Colorado signs law allowing abortion at ANY POINT in PREGNANCY

Phoenixmgs

The Muse of Fate
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
8,652
764
118
w/ M'Kraan Crystal
Gender
Male
If the problem is cultural it can not and will not be solved by needless segregation.
Desegregating sports would exacerbate the problem.

But it is a sport: and it's a sport for no less a reason than so many people and official bodies recognise it as one.

In a similar vein, as we're on a gaming website, I would suggest you consider very carefully the fact that gaming has "eSports".
You don't do anything physically in chess. You can instruct someone to move the pieces for you if you didn't have limbs. Doing well in chess has nothing to do with how you move the pieces. Even in video gaming, there's at least some physicality to it with hand and finger dexterity. I'd consider video games a sport but they'd be as far down the spectrum as you can get to not being a sport but still technically a sport. Chess isn't a sport just like Axis and Allies isn't a sport just like DnD isn't a sport.
 

TheMysteriousGX

Elite Member
Legacy
Sep 16, 2014
8,265
6,735
118
Country
United States
Desegregating sports would exacerbate the problem.
I know you have a pathological aversion to, like, experts, but the problem doesn't get fixed with segregation. Like with chess, where a child prodigy just walked away because she was relegated to women's events.

EDIT: Anyway, fun diversions aside, given the rise of GOP members vowing to ban any and all abortion, do you still contend that this law does nothing and is objectionable?
 
Last edited:

Phoenixmgs

The Muse of Fate
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
8,652
764
118
w/ M'Kraan Crystal
Gender
Male
I know you have a pathological aversion to, like, experts, but the problem doesn't get fixed with segregation. Like with chess, where a child prodigy just walked away because she was relegated to women's events.

EDIT: Anyway, fun diversions aside, given the rise of GOP members vowing to ban any and all abortion, do you still contend that this law does nothing and is objectionable?
How does making sports desegregated where girls have less chance and opportunity to compete improving any cultural issue with sports being a boys thing? Things like segregation and discrimination aren't inherently bad things that are always bad. It's like torrenting is a very valid way to share non-copyrighted files, but it's just that it's mainly used for sharing copyright files that makes it perceived as bad. Every single person discriminates in some fashion everyday because it's valid in most instances.

I believe women's chess was started because chess was male dominated so girls/women feel more welcome to play. Chess is something that shouldn't be segregated.

It still is objectionable to have a chosen abortion 9 months in, which the law allows for.
 

TheMysteriousGX

Elite Member
Legacy
Sep 16, 2014
8,265
6,735
118
Country
United States
How does making sports desegregated where girls have less chance and opportunity to compete improving any cultural issue with sports being a boys thing? Things like segregation and discrimination aren't inherently bad things that are always bad. It's like torrenting is a very valid way to share non-copyrighted files, but it's just that it's mainly used for sharing copyright files that makes it perceived as bad. Every single person discriminates in some fashion everyday because it's valid in most instances.
I'm sorry, the fuck does torrenting have to do with literally any of this?
I believe women's chess was started because chess was male dominated so girls/women feel more welcome to play. Chess is something that shouldn't be segregated.
Yeah, it's backfired horrifically
It still is objectionable to have a chosen abortion 9 months in, which the law allows for.
Objectionable to whom, and why do they get a say over how somebody else uses their body?

Newsflash my dude: fucking nobody stays pregnant for 9 months only to abort for the lulz. Why the fuck are you for adding government red tape to something that's typically traumatic and time sensitive?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Seanchaidh

Agema

You have no authority here, Jackie Weaver
Legacy
Mar 3, 2009
8,598
5,962
118
You don't do anything physically in chess. You can instruct someone to move the pieces for you if you didn't have limbs. Doing well in chess has nothing to do with how you move the pieces.
"Sport" does not necessarily have to involve physical activity - although through its origins it conventionally has.

The simple fact is that if enough people and organisations (such as the IOC) recognise it as a sport, then it's a sport.
 

