What is a woman?

[olofscience 480]

1 hour ago, metalslug said:

Nope. Witness #3 would be the most useless as they had the worst view, from behind.

And in billvon's simile all three witnesses had the same view.

what was that quote - "The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt." (Bertrand Russell)

 

Lots of people are so proud of announcing their certainty here...

[brenthutch 444]

10 hours ago, wmw999 said:

I had a friend who was born intersex (both sets). Her parents decided they wanted a boy, so that’s what the surgery left behind. But she said she never, ever, felt like a man, even back when that was ridiculous and unacceptable. So to make herself into one, she joined the army and became a Ranger. Career, decorated, invalided in the long run because of battle-incurred injuries and agent orange.

 

Wendy P. 

Cute story but I’m afraid I’m going to have to call bullshit on it.  Your timelines don’t add up, agent orange use in the military ended in ‘71 and the military did not start paying for transition surgery until 2017.  Give me “her” birth name and I will cross reference with Ranger School graduation records.  If I find a match I will apologize.

[wmw999 2,447]

Your calling bullshit doesn't change the story's truth, and your judgment isn't necessary. The risk of your negative judgment is far outweighed by the risk of sharing what is someone else's private info. I quite deliberately left stuff out.

Wendy P.

[brenthutch 444]

1 minute ago, wmw999 said:

Your calling bullshit doesn't change the story's truth, and your judgment isn't necessary.

Wendy P.

No but the fact that your timeline doesn’t make sense does. Why don’t you give me “her” name?  If your story is true, it would be newsworthy as “she” would be the first woman to graduate Ranger School!

BTW what is your definition of “truth”?

[BIGUN 1,314]

5 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Why don’t you give me “her” name?  If your story is true, it would be newsworthy

You answered your own question. You would not respect their privacy. 

Transgender (like any other medical condition) is none of anyone else's business.  

[brenthutch 444]

Just now, BIGUN said:

You answered your own question. You would not respect their privacy. 

Transgender (like any other medical condition) is none of anyone else's business.  

That’s fine but her story still doesn’t add up.  There is a 45 year gap in the timeline.

 

[sfzombie13 324]

1 minute ago, brenthutch said:

That’s fine but her story still doesn’t add up.  There is a 45 year gap in the timeline.

 

what doesn't add up is your continued questioning of it.  the gap is in your mind, and it shows.  there are such things as privacy, and there are still those of us who cherish and respect it.  then you have folks such as yourself who thrive and revel in hate and divisiveness.  i'll say a prayer for you.  you need to re-examine your views, but that's your business and not mine.  see how easy that is?

[BIGUN 1,314]

11 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

There is a 45 year gap in the timeline.

But the timeline still works. 18 years old and joins the Army + 45 = 63 year old life of unhappiness. Not unrealistic to think someone wants to enter Act III of their life feeling happy and how they should have felt their whole life.

IMO. You're out of line.   

[brenthutch 444]

8 minutes ago, BIGUN said:

But the timeline still works. 18 years old and joins the Army + 45 = 63 year old life of unhappiness. Not unrealistic to think someone wants to enter Act III of their life feeling happy and how they should have felt their whole life.

 

The Army would not have paid for gender reassignment in that scenario.  It is obviously a fabricated, composite story. Take a little https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristin_Beck mix it with some https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Levine throw in some agent orange, just because… and voila!

[gowlerk 2,193]

6 hours ago, billvon said:

"I saw the back of someone with long brown hair wearing a blue dress." 

Probably named Monica.

[metalslug 36]

.

Edited March 27, 2022 by metalslug

[brenthutch 444]

https://babylonbee.com/news/conan-the-barbarian-acquires-biology-degree-so-he-can-know-whose-lamentations-hes-hearing

[billvon 2,991]

7 hours ago, metalslug said:

Utter nonsense and deflection. This was a questioning for a judicial position, she was quite logically being asked her legal opinion on a legal definition

She demonstrated that she does not have the usual biases.  Excellent.  Some day she may have to rule on a case where a woman with XY chromosomes can participate in a woman's sport.  She demonstrated she will not immediately assume that they are a man (due to her chromosomes) or a woman (due to her vagina) but rather decide the matter on the legal (and scientific) merits.

Quote

Nope. Witness #3 would be the most useless as they had the worst view,

They all had exactly the same view.  Witnesses 1 and 2 made assumptions.  Even witness 3 made some assumptions, but they were less broad - and he provided the most objective view of the situation,

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

Everyone knows perfectly well that it was a 'gotcha' question.

