorts to simple subdivisions.

Absolutely first class summing up of the idiotic anomalies created by
mental pigmys who don\'t understand biology and go through life trying to
force everyone else to believe in a false reality which corresponds to
their own level of ignorance

Would you mind if I keep a copy and use it (with due credits) when
needed?


--
~ Liz Tuddenham ~
(Remove the \".invalid\"s and add \".co.uk\" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk

 

[Don Y]

On 3/30/2022 4:53 AM, Liz Tuddenham wrote:

Absolutely first class summing up of the idiotic anomalies created by
mental pigmys who don\'t understand biology and go through life trying to
force everyone else to believe in a false reality which corresponds to
their own level of ignorance

Would you mind if I keep a copy and use it (with due credits) when
needed?

Skip the accreditation but feel free to paraphrase/quote as you like.

I wonder how long before we hear these same \"champions of fairness
in women\'s sports\" ALSO championing EQUALITY of women in ALL things?

[Gotta wonder what life is going to be like for men coming of age, now.
Given that so many FEWER of them are pursuing an education. Will the
female doctors/lawyers/engineers/PROFESSIONALS be willing to \"settle\"
for a \"truck driver\" as a mate? How will *he* look his friends in the
eye when they all implicitly know SHE is the breadwinner?]

(sigh) Gotta be tough living in perpetual fear of a life that
is changing around you and you\'re desperately clinging to YOUR past.
Better buy a gun! That will make you feel \"potent\", eh?

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Wednesday, March 30, 2022 at 4:43:17 PM UTC+11, palli...@gmail.com wrote:

IEEE Bill needs to be committed bill....@ieee.org wrote:
============================================

If even ONE good male player entered women\'s Golf or Tennis, he would win every match and title on offer.

Idiot assertion.

** Totally CORRECT statement of fact.

Not really.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Sexes_(tennis)
** A staged joke of an event.
You snipped the bit where I did point out that Bobby Riggs had beaten Margaret Court earlier in the same year,
** So even a 55 year old * has been* can beat a top female on a good day.

Sure, but your assertion was that \"even if ONE Good male player entered women\'s Golf or Tennis, he would win every match and title on offer.\"

Bobby Riggs wasn\'t the best male player around, but he was pretty good, and he didn\'t beat Billy Jean King.

> Imagine what a top, 25 year old male pro can do.

The same link lists a number of such matches. No need for imagination.

Women players are welcome to enter male Golf tournaments - they are literally \"open\" to all comers subject to a qualifying standard.
This was common years ago, until the women\'s tour was established..
Those who attempted it lately finished way down the list.
Men hit their tee shots so much further than women.

Most men...

** Wrong topic - you demented POS fuckhead.

And why would you think that

** Cos \"most men\" are not top level pro golfers you - you ASD FUCKED MORON.

This is also true most women. There\'s going to be a distribution of how far the tee shot goes for each sex, and you were making an assertion about all men, not just top level pro golfers. If you had thought about what you were claiming when you constructed your post, you might have qualified the claim at the time you made it. which makes you the moron.

I won\'t speculate about your particular mental problems - a tendency to fly off the handle when even minimally provoked is probably symptomatic of something, but it would be a waste time to try to pick a technical sounding name for it.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Wednesday, March 30, 2022 at 9:37:16 PM UTC+11, John Doe wrote:

Don Y <blocked...@foo.invalid> wrote:
On 3/25/2022 6:07 AM, amdx wrote:

<snip>

How does \"sex/gender\" *meaningfully* act to sort competitors? (in ANY
competition -- sports or otherwise)

Entities/individuals exist in an N-dimensional space. \"Sex\", \"hair color\",
\"religious belief\", \"ethnicity\", \"BMI\", \"height\", \"weight\", ... can each
be used to subdivide that space. Only a fool resorts to simple subdivisions.

A very long, insane rant...

It was quite long, but perfectly sane (if a little tedious).