McElroy

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 3, 2013
4,545
360
88
Finland
"Sport" does not necessarily have to involve physical activity - although through its origins it conventionally has.

The simple fact is that if enough people and organisations (such as the IOC) recognise it as a sport, then it's a sport.
Semantics. IOC giving recognition to FIDE as a sports organization can be dismissed easily. If that recognition really is the only thing speaking for chess' sports status, it doesn't have much to stand on. You're smart enough to understand the arguments against it. Join us. Join the sports fans. We have the superior opinion in this matter.

Check.
 

Agema

You have no authority here, Jackie Weaver
Legacy
Mar 3, 2009
8,598
5,962
118
Semantics. IOC giving recognition to FIDE as a sports organization can be dismissed easily. If that recognition really is the only thing speaking for chess' sports status
Yes, it is literally semantics.

Words mean what people believe them to mean. As people believe something to be defined by a word, so that the meaning of that word includes that thing. Thus for instance the way that "literally" has come to mean both what it traditionally meant ("exactly", "or to the letter"), and the opposite because enough people started using it to mean the opposite (i.e. "figuratively"). That global bodies like the IOC and Global Association of International Sports Federations accepted chess as a sport pretty much sealed the deal.

Although that said, perhaps it is also appropriate etymologically for chess to be a sport. "Sport" comes from the French "desport" - to amuse oneself, also the derivation of the English word "disport" which has a very similar meaning. And why cannot someone amuse themselves playing or watching any game, irrespective of physical activity?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: tstorm823

Asita

Answer Hazy, Ask Again Later
Legacy
Jun 15, 2011
3,192
1,027
118
Country
USA
Gender
Male
I don't think you understood a word I said. For example, I spoke of intersex people identified as a specific sex as misidentified, and then explicitly said that isn't what "trans" is, so you wrote a lecture about how that idea of trans (that I specifically said wasn't trans) is wrong. And then immediately after accusing me of constructing a strawman that I very specifically didn't, you unleashed a significantly bigger strawman about what bigotry you assume I actually think in spite of my words being right in front of you saying the opposite.
Well to borrow your own phrasing: I don't think you understood a word I said. I did not give you the rundown of cis and trans because you alluded to the intersex. I did so because you tried to redefine the opposing position as only existing the context of misidentification and nothing else. Specifically that second paragraph of yours, wherein you say - and I quote - "But I really think most of you are just still applying an inverted double standard: if a doctor can misidentify a persons sex based on a shallow assessment of physical characteristics, why would you then consider changing those physical characteristics to be a sex change? If the current standards can be right or wrong, and you take the exact inverse position, you've still taken a position that can be right or wrong." You misrepresented the opposing position as claiming that SRS happens because the doctors got the sex wrong and then tried to pull a gotcha presenting the position as inherently contradictory, down to suggesting that if we actually believed that we wouldn't call it a sex change. Hence my explaining how badly you bastardized the basic concepts.

Now, I will concede that I perhaps chose my phrasing poorly when I described your apparent position as thinking of the intersex "as what trans should be", as that is indeed easy to read as implying that you think intersex are trans rather than my intent that you thought of intersex as a valid application of SRS and the trans as an invalid application. But this certainly is not something that you "said the opposite" on. Point of fact that's rooted in the final bit of the first paragraph: "if trans people were just those whose overall physical biology was misidentified at birth due to mismatched or ambiguous genitalia, it wouldn't even be an argument. Go for it". Tell me, how is that not conveying that if the trans instead intersex you would have no bones about it?

Hell, considering the whole of your post, it's not difficult to read that as a passive aggressive insinuation of motte-and-bailey tactics, implying that we retreat to pretending it's all about intersex when challenged on trans. So, as such, I further feel obliged to point out that I first invoked the intersex purely to illustrate why the "it's all down to chromosomes" angle is patently bullshit. As an analogy, think of it in the same vein as if...what would be a good example...as if I were pointing out that creationists' efforts to get "equal time" in the biology classroom and "letting the kids decide for themselves" is demanding a different standard in biology than in any other science class; eg, we don't offer "equal time" to alchemy or the classical elements in chemistry.