And Jackson's answer of "I'm not a biologist" was a clipped quote of her entire answer.
Which basically boiled down to "the definition would depend on the facts of the case being argued."
And when Blackburn pressed her, citing a few different SC decisions, Jackson's answer of 'I'm not familiar with the case and I'd have to read the decision before answering' is an entirely appropriate answer.

But, again, for a 'gotcha' question, the rabid right wingers see it as 'pandering to the left'.

 

Not to mention that Blackburn told some very blatant lies and mixed and matched SC decisions.
Go figure. She wasn't the one under oath (there's a big part of me that would like to see those posing the question in these hearings subject to the same oath and consequences that those giving testimony are).

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/03/23/remarkable-bad-faith-involved-what-is-woman-attack/

[brenthutch 444]

13 minutes ago, wolfriverjoe said:

Everyone knows perfectly well that it was a 'gotcha' question.

And Jackson's answer of "I'm not a biologist" was a clipped quote of her entire answer.
Which basically boiled down to "the definition would depend on the facts of the case being argued."
And when Blackburn pressed her, citing a few different SC decisions, Jackson's answer of 'I'm not familiar with the case and I'd have to read the decision before answering' is an entirely appropriate answer.

But, again, for a 'gotcha' question, the rabid right wingers see it as 'pandering to the left'.

 

Not to mention that Blackburn told some very blatant lies and mixed and matched SC decisions.
Go figure. She wasn't the one under oath (there's a big part of me that would like to see those posing the question in these hearings subject to the same oath and consequences that those giving testimony are).

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/03/23/remarkable-bad-faith-involved-what-is-woman-attack/

Pretty tame stuff when compared to the “when did you quit raping women” treatment of Kavanaugh 

[billvon 2,991]

Yep.  And to call out the exact exchange:

Blackburn: “Do you interpret Justice Ginsburg’s meaning of ‘men’ and ‘women’ as male and female?”
Jackson: “Again, because I don’t know the case, I don’t know how I’d interpret it,  I’d need to read the whole thing.”
B: “Okay. Can you provide a definition for the word ‘woman’?”
J: “Can I provide a definition? No. I can't.”
B: “You can’t?” 
J:  “Not in this context,  I’m not a biologist.”
B:  “So you think the meaning of the word woman is so unclear and controversial that you can’t give me a definition?”
J:  “Senator, in my work as a judge, what I do is I address disputes,  If there’s a dispute about a definition, people make arguments and I look at the law and I decide."

Which is exactly what you hope to see from a judge.

Imagine, for example, you are disputing custody of a child who you are an adoptive parent for.  The case begins and the judge enters the room.  "So I understand that this case is about someone who is not a parent who wants to take the poor child away from his legal parent" she says as the case begins.  Is that the mark of a good judge?  Or, by claiming they were not a legal parent, has she pre-judged the case?

[kallend 2,027]

The entire GOP line of questioning was a GOP pander-fest.  

[BIGUN 1,314]

13 minutes ago, kallend said:

The entire GOP line of questioning was a GOP pander-fest.

Yes, but she handled it well IMO. 

[brenthutch 444]

51 minutes ago, kallend said:

The entire GOP line of questioning was a GOP pander-fest.  

Unlike the Kavanaugh confirmation 

[kallend 2,027]

1 hour ago, BIGUN said:

Yes, but she handled it well IMO. 

I suspect that, in general, SCOTUS nominees are smarter than the politicians who grill them.

[Phil1111 1,149]

19 hours ago, kallend said:

The entire GOP line of questioning was a GOP pander-fest.  

Yes

19 hours ago, BIGUN said:

Yes, but she handled it well IMO. 

Yes, see below.

17 hours ago, kallend said:

I suspect that, in general, SCOTUS nominees are smarter than the politicians who grill them.

True, but see first quote above. Which defines more or less the whole exercise.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

On 3/26/2022 at 3:57 PM, Phil1111 said:

All sporting organizations have the common sense to deal with these issues.

Do they? How exactly do they deal with these issues?

[Phil1111 1,149]

5 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

Do they? How exactly do they deal with these issues?

You ask, I provide.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

On 3/27/2022 at 2:54 AM, metalslug said:

Utter nonsense and deflection. This was a questioning for a judicial position, she was quite logically being asked her legal opinion on a legal definition

A legal definition should be easy to look up. What is the legal definition of a woman?

[SkyDekker 1,465]

3 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

You ask, I provide.

There is nothin in that pdf that defines what a male and a female athlete is.

The case regarding Caster Semenya for instance took many, many years to come to an "end". Even then it wasn't decided based on a determination of male or female, but a decision around the testosterone levels in the body.