John Doe isn\'t remotely sane, and he does have a lunatic enthusiasm for telling us about his favourite delusions.
If he lived in a glass house, he\'d long since have broken all the windows.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[John Doe]

Poor liddle Eddie got spanked and just can\'t get over it.

Unless Eddie is nym-shifting, it has never posted anything NORMAL
except when it got a severe spanking...

https://groups.google.com/g/sci.electronics.repair/c/MesPLcGU4BE

Is the stalker a nym-shifting troll, or a newbie netcop wannabe?

See also...
Peter Weiner <dtgamer99@gmail.com>
Edward H. <dtgamer99@gmail.com>
Edward Hernandez <dtgamer99@gmail.com>

Eddie is an example for all newbies. Don\'t get spanked!

Spanked Eddie...

--
Edward Hernandez <dtgamer99@gmail.com> wrote:

Path: eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.freedyn.de!newsreader4.netcologne.de!news.netcologne.de!peer03.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer03.ams4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx14.ams4.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Edward Hernandez <dtgamer99@gmail.com
Subject: Re: What is a women?
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design,free.spam
References: <t1keq0$tv7$1@dont-email.me> <t20egb$kdd$1@dont-email.me> <t21bsk$a6s$1@dont-email.me
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <BHW0K.91452$I_K3.86154@usenetxs.com
X-Complaints-To: https://www.astraweb.com/aup
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2022 10:56:33 UTC
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2022 10:56:33 GMT
X-Received-Bytes: 1855
Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org sci.electronics.design:664582 free.spam:17827

The John Doe troll stated the following in message-id
sdhn7c$pkp$4@dont-email.me>:

The troll doesn\'t even know how to format a USENET post...

And the John Doe troll stated the following in message-id
sg3kr7$qt5$1@dont-email.me>:

The reason Bozo cannot figure out how to get Google to keep from
breaking its lines in inappropriate places is because Bozo is
CLUELESS...

And yet, the clueless John Doe troll has continued to post incorrectly
formatted USENET articles that are devoid of content (latest example on
Wed, 30 Mar 2022 10:37:09 -0000 (UTC) in message-id
t21bsk$a6s$1@dont-email.me>).

NOBODY likes the John Doe troll\'s contentless spam.

Further, Troll Doe stated the following in message-id
svsh05$lbh$5@dont-email.me> posted Fri, 4 Mar 2022 08:01:09 -0000
(UTC):

Compared to other regulars, Bozo contributes practically nothing
except insults to this group.

Yet, since Wed, 5 Jan 2022 04:10:38 -0000 (UTC) Troll Doe\'s post ratio
to USENET has been 54.1% of its posts contributing \"nothing except
insults\" to USENET.

This posting is a public service announcement for any google groups
readers who happen by to point out that the John Doe troll does not even
follow the rules it uses to troll other posters.

SwwaBHeYvuiT

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Wednesday, March 30, 2022 at 11:40:35 PM UTC+11, John Doe wrote:
> Bill doesn\'t know what a woman is.

John Doe has some strange delusions. I did first year biology back in 1960. That spelled out the biological differences that were known about at the time.

We know a bit more now, but you wouldn\'t run into much of the new knowledge in first year biology today. A few years later I married one and I\'m still married to her, so I have a certain practical familiarity with at least one woman ( and I\'ve worked - more or less closely - with quite a few more).. Female hardware engineers are thin on the ground, but there have been quite a few female software engineers, pretty much all of them pretty good.

Then there was my mixed hockey team in the Netherlands ... the female traffic engineer got late onset multiple sclerosis, which wasn\'t great.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Edward Hernandez]

The John Doe troll stated the following in message-id
<sdhn7c$pkp$4@dont-email.me>:

> The troll doesn\'t even know how to format a USENET post...

And the John Doe troll stated the following in message-id
<sg3kr7$qt5$1@dont-email.me>:

The reason Bozo cannot figure out how to get Google to keep from
breaking its lines in inappropriate places is because Bozo is
CLUELESS...