Same principle here: I invoked the intersex because they neatly demonstrate how we don't typically even look at chromosomes unless a complication is noticed, often more than a decade later. Nor do we look at them and say "oh, they aren't male/female enough" because of of chromosomes, infertility, or even atypical genetalia. Rather we shrug it off as "close enough" based on their general morphology. This stands in stark contrast to how transphobes try to justify their petty prejudice by insisting that those same traits preclude trans from that same "close enough" judgment. I invoked the intersex as a point of contrast to illustrate that.

Now, if you don't think that the above is reflective of your intended meaning, then by all means, clarify your position. But the fact that you find my characterization unflattering does not in and of itself mean that I have misrepresented you. And on that note:

Nor did I say anyone did anything for the 'wrong' reasons (nice scare quotes...). If you've read my posts in the past, which you obviously have but just made up bits to fill in the blanks you didn't understand, you'd have seen that I don't question the motives of those transitioning, but rather the role and response of society around them. When society is bullying children into gender stereotypes and then drugging them if they don't fit cleanly enough, that's not a problem of the motives of those transitioning.
...That's a distinction without difference and does not dispute my point at all. You claim not be questioning the motive, but then in the same breath explain that you believe it's done for the sake of conforming with societal pressures. That is to say, you question the motive and say that they're transitioning for the wrong reasons ("bullied into it" as you phrase it) as a matter of course. Never mind that the same line demonstrates my point that you do not understand this topic.

You're directly invoking a common "well-meaning" trans stereotype: that the transgender are just confused and not only should we reject their self-identification, we should instead patronizingly insist that we know their nature better than they themselves do. Moreover, it insists that the only reason that they believe otherwise is because people/society didn't insist hard enough that they weren't trans (you know, despite trans being one of the most heavily stigmatized demographics in the world). Point of fact, this is probably the single most common stereotype for the demographic. "They aren't really trans, they're just confusing the fact that they don't line up with gender stereotypes with being a different gender!" "Oh, they just think they must be a different sex simply because they have some stereotypically masculine/feminine interests!" "Oh, pish posh, clearly what they really need is affirmation from one such as I that they really are the gender they were assigned at birth! This is clearly just a phase, after all, and society's to blame" ...It doesn't work that way (indeed, it's the central premise of the junk science that is conversion therapy), and it's an incredibly arrogant train of thought to boot.

For illustrative purposes, let's switch to sexuality for a moment and imagine that someone was trying to tell you that you were really attracted to a sex that you've never expressed interest in. Shot in the dark: I'm assuming you're straight and quite comfortable in that knowledge. If so, imagine that this person is trying to convince you that you're actually gay. Not bi, flat out gay. They're saying you're lying both to others and yourself whenever you express interest in the sex you are attracted to and insist that you're really only interested in the one you claim not to be attracted to. If you aren't straight, just adapt the scenario so that the basic principle applies. The specifics don't really matter, just that the argument is that you've deluded yourself into embracing a different sexuality because societal stereotypes have convinced you that you can't really be the sexuality you claim. Basically this person is arguing that you're so deep in the closet that you're convinced you can see the castles of Narnia.

