IOC must act to protect women’s sport, says presidential candidate Sebastian Coe

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-24T02:52:14+00:00

Coe is the way to go!

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-18T06:53:14+00:00

Excellent resource!

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-17T21:13:04+00:00

Agreed. I'd been on r/gendercritical since almost its inception (lurked from day one) and been involved in radfem communities since 15-20 years ago even though at the time I was only about 70% on the same page. Now I am about 95% on the same page and yet a bulk of vocal posters there would consider me rightwing even though I support socialized healthcare amongst other essential services, am an atheist sex-nonconforming disabled lesbian against porn and prostitution and prescriptive sex roles generally, am ardently pro-choice (although since I do think is reasonable to restrict 3rd trimester abortions without medical reasons, because as rare as that is, law should account for edge cases and people saying "it literally NEVER happens but it's also evil to ban it" sound like TRAs even though female sociopathy is far less common of course than male perversion).

But I dare say I don't know which would be the lesser evil in the long run or that people voting for Trump were not all motivated by misogyny, racism, and stupidity (even though these certainly played a part), but while I didn't vote him in, my life was better under Trump for the gender reason alone and likely will be again, so I can see how others who are similarly positioned would be motivated by that, and that is enough to brand me as surely a Trump supporter.

Which is fine, I don't care that some misunderstand where I'm coming from. I don't understand why anyone cares whether they are considered a true feminist, a true lefty, a real man, a real Star Trek fan, whatever. None of that is important to my self- concept, only that I continually reevaluate my ethical stances for internal logical consistency and external correspondence with objective reality, and how my actions stack up against those.

So I don't understand self-censoring for the sake of avoiding arguments (as opposed to needing to put food on the table or stay out of jail) but of course we came from communities where this was the norm, only I've been out of that since about two weeks after getting in an echo chamber 20 years ago, refused to edit my thoughts about the gender delusion. I can't fathom why some say they would prefer an echo chamber as if it is truly inevitable, which is such an anti- intellectual stance, particularly when saying it's difficult to stomach seeing an article criticizing where the Dems went wrong. Isn't that essentially the purpose of our gendercritical fora, just more general to the parties of other countries that support this quasireligion?

How can we reform the leftwing parties if we don't hold their feet to the fire? One reason I said Trump winning might be the lesser evil is that I thought it might be the only thing that would push the party leadership to begin to distance themselves from this weight around the neck and work for the people again. The longer they don't reform on gender crap, the longer we are without a viable left. If I really wanted a rightwing government, I would encourage the Dems to stay the course. Why do you think the Republicans waited so long to use this in presidential attack ads when there was so much crazy out there already, including the photo of Ludwig towering over the women's basketball team? Think Trump's advisors just learned about how deep the rabbit hole goes? Think again. It's been clear since their odd silence of 2020 that they were sitting on this, letting it truly blow up so they could nuke the Dems in 2024. I also feared that others would be correct in the prediction that a Trump win would result in the Democrats further digging in heels.

I don't care what others would label me as. I would be happy to engage them in discussion and learn more of their perspectives to see other sides, but this is most productive when they are also open to seeing my perspectives in three dimensions, not just as radfem-or-not, left-or-not, etc.

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-17T20:14:55+00:00

Nothing fascist here.

We clearly should've elected the candidate who promised us JOY ...or else.

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-17T20:11:32+00:00

This comment screams MAJOR MENTAL ILLNESS almost as much as the headline does.

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-14T12:52:42+00:00

It's not a farfetched conspiracy to think that those who seek the highest power positions in society are prone to wanting to control the population to greatest extent possible. This tendency is the whole reason for our system of checks and balances.

Even that system has vulnerability to corruption and possibility of failure. I think gender is a test run in learning how to exploit media to manipulate people into believing absurdities and siloing people into divided groups that will hesitate to unite against authoritarian control. They exploited an existing neurosis (largely fueled by black and white thinking of "either sex is always relevant (conservative) or sex is never relevant (liberal)" and "if women can marry each other, or men can marry each other, then anything goes" - homophobic thought shared by conservative and liberal, only the former opposes all while the latter supports all) society is having in response to women and gays gaining rights.

