What to call this thread?

Shiftless2 said:
"Anti trans policies don't just harm trans children – they harm ALL children." S2 #100
Click to expand...
In defense of noble principle, if all rights are not defended, all rights may be in jeopardy. So even if the above quotation isn't precisely true, for purpose of the defense of Liberty and human rights, it should be treated as true.
From the link in #100:
Hamand’s 14-year-old daughter has severe autism and limited verbal communication skills. Early on, Hamand knew her daughter likely wouldn’t be able to safely manage getting her period, or the mood changes and other side effects from menstruation.

https://www.texastribune.org/2023/0...health-gender-affirming-paxton-investigation/
Click to expand...
I don't agree politically much w/ Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), but he appeared on FNS and expressed concern over gender reassignment surgery for minors. I share Cruz' concern.

I strongly believe "s/he might change her / his mind" is nonsense in most cases. BUT !! There's more to it than mind alone.
Before such surgery was possible such persons seem to have managed to reach adulthood (the age of legal emancipation) without cataclysmic consequence.

I understand, change of mind is not absolutely impossible. Doubters can read Dr. Carl Sagan's Brocca's Brain for details. I'm not asserting national policy must be molded to conform to these rarest of exceptions. Individuals are who they are. Splendid. BUT !!
Leaving major life / genital reconfiguration decisions to citizens that lack adult perspective is to some degree an unringable bell, and a foolish precedent.

Until a panacea solution presents, I think it prudent to delay such surgery (or chemistry?) decisions until adulthood.
My personal experience with such delay was vasectomy. I wanted a vasectomy at age 14, as I was determined to not procreate. I was repeatedly denied: "You'll change your mind."
No. I did not.
BUT !!
They made me wait until I was nearly 40, far too long. Split the baby. Adulthood is close enough. AND !!

Delaying surgery in this case isn't premised on "s/he may change her / his mind", a ridiculous notion about their state of mind in most cases. BUT !! There's more to this than merely who the patient is.
The advent of viable gender-reassignment surgery raises the issue of what's to be done about it. And "modern" surgery performed today may preclude superior options developed tomorrow.

Everybody calm down. As Oprah said:
"I think you can have it all. You can't have it all at once." Oprah Winfrey
Click to expand...
PS
There's a distinction between the law, and approved medical practice.
The law is to protect the innocent, & minors from force or fraud. Approved medical practice should be a higher standard.
This post is intended to address the latter, though I realize it to whatever degree entrains the former as well.
 
After watching a girl destroy her male competitor in #72 here's another case of a girl completely demolishing her opponent - this time in free style wrestling (that move is called a suplex if you don't know)

 
According to TV news the behavior wasn't just "confrontaional"

‘Threats’ prompt US Target stores to remove some Pride Collection products​

Items removed from sale and others moved to back of stores after ‘confrontational behavior’ towards employees

www.theguardian.com

‘Threats’ prompt US Target stores to remove some Pride Collection products

Items removed from sale and others moved to back of stores after ‘confrontational behavior’ towards employees
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
 
Shiftless2 said:
Back to the difference between wrestiing (as you know it) and other martial arts - this is an international level bout - the victory here has nothing to do with pinning the opponent's shoulders
Click to expand...
The purpose of such one on one competition is to win.
To win, one competitor must meet the criterion of victory in that sport. I can watch the video. But seeing one competitor spring to feet and strut confidently away leaves unanswered the criterion of success / victory.

We can consider these sports, similar to NHL or MLB.
But unlike them, martial arts imply a practical utility as a means of self-defense *. In that context one might imagine the purpose of a martial arts competition would be to demonstrate the neutralization of an aggressive, violent antagonist.

* without a baseball bat, or hockey stick
 
I noticed the tap-out.
But is that the only criterion for winning the contest, coercing the opponent to tap out?

A few decades ago I saw an interview with a martial artist (MMA?) whose arm was broken in a high priority match.
Whatever.
But it's easier to understand the match if the observer / spectator knows the rules.
I don't.
 
sear said:
I noticed the tap-out.
But is that the only criterion for winning the contest, coercing the opponent to tap out?
Click to expand...
In a judo match there are four ways to win a bout:

1 - throw your opponent so they land on their back (that's an "ippon" or full point) - if the throw isn't clean enough for that a "wazari" (half point) can be awarded - and, as you can imagine, two wazaris (i.e., two half points) add to a full point. In either case that ends the bout. If, at the end of regulation time, only a wazari has been obtained that still ends the bout with a win. There are some lesser partial points but they only count towards a decision if there was no decisive score.