And yet, the clueless John Doe troll has itself posted yet another
incorrectly formatted USENET posting on Wed, 30 Mar 2022 12:41:40 -0000
(UTC) in message-id <t21j64$3ke$2@dont-email.me>.

This posting is a public service announcement for any google groups
readers who happen by to point out that the John Doe troll does not even
follow the rules it uses to troll other posters.

5z6oPPep7IPi

 

[David Brown]

On 30/03/2022 14:18, Don Y wrote:

On 3/30/2022 4:53 AM, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
Absolutely first class summing up of the idiotic anomalies created by
mental pigmys who don\'t understand biology and go through life trying to
force everyone else to believe in a false reality which corresponds to
their own level of ignorance

  Would you mind if I keep a copy and use it (with due credits) when
needed?

Skip the accreditation but feel free to paraphrase/quote as you like.

I wonder how long before we hear these same \"champions of fairness
in women\'s sports\" ALSO championing EQUALITY of women in ALL things?

For those in this group, it will never happen. They are old, bitter,
bigoted and ignorant, and that won\'t change. They will probably deny
being misogynist (and racist, homophobic, and allergic to pretty much
anyone that doesn\'t conform to their personal image) and try to cover it
up, but it\'s usually quite obvious. They\'ll tell you that they even
employee a female/black/gay/Muslim engineer and that they do quite a
good job for a girl/black/whatever - thinking that \"proves\" they are not
bigoted.

They absolutely /love/ the myth that women\'s sport is being taken over
and spoiled by transgenders. In many places it\'s getting too hard to
boost your feeble self-image by beating down on women as women\'s rights
and equality have improved, but non-binary people are an easy target
that have become more visible in recent years. And you can rail against
them while claiming to be protecting women - it\'s the ideal situation
for them.

So no, they won\'t change - we just have to wait for them to die off.
Somebody in another thread quoted \"science progresses one funeral at a
time\" - sometimes the same applies to social justice.

[Gotta wonder what life is going to be like for men coming of age, now.
Given that so many FEWER of them are pursuing an education.  Will the
female doctors/lawyers/engineers/PROFESSIONALS be willing to \"settle\"
for a \"truck driver\" as a mate?  How will *he* look his friends in the
eye when they all implicitly know SHE is the breadwinner?]

My mother earned twice as much as my father. It never bothered them.

Men will get on fine in an equal society, even a truck driver married to
a female doctor, as long as they don\'t expect special treatment just
because they are male. A truck driver who wants to live in the 1950\'s
and expects his doctor wife to provide him with dinner and a beer in
front of the tele is not going to get on well. But people to who see
life with a partner as an equal, honest and fair partnership will do
fine, regardless of combinations of male, female, non-binary, truck
driver and doctor.

(sigh)  Gotta be tough living in perpetual fear of a life that
is changing around you and you\'re desperately clinging to YOUR past.
Better buy a gun!  That will make you feel \"potent\", eh?

I am glad to live in a country where the only question that is answered
\"better buy a gun\" is \"How do I tale up elk-hunting as a hobby?\".

 

[Liz Tuddenham]

Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:

On 3/30/2022 4:53 AM, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
Absolutely first class summing up of the idiotic anomalies created by
mental pigmys who don\'t understand biology and go through life trying to
force everyone else to believe in a false reality which corresponds to
their own level of ignorance

Would you mind if I keep a copy and use it (with due credits) when
needed?

Skip the accreditation but feel free to paraphrase/quote as you like.

Thanks, it is too good to be allowed to lapse into oblivion.

I wonder how long before we hear these same \"champions of fairness
in women\'s sports\" ALSO championing EQUALITY of women in ALL things?

Equality of opportunity doesn\'t worry me; enforced equality of results
is much more worrying. All targetted positive discrimination is
widespread negative discrimination under another name.