You have to build on existing thread of insanity for most successful propaganda. This one has been spun for already about a century before the think tanks and activists leapt on it to weave a tapestry of their own authoritarian design.

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-14T12:35:11+00:00

"Nothing is ever our fault," they sound narcissistic as Trump. Even Trump admits to some mistakes he made in his presidency, whereas Harris's campaign was "flawless," apparently.

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-14T12:28:02+00:00

Yes, given how they indoctrinated a decent fraction of their ardent supporters and already alienated many of their former ardent supporters such as myself, they are still beholden to the true believers, who will oppose any righting of the ship with all their might. The alienated will not be eager to rush back in for another beating until enough has come to light to reduce the number of fervent believers to a subcritical mass to where we would be confident enough that we would survive the beating rather than face yet another virtual exile.

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-12T22:01:40+00:00

Yes, this is encouraging and far better than if they further dug in their heels, but the Party leadership is still paid to slip this nonsense through, and I expect it would unfortunately take yet another decisive presidential victory by the Republicans to instigate systemic reform. But hopefully, these are the first steps towards the Party taking an honest look at and admission of their failures and eventual reform.

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-12T02:04:59+00:00

I just assumed it was a typo for great advice

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-10T20:40:38+00:00

It's the pragmatic view. A sex strike, for instance, would only have a practical effect in altering men's behavior as a group if a certain critical mass is achieved. Acknowledging that most women will not be on board with that, and barring some major change motivating more women to take such action, achieving that critical mass is astronomically unlikely, then the action only makes sense if it personally benefits you (as a woman might decide is the case if she lives in a place with draconian abortion laws and can't realistically travel for one).

Now, if women decided to take a collective action that would actually have a meaningful chance of success, such as agitating for better protections to keep porn away from kids, that is extremely worthwhile even if she personally has no kids or nieces who would benefit from boys being less porn-saturated.

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-10T18:52:00+00:00

"Waah, so much transphobia we are on the verge of a trans genocide, super cereal, you guys!"

"Only a TINY FRINGE thinks a boy who identifies as a girl is a boy, wtf, no one thinks they're boys, don't say it DON'T EVEN THINK IT!"

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-10T18:47:27+00:00

Yeah, even if his cause were legitimate, that's not how you make social change. Imagine if gays and lesbians 40-60 years ago, in promoting gay rights on TV or speaking to people in a protest, said, "I won't hear any homophobic rhetoric la-la-la-la-la" we would've made zero progress. Of course, we didn't have the media and most other major corporations promoting gay rights with an iron fist, either.

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-10T16:47:00+00:00

Exactly, when we say male or female, we mean it in exactly the sense that a flower is male or female - it's about the reproductive system / gametes, not social roles, and in humans a male reproductive system confers athletic advantage. There is so social prescriptivism, only biological reality.

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-10T05:44:59+00:00

They could always claim that Biden singlehandedly rigged the election since he's too senile to defend himself.

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-10T05:37:10+00:00

Yay, Harris finally is doing something about the border ! (by leaving the White House...)

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-10T05:32:58+00:00

The fascist wants to stop schools from telling kids that if they're nonconforming their bodies are wrong and wants to stop surgeons from cutting them up into disabled facsimiles of the opposite sex, the sky is LITRALLY FALLING.

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-10T05:18:48+00:00

Yeah, I and every lesbian I've ever met are pissed off at self-proclaimed political lesbians who claim it's a choice. No, Sheila, you're just bi and fed up with men. Nothing wrong with that but don't pretend it's anything else.

And yes, lots of us think it's nuts that the Womens Liberation circle disallowed any intimation that there should be limits of any kind up to the day of birth, but most everyone there would agree that it should be allowed up to at least 12 if not 22 weeks without any requirement about health problems.

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-10T05:12:47+00:00

Yep, that's why I'm concerned about Vance. He's better than Pence to be sure, but also it can be dangerous if he puts a reasonable face to a radical agenda.

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-10T05:07:49+00:00

No, his wife is. He converted to Catholicism.

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-09T22:59:36+00:00

Oh, so the implication is the government should do the bidding of suicidal people? Lol good luck with that.