2 - hold your opponent down 20 seconds (basically pin them - nothing to do with shoulders on the mats - just immobilize them - you'd be surprised how hard that is to do against a skilled opponent) - that counts as an ippon as well

3 - choking them until they surrender (or if they're really stubborn pass out) - have to admit I've only had the latter happen a couple of times - again, that counts as an ippon.

4 - apply an armlock until they tap out - never seen anyone get their arm broken but it is theoretically possible - after all, you might have an opponent who is too stubborn to tap out. There are some serious restrictions on this - no standing armlocks (they used to be legal when I was still competing but they've changed the rules on that - I've only seen one done properly once but later that same year in the nationals one of the competitors had their shoulder completely destroyed - it's because of things like that that the rules were changed) Again, if they tap out that counts as an ippon.

If, at the end of regulation time, no-one has scored the ref and corner judges call a decision (there are rules re overtimes but no need to discuss them here)
 
My apology for dragging you through all that S2.
Problem is, there are enough different styles of the soft arts, numerous forms of similar competition I wasn't sure how much the criterion of victory varies among them (or their formal names, etc). BUT !

I've got a clearer idea of what's involved now. Thanks.
I have wondered, sometimes called a "gi", but with several other names, the training / exercise uniform is sturdy.
I've wondered, in actual street-level self-defense what happens if the assailant's shirt is grabbed as the gi is grabbed, but the shirt tears, gives way, leaving the assailant both in aggressive posture, and irritated about the destruction of his wardrobe ensemble.
Might be better to just open up with a couple of 50 cal. machine guns and slice the guy into several separate piles of protoplasm.
 
I'd like to call this meeting of Cisphobia Anonymous to order

Fw-38JkagAYjVND
 
Shiftless2 said:
I'd like to call this meeting of Cisphobia Anonymous to order

Fw-38JkagAYjVND
Click to expand...
I'm sympathetic. Been there, experienced that.
I can't endorse gratuitous insult of cis-. But,
if they don't wear a "My title is Mr." T-shirt it can be difficult to tell. Can be particularly difficult over the telephone.
 
S2 #112
sear said:
Been there, experienced that.
Click to expand...
Years after I left military service I was donating blood, and consistent with protocol I'd learned in the military I addressed the female medical attendant withdrawing the pint from me as M'am.
She seemed annoyed, perhaps something I'd done to offend her, so I endeavored to be deliberately unerringly polite, and addressed her as M'am again.
As the brief medical procedure progressed she seemed to grow increasingly enraged with me. Turns out she found me addressing her as M'am insulting. Perhaps she considered herself not old enough for such matronly address. BUT !!
Shiftless2 said:
The third panel re misgendering says "several times" so it's clearly a repeat behavior
Click to expand...
It can be "repeat behavior" and also be not necessarily deliberately insulting behavior.

If in my case when I first addressed her as M'am she'd said: - You may address me as Lord Gwendolyn. -
that would have solved the problem. But she kept it secret, as if it was her setup, something for her to act irritable about.

What I don't know is whether the Cis- segment of society has a higher percentage of chip on shoulder. Possibly.
Not sure it matters. But it might help explain cases as illustrated in #110.
 
S2 #115
Not sure if NoOx is a genuine buffoon, or merely Sprankle's straight-man.

but if you'll pardon a wrong turn
not all porn is horrid.
Comedy porn can be worth a chuckle. Might even get an idea for a new move or two. BUT !!

I may have just sprinkled on your point here S2, a point I share. Hypocrisy, BAD !

note:
My subconscious frequently intrudes. Instead of "hypocrisy" above, I initially typed "hypocracy". Hypocritical governance?

PS
S2 #114
BugsKissingFudd01.JPG
 
PL #117
Public outcry is such a powerful tool it even worked on the Chi-Comms in Tiananmen Square
for a moment.

BUT !!

Goldilocks must not be ignored. We can appreciate the exercise of Liberty from the transphobes. BUT !!
What's the British Library's excuse? Champions of ignorance?
 
S2 #119
Reminds me of the bereaved former anti-choice parents of their deceased daughter, casualty of an illegal "back-alley" abortion.
"He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself." Thomas Paine
Click to expand...
To genuine conservatives government is the problem.
To pseudo-cons authoritarian government usurpation is the solution.

Pseudo-cons are not political conservatives. They claim the label for the prestige, but have no legitimate claim to the prestige or the label.

Their political activism is not to promote or defend their own rights, but to usurp the rights of others.

Next time you witness a pseudo-con claiming to be conservative, ask them precisely what it is they're trying to conserve. Then enjoy silence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top