Now tell me, would this random arrogant ninny, who doesn't know you from Adam, actually know your sexuality better than you do? I should hope that you would find that scenario positively laughable. But here's the thing: your argument - that these people were bullied into being trans and just needed affirmation that they were just confused and it was all society's fault that they deluded themselves into thinking they were trans because they "don't fit cleanly enough" - is the gender identity equivalent.
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Aug 4, 2011
6,338
918
118
Country
USA
You misrepresented the opposing position as claiming that SRS happens because the doctors got the sex wrong.
I did not. Not even close. I was comparing two related concepts, I never said anything to suggest that one is the cause of the other.
Tell me, how is that not conveying that if the trans instead intersex you would have no bones about it?
It is, because it's a different situation entirely. An individual who lived as a certain gender finding out they are intersex and changing their gender expression based on that is not the same thing as a individual trying to change their sex to match their desired gender expression. When I said I had said the opposite, this is what I meant. Someone adjusting their gender to match changes in what they know of their sex is not trans. I have never suggested that is trans.
Same principle here: I invoked the intersex because they neatly demonstrate how we don't typically even look at chromosomes unless a complication is noticed, often more than a decade later. Nor do we look at them and say "oh, they aren't male/female enough" because of of chromosomes, infertility, or even atypical genetalia. Rather we shrug it off as "close enough" based on their general morphology. This stands in stark contrast to how transphobes try to justify their petty prejudice by insisting that those same traits preclude trans from that same "close enough" judgment. I invoked the intersex as a point of contrast to illustrate that.
Ok, but you understand that in this context, in order to point to the contradiction, you are appealing to the sensibilities of transphobes. The logic of sex reassignment is identical to the logic of transphobes, that specific elements of physical presentation preclude people from societal roles.
Now tell me, would this random arrogant ninny, who doesn't know you from Adam, actually know your sexuality better than you do? I should hope that you would find that scenario positively laughable. But here's the thing: your argument - that these people were bullied into being trans and just needed affirmation that they were just confused and it was all society's fault that they deluded themselves into thinking they were trans because they "don't fit cleanly enough" - is the gender identity equivalent.
You're still not getting it. I'm not saying trans people are confused or have the wrong reasons. I'm saying the outside circumstances of a society fixated on gender roles puts people into the situation where it is logical to try to present as the opposite sex because of a real dissonance between their self-image and their experience of gender in society. Prescribing transitions further reinforces the societal obsession with gender roles that causes the dissonance in the first place.
 

TheMysteriousGX

Elite Member
Legacy
Sep 16, 2014
8,265
6,735
118
Country
United States
Ok, but you understand that in this context, in order to point to the contradiction, you are appealing to the sensibilities of transphobes. The logic of sex reassignment is identical to the logic of transphobes, that specific elements of physical presentation preclude people from societal roles.

You're still not getting it. I'm not saying trans people are confused or have the wrong reasons. I'm saying the outside circumstances of a society fixated on gender roles puts people into the situation where it is logical to try to present as the opposite sex because of a real dissonance between their self-image and their experience of gender in society. Prescribing transitions further reinforces the societal obsession with gender roles that causes the dissonance in the first place.
The logic of a sex change is that some people want different genitals. You're placing the onus on changing all of society on a tiny group of people and blaming them when they don't
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Aug 4, 2011
6,338
918
118
Country
USA
The logic of a sex change is that some people want different genitals. You're placing the onus on changing all of society on a tiny group of people and blaming them when they don't
a) The logic of a sex change is that some people think having different genitals will change their sex. It's both wanting to be the opposite sex and believing cosmetic surgeries accomplish that.
b) I'm not putting the onus on a tiny group of people. I'm saying the actions of a tiny group of people are understandable given the societal context, and the onus for changing that lies on society as a whole, and not drugging children to fit gender roles better is definitely part of what society should be doing.
 

TheMysteriousGX

Elite Member
Legacy
Sep 16, 2014
8,265
6,735
118
Country
United States
a) The logic of a sex change is that some people think having different genitals will change their sex. It's both wanting to be the opposite sex and believing cosmetic surgeries accomplish that.
b) I'm not putting the onus on a tiny group of people. I'm saying the actions of a tiny group of people are understandable given the societal context, and the onus for changing that lies on society as a whole, and not drugging children to fit gender roles better is definitely part of what society should be doing.
A) Yes. And?
B) "so they should just suffer until those societal roles are changed, which I and the right have no interest in doing" EDIT: "Also, I will continue to ignore A"
 
Last edited:

Phoenixmgs

The Muse of Fate
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
8,652
764
118
w/ M'Kraan Crystal
Gender
Male
I'm sorry, the fuck does torrenting have to do with literally any of this?