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-09T17:38:39+00:00

I think that's THE reason she didn't go on. I have no doubt Trump would've won by a larger margin. Even people who don't listen to the show, the clips of her fumbling trying to talk around the nonsense juxtaposed with Vance speaking clearly and honestly about it would have reduced her chance of winning from essentially a toss up to certain defeat. A couple tens of thousand moderates in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania would not respond well to that even if they thought the gender stuff was niche before. They would have to buy in to the idea that democracy would end under Trump for it not to make a difference, and many of the swing voters would've already voted Trump in 2016, flipped in 2020, and saw Biden/Harris prioritize genderism in a tanking economy. So, not likely.

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-09T16:42:39+00:00

Hey, if that's the worst violence we got that's pretty good, compared to the tsunami of rhetoric about them raping and killing and beating us, which has been put into action more often than women shoving them in games.

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-09T16:13:53+00:00

"most ~~anti-LGBTQ~~ fed up with blatant lies lection in decades"

Harris lost because the Democrats are embracing blatant lies even more than Trump, which is an impressively stupid feat.

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-09T16:00:07+00:00

As an L, I approve of little that Trump says, but this message I do approve.

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-09T15:46:47+00:00

Yeah I just wish they would flip all the way for social/environmental. Also, while I support strong social safety net, I want there to be a system for rational evaluation of program successes and failures. I don't mind spending big taxes for programs that work. But my experience when I was on welfare was I was on my own, and if I had chosen to give up on myself and lie in bed all day scrolling the Internet doing nothing to improve my conditions (most of which were not caused by lifestyle problems but were exascerbated by them), I could've just kept receiving checks with no outside motivation.

There was no incentive besides my own unusually strong determination to rise above circumstances. No help for learning how to eat healthily when in too much pain to do much meal prep. The problem is that it's cheaper to just cut people checks than to do social welfare right, which is why Republican- controlled states have the same problem. It's expensive to improve the health and job skills of marginalized and deteriorating communities, but it costs a lot of money to fix bridges, too, so we should invest in human infrastructure to improve the livability of society outside gated communities.

Of course, govt would do the most half-assed implementation it could get away with, like sending texts reminding welfare recipients to eat vegetables (without telling them how they can make them taste good for minimal cost or effort). Or else hinge on punitive incentives rather than building motivation in people who have largely given up hope.

Similar for school. Where things aren't working, we should try different things (that don't have good evidence AGAINST their efficacy), track the progress in controlled comparisons, let the evidence lead. We will always have disagreements about values and priorities, but where people largely agree on something - that people in poverty should have a viable off-ramp, that schools should teach kids how to read and write and do math - we can measure objective outcomes to see how successful a program is.

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-09T15:18:50+00:00

I don't see how going on Rogan could've done anything but hurt her. You know he was going to pin her down about the issue of children transitioning and males in female sports, and she cannot disavow or spin that issue as it's where the party is blatantly wrong but she's beholden to the gender lobby. If it weren't for that albatross, I agree that it would've helped.

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-09T01:43:31+00:00

Doncha know? Donalda Trump was our first female president!

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-09T01:36:08+00:00

Yeah I have no expertise in this arena but she need to gtfo of there ASAP. Fuck what the family thinks. If the shelters available to her are run by handmaidens, she doesn't have to tell them heretical thoughts. An abusive woman would have no right to access her in a shelter, so even if they are all in, they should keep her safe from her specific abuser.

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-08T21:47:28+00:00

Yep, Trump should be easy as hell to beat. I think the party leadership wanted Trump to win, so they could more easily fan the flames of fear to the point they could convince large swathes of the population that they need to clamp down on social media as a public emergency. I don't think they manufactured Covid but they certainly exploited it, and the real lab experiment there was the proving ground for government manipulation of mass fear.

It serves both parties for the other side's candidate to be terrible, as it enables them to lower the bar too, placate their donors and throw us a couple of bones like "at least I won't be forced to room with a man on a college trip to a professional conference" - a seriously low fucking bar.