I have worked for good and bad bosses, some were female and some were
male, there was no correlation. I was mainly taught by males (because
that\'s how things were in those days), but found I learned a lot more
easily from females. I have known excellent female engineers who were
denied the chance to excel because they were female - and really bad
male engineers who held down unsuitable jobs because they could throw
their weight around when challenged.

The whole male/female thing is a mess, mainly because of lazy thinking
and prejudice.

--
~ Liz Tuddenham ~
(Remove the \".invalid\"s and add \".co.uk\" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk

 

[server]

On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 19:15:23 -0700, Don Y
<blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:

[Personally, I\'ve never had a female boss. Nor employer. And, only
*once* had a boss that was an engineer -- so the \"male-STEM-bias\" can\'t
explain away that (I\'ve known several female engineers). OTOH, every
\"HR\" person I\'ve encountered has been female, save one.]

My boss is female. She manages immense detail so I can design one
thing at a time. I hate to task switch.

If sports wanted to be \"fair\", they would assess the ATHLETIC
qualities of the participants and qualify the competitions accordingly.

You don\'t see \"welter-weights\" boxing \"heavy-weights\"! Why not?
Shouldn\'t the *bigger* boxer be ALLOWED to clean the little guy\'s
clock? (\"Oh, but that wouldn\'t be *sporting*!\")

Do we sort *jockeys* based on length of penis?? Or, amount of leg hair?

How does \"sex/gender\" *meaningfully* act to sort competitors? (in ANY
competition -- sports or otherwise)

Entities/individuals exist in an N-dimensional space. \"Sex\", \"hair color\",
\"religious belief\", \"ethnicity\", \"BMI\", \"height\", \"weight\", ... can each
be used to subdivide that space. Only a fool resorts to simple subdivisions.

No. Many clever people do it for power and profit.



--

I yam what I yam - Popeye

 

[Dimiter_Popoff]

On 3/30/2022 5:15, Don Y wrote:

....
If sports wanted to be \"fair\", they would assess the ATHLETIC
qualities of the participants and qualify the competitions accordingly.

You don\'t see \"welter-weights\" boxing \"heavy-weights\"!  Why not?
Shouldn\'t the *bigger* boxer be ALLOWED to clean the little guy\'s
clock?  (\"Oh, but that wouldn\'t be *sporting*!\")

Do we sort *jockeys* based on length of penis??  Or, amount of leg hair?

How does \"sex/gender\" *meaningfully* act to sort competitors?  (in ANY
competition -- sports or otherwise)

Don, of course nothing can be 100% fair when many people are involved.
And of course it is everyone\'s own busyness what the do with their
genitalia.
That is, until they make it other people\'s busyness.
In sport, a mediocre male athlete suddenly has his dick chopped off
and there we are, he is a champion - among women. Clearly unfair.
They ban athletes for life for much less, like using drugs etc.

Is it not practical to divide women/men by chromosome count or
something? That would be fair enough I suppose (but I don\'t know
much if anything about biology).

(about to email you on another topic but saw this first)

 

[server]

On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 18:52:16 +0300, Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com>
wrote:

On 3/30/2022 5:15, Don Y wrote:
....
If sports wanted to be \"fair\", they would assess the ATHLETIC
qualities of the participants and qualify the competitions accordingly.

You don\'t see \"welter-weights\" boxing \"heavy-weights\"!  Why not?
Shouldn\'t the *bigger* boxer be ALLOWED to clean the little guy\'s
clock?  (\"Oh, but that wouldn\'t be *sporting*!\")

Do we sort *jockeys* based on length of penis??  Or, amount of leg hair?

How does \"sex/gender\" *meaningfully* act to sort competitors?  (in ANY
competition -- sports or otherwise)

Don, of course nothing can be 100% fair when many people are involved.
And of course it is everyone\'s own busyness what the do with their
genitalia.
That is, until they make it other people\'s busyness.
In sport, a mediocre male athlete suddenly has his dick chopped off
and there we are, he is a champion - among women. Clearly unfair.
They ban athletes for life for much less, like using drugs etc.

Is it not practical to divide women/men by chromosome count or
something? That would be fair enough I suppose (but I don\'t know
much if anything about biology).

Read this:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1250236061

Lots of cool stuff.



--

I yam what I yam - Popeye

 

[amdx]

On 3/30/2022 7:18 AM, Don Y wrote:

On 3/30/2022 4:53 AM, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
Absolutely first class summing up of the idiotic anomalies created by
mental pigmys who don\'t understand biology and go through life trying to
force everyone else to believe in a false reality which corresponds to
their own level of ignorance

  Would you mind if I keep a copy and use it (with due credits) when
needed?

Skip the accreditation but feel free to paraphrase/quote as you like.

I wonder how long before we hear these same \"champions of fairness
in women\'s sports\" ALSO championing EQUALITY of women in ALL things?

[Gotta wonder what life is going to be like for men coming of age, now.
Given that so many FEWER of them are pursuing an education.  Will the
female doctors/lawyers/engineers/PROFESSIONALS be willing to \"settle\"
for a \"truck driver\" as a mate?  How will *he* look his friends in the
eye when they all implicitly know SHE is the breadwinner?]

 This is already an issue, especially in the black community.
I enjoy watching Kevin Samuels although sometimes he is a bit harsh,
but he is giving tough love. He\'s trying to fix the 30% marriage rate of
Black women.
This particular video doesn\'t cover highly educated women picking men,
but many of his videos do,
and they often think they are going to marry a man the earns $200k to
$400k a year.
Kevin points out that that is less then 5% of men and those aren\'t
looking for the
30 year olds, they want the 22 year olds.
This video is a women building her business and delaying marriage.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VwbPUZXek60

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wGaAGcLlig

                        Mikek

PS, Kevin doesn\'t think a women should weigh more than a man.



--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

 

[Don Y]

On 3/30/2022 8:52 AM, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:

Don, of course nothing can be 100% fair when many people are involved.
And of course it is everyone\'s own busyness what the do with their
genitalia.
That is, until they make it other people\'s busyness.
In sport, a mediocre male athlete suddenly has his dick chopped off
and there we are, he is a champion - among women. Clearly unfair.
They ban athletes for life for much less, like using drugs etc.

But that\'s because some idiot decided that male-female categories
make some sort of sense -- instead of more clearly sorting
contestants into similar capabilities (relying on genitalia as
the sole criteria).

As I said, you wouldn\'t want to watch a heavy-weight boxing a welter-weight
because it would be \"no contest\". You\'d *expect* the heavy weight to win.

EVEN IF BOTH WERE (cis)FEMALE (or cismale)

You don\'t race a stock car against a rail on a dragstrip -- because you
KNOW the rail will win, hands down.

Instead, you try to match competitors as closely as possible to \"make it
sporting\".

Is it fair for a man with an artificial foot (\"blade runner\") to race
men with natural appendages? Can you demonstrate that the \"blade\"
doesn\'t give him an *advantage* (despite the thinking that he is, in
effect, \"handicapped\")?

How exciting is it to watch Jeopardy, Wheel of Fortune, etc. when one
contestant is clearly MUCH better than the others? Wanna bet their
viewership would fall if this was the case EVERY time?

[Why do the Japanese love *ties*?]

Is it not practical to divide women/men by chromosome count or
something? That would be fair enough I suppose (but I don\'t know
much if anything about biology).

I contend it is a silly distinction, in the 21st century.

Why not allow \"doping\"? And, the body that can better tolerate
(and respond to) the drugs should DESERVE to win, right? Clearly,
the other competitors can take the same drugs so the playing field
wouldn\'t be biased by one competitor having access to them while
another doesn\'t?

> (about to email you on another topic but saw this first)