Objectionable to whom, and why do they get a say over how somebody else uses their body?

Newsflash my dude: fucking nobody stays pregnant for 9 months only to abort for the lulz. Why the fuck are you for adding government red tape to something that's typically traumatic and time sensitive?
The word discrimination has bad connotations to it because of racism and sexism but in most instances, it's good to discriminate. Torrenting also has bad connotations as it's always mentioned with pirating.

So the baby is not a body until it is birthed? And also guess what? They don't teach sexual stuff to kids in 3rd grade so why the fuck do you care about Florida's "Don't say gay" law? That is literally why a posted the thread. You'll whine about conservative stuff that does nothing but not liberal stuff that does nothing.

Objectionable to save the mothers life?
Who said that?

"Sport" does not necessarily have to involve physical activity - although through its origins it conventionally has.

The simple fact is that if enough people and organisations (such as the IOC) recognise it as a sport, then it's a sport.
1653614986724.png
 

TheMysteriousGX

Elite Member
Legacy
Sep 16, 2014
8,265
6,735
118
Country
United States
The word discrimination has bad connotations to it because of racism and sexism but in most instances, it's good to discriminate. Torrenting also has bad connotations as it's always mentioned with pirating.
When did piracy pick up negative connotations?
So the baby is not a body until it is birthed?
It's a body that doesn't have any more right to an involuntary blood transfusion than I do.
And also guess what? They don't teach sexual stuff to kids in 3rd grade so why the fuck do you care about Florida's "Don't say gay" law? That is literally why a posted the thread. You'll whine about conservative stuff that does nothing but not liberal stuff that does nothing.
Because conservative stuff "that does nothing" involves teachers getting fired for discussing their spouses and kids getting suspended for handing out pride pins while "liberal stuff that does nothing" is an entirely unobjectionable response to conservative attacks on bodily autonomy
 

Phoenixmgs

The Muse of Fate
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
8,652
764
118
w/ M'Kraan Crystal
Gender
Male
You did, because that is the only circumstance in which an abortion like that would be happening.
No I didn't, I said "chosen" because that's what the law allows for.


When did piracy pick up negative connotations?

Because conservative stuff "that does nothing" involves teachers getting fired for discussing their spouses and kids getting suspended for handing out pride pins while "liberal stuff that does nothing" is an entirely unobjectionable response to conservative attacks on bodily autonomy
So you're arguing that people don't generally think stealing is bad...?

Teachers aren't getting fired for general things about their home life. What about the teacher fired for not meowing back to a student? This Colorado law literally allows a woman to get an abortion 9 months pregnant if she wants to. I don't understand how you think that isn't objectionable. Maybe no one would do this but why should you allow something like that in the 1st place?
 

TheMysteriousGX

Elite Member
Legacy
Sep 16, 2014
8,265
6,735
118
Country
United States
So you're arguing that people don't generally think stealing is bad...?
Stealing yes/kind of/maybe. Piracy no.
Teachers aren't getting fired for general things about their home life. What about the teacher fired for not meowing back to a student?
You will literally fall for anything. It's amazing.
This Colorado law literally allows a woman to get an abortion 9 months pregnant if she wants to. I don't understand how you think that isn't objectionable. Maybe no one would do this but why should you allow something like that in the 1st place?
Read my previous posts in this thread. I've answered this question extensively. But to reiterate: I want this to be legal because when abortions that late happen they usually don't have the time to be litigated in front of a government tribunal.

What, precisely, am I supposed to find objectionable? More specifically, what am I supposed to find so objectionable that I want the government to stick their big noses in?
 
Last edited: