I really liked Judge Jackson's answer on the definition of a "woman."

[Seymour Flops]

You are conflating two separate issues, biology and sociology. On the biological question of what is a male and female the answer isn't binary. The biological fact that some people are born with any mixture of chromosomes and sex organs proves that point.

It proves that male and female are binary with extremely rare exceptions.

The sociological question deals with things like the idea of fairness or like the bathroom issue. Let me explain the difference. Biology makes no case for what bathroom someone can or can not use. Meaning a woman isn't biologically incapable of walking into the men's room bending over a urinal and doing about as decent a job of making it in the hole as any guy (as far as my anecdotal evidence is concerned). The question of whether or not she can use the men's room isn't a question of biological capability but whether or not society wants to allow her to.

The question of whether trans athletes should be allowed to compete and where isn't a biological question. Biology can't even make clear determinations on what is a male or female and it certainly doesn't care one way or another if men or women or any combination of them play sport together.

In that case they would be biologically incapable of running which is a key aspect of the vaulting. A better analogy and question would be what to do with someone who wanted to compete with artifical legs.

Interesting. How would you come down on that question about a double amputee? Say his artificial legs are extremely springy and he begins to break all records for pole vaulting, even requiring that the standards (the poles that hold the crossbar) to be lengthened in order for his ability to be measured. Would you advocate discriminating against that person?

Since you seem way more intelligent, I'll give you a chance to answer the question that Moonglow is dodging:

Do you advocate that sports organizations end the practice of categorizing teams into "Men's" and "Women's?"

 

[Decus]

Of course not.

So do you advocate ending the practice of categorizing sports into "Men's" and "Women's"

Yes, or no, then explain all you like.

I really wish they would allow all athletes to compete without separating the sexes. In the Olympics women wouldn't get past qualifying rounds and all the medals would go to men. There would be no need for the WNBA or the Women's National Soccer team given that only the best athletes would be picked for those sports and teams as well.

Too fcking funny.

.

 

[Canon Shooter]

I wonder how Ms. Jackson would have answered if she was asked if 'she' was a woman.

At this point, she wouldn't be able to answer it.

But I agree with you. I would love to see her put on the spot like that...

 

[Bob Blaylock]

What about a person with xy chromosomes, a vagina and testicles instead of ovaries?

 

[Calypso Jones]

God said, 'Save yourself for the marriage bed'.

 

[Curried Goats]

It proves that male and female are binary with extremely rare exceptions.

Those exceptions prove that it isn't binary and scientists certainly don't feel the pressure to make it so, you do. Of course the idea of who someone is biologically to a scientist and biologist is a bit more complex than whether you have testicles or ovaries or whether or not Canon Shooter finds you attractive enough to want to sleep with.

Interesting. How would you come down on that question about a double amputee? Say his artificial legs are extremely springy and he begins to break all records for pole vaulting, even requiring that the standards (the poles that hold the crossbar) to be lengthened in order for his ability to be measured. Would you advocate discriminating against that person?

Nope.

1. I don't really care about sports records. I love sports but I love the drama in moments that are determined in seconds and inches. The record keeping I don't actually care about.

2. Let's say a man came back from being a double amputee, to learning to walk again on sticks, to training, then to beating Usain Bolt in foot race. Why the fuck would I do anything but celebrate that miracle? You'd have to be a total asshole not to.

3. I'm a man and a foot race between me and Usain Bolt isn't made "fair" because we both have penises. Fairness is largely an illusion.

Since you seem way more intelligent, I'll give you a chance to answer the question that Moonglow is dodging:

Do you advocate that sports organizations end the practice of categorizing teams into "Men's" and "Women's?"

To me that is more an issue of the freedom of private individuals and organizations. If someone wants to create a league where men and women violently run into and tackle one another for every inch of turf and all the participants are adults and willing, I have no problem with it.

 

[Viktor]

Jackson perceived that the question was political, so she gave a political answer. Pretty smart actually.

She is too stupid to realize that supporting Critical Race Theory will make many people very angry.

 

[Curried Goats]

She is too stupid to realize that supporting Critical Race Theory will make many people very angry.

Why should your impotent anger bother her at all?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Don't celebrate just yet morons, college educated professionals are rarely on your side of ignorance. That includes biologists.

That's why you leftist Froot Loops keep trotting out all these biologists insisting that humans aren't sexually dichotomous . . . oh, wait, you don't. You keep giving us weasel articles from "gender studies" majors, when you don't just assert your opinion as fact and expect THAT to be proof.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Jackson perceived that the question was political, so she gave a political answer. Pretty smart actually.

"Gosh, it was SO SMART of her to claim to be unable to answer a question children can answer!"

Uh huh.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Whichever I'm your intellectual superior. Why would you clowns run to cover under biologists? You eschew science, remember, it rarely ever agrees with your limited and bigoted intellects, such as they are.

I've cleaned stuff out of my cat's litter box that was intellectually superior to you. Your delusion that you have any intelligence to congratulate yourself on rivals your delusion that male and female are mutable. And don't even get me started on, "YOU don't like science, because you don't agree with the political agenda I have declared to be science!"

 

[Curried Goats]

That's why you leftist Froot Loops keep trotting out all these biologists insisting that humans aren't sexually dichotomous . . . oh, wait, you don't. You keep giving us weasel articles from "gender studies" majors, when you don't just assert your opinion as fact and expect THAT to be proof.

Speak for yourself if you can't emotionally handle the existence of intersexed human beings soy boy. Or gyal.

 

[Calypso Jones]

To show how a deity dies?

here's that occasion where you don't throw pearls before swine.

 

[Cecilie1200]

She was being questioned about her politics not her scientific knowledge. Recall that she framed her (non) answer within the 'context' of the question, which was clearly political. Criticizing her answer is just grabbing at straws by the Republicans.

She was being questioned about the English language, moron. There is no "context" in which the answer changes.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Really? Then post these thoughts of "biologists" on sex and gender because I don't they find either notions as binary as you stunted clowns present them.

No, Sparkles, YOU are the one who made the assertion that biology doesn't agree with us. The burden of proof is on YOU, and you don't get to play Torquemada and demand that we justify ourselves to you.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Speak for yourself if you can't emotionally handle the existence of intersexed human beings soy boy. Or gyal.

No thanks, talking about the world in terms of personal feelings is YOUR department, and I have no desire to be like you in any way.

I'll go right on posting reality as it is in any way I want, and you'll go on pathetically wishing you got to dictate to me what I can say.

By the way, Mr. Science, "intersex" is defined as "relating to or denoting a person or animal that has both male and female sex organs or other sexual characteristics". What we used to refer to as "hermaphrodites". We aren't talking about hermaphrodites, and you don't get to hide behind their existence to justify your claims about people who don't fall into that category.

Thanks for giving us the hypocritical demonstration about who's REALLY trying to hide behind something that doesn't support him.

 

[Cecilie1200]

What about a person with xy chromosomes, a vagina and testicles instead of ovaries? Again, real life isn't as binary as you frightened clowns desperately need to pretend it is.

Swyer Syndrome occurs in about 1 in every 80,000 births. Are you suggesting that accommodating the existence of rare genetic defects also requires us to play pretend with people who don't have those defects?

Again, real life isn't as unknowable as you ignorant tools desperately need to pretend it is.

Next time, just ask us to laugh at you. It will take less time, and have the same result.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The context that she alluded to was a yet-to-be adjudicated hot potato. I'm sure she was prepared for it. She also seemed to be amused by it.

"Gosh, she looked so brilliant because I was told to believe she was!"

 

[Curried Goats]

No thanks, talking about the world in terms of personal feelings is YOUR department, and I have no desire to be like you in any way.

I'll go right on posting reality as it is in any way I want, and you'll go on pathetically wishing you got to dictate to me what I can say.

By the way, Mr. Science, "intersex" is defined as "relating to or denoting a person or animal that has both male and female sex organs or other sexual characteristics". What we used to refer to as "hermaphrodites". We aren't talking about hermaphrodites, and you don't get to hide behind their existence to justify your claims about people who don't fall into that category.

Thanks for giving us the hypocritical demonstration about who's REALLY trying to hide behind something that doesn't support him.

I don't know what you are talking about but I'm talking about biological facts.

 

[Curried Goats]

Swyer Syndrome occurs in about 1 in every 80,000 births. Are you suggesting that accommodating the existence of rare genetic defects also requires us to play pretend with people who don't have those defects?

Again, real life isn't as unknowable as you ignorant tools desperately need to pretend it is.

Next time, just ask us to laugh at you. It will take less time, and have the same result.

Are you suggesting trans individuals are pretending because the science there suggests their brain patterns are far more similar to the brain patterns of people in their chosen gender. Science isn't on your side dum dum.