Shame on the Democrats for sucking so hard that this is what we have to settle for, whether we like it or not. I wanted a viable left that based policy on scientific evidence, not a second corporatist party embracing an alternate form of quasireligious pseudoscience.

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-08T16:59:37+00:00

Yeah, the violent homophobes don't care as long as these dudes aren't hitting on them, which the agps won't. Otherwise, one might get clocked if he follows a little girl into the restroom, or if his cock is on display in a mini skirt or skintight leggings. Which is what should happen to men who sexually harass women. Not just for standing around being a man in drag, though, that's quite rare.

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-08T16:52:44+00:00

How do you think they will be suppressed in voicing their ideas? Is Musk censoring them now? Their ability to stealthily push through legislation will be hamstrung, but I just see them getting loud like the last time Trump was president ("he banned mentally ill men and women who threaten suicide if you don't give them surgeries with long recoveries from the military that bans people who rely on meds for ADHD or migraines, oh noes the sky is falling...")

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-08T16:44:46+00:00

I found out about him from Gender Trender about a decade ago. When you act scummy in public, you can't be precious about "being targeted" as a private citizen, when you publicly were scummy stealing a spot on a public college team. The ad wasn't targeting a random trans mailman or something, like if I joined a girls soccer teams with 10 year old girls, I would be fair game for public mockery and excoriation, no matter how many categories of oppressed I am in. Act shamefully in public, don't be surprised when you get criticized.

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-08T15:26:17+00:00

Also, if you're in a state that has draconian abortion laws, look into the process for changing that. Missouri is a red state, but they just voted to add abortion protections up the the point of viability, and after that for the health of mother or fetus, to their state constitution. Many people who morally oppose abortion, even from a Christian perspective, don't agree with the state banning it prior to viability.

If you're not in one of those states, support efforts to educate the electorate in any of those states about how many women don't even know they're pregnant at six weeks, how ectopic pregnancies are never viable and treaten the woman's life, etc. Point of viability with exceptions for fetal defects or medical emergencies is a reasonable standard. Lots of people in red states are scared of enacting abortion protections because they see things like the Tik Toks of women celebrating their abortions JD Vance brought up on Rogan (which I completely get that the motivation for those is to take shame out of it so women aren't pressured to feel shame over making the decision that's right for them, but understand how it comes across to most people), and they worry about women capriciously getting late term abortions becoming normalized. Those people just need reasonable assurance that late term abortions will be allowed only for fetal defects or medical emergencies, and they can become prochoice. Thats where a lot of more conservative Americans are at, that's what we've got to work with.

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-08T14:57:50+00:00

They are undermining democracy they way they say Trump will do. Not that he's a safe option either, but the pot should meet the kettle. Seriously, if the party leadership believes Trump will end democracy, and then they keep the senile Biden in up to the point of allowing him to debate when they knew he was unfit and couldn't perform well, then put forth his unpopular VP as the candidate, no questions asked, then they either WANT Trump to get in and end democracy, or they are comically, monstrously incompetent. The alternative is that they don't believe he's going to be that bad and are lying.

And it shouldn't require a million disclaimers about how I loathe the antichoice forces in the Republican party and their loyalty to Big Oil over the environment and etc. Etc. Dobbs is a major setback, but even the red state of Missouri has voted to add abortion rights to the state constitution because even most who morally oppose abortion don't favor draconian restrictions. I may be an impoverished, disabled lesbian, but I'd rather go into debt to help my niece travel and pay for an abortion than force her to undress in front of boys and be punished for complaining about it.

The simple act of considering whether Trump might be the lesser evil in this election does not make you a Trump supporter and not a feminist. At least most women can mitigate the pregnancy risks to reduce the chances of needing an abortion, while girls have no choice about going to school and get punished if they complain. There are legitimate utilitarian arguments about which causes the most harm overall, but I can't blame a woman for falling on either side of it.

ChaikiKarabli · 2024-11-08T14:22:36+00:00

The BBC election coverage was the only one that I saw mention free speech being an issue for voters. The others pretty much stuck to immigration and economy. Maybe I missed it elsewhere as I was flipping between channels, but considering what Walz said and the Twitter files and "malinformation" it is concerning that American media are largely silent about this, that I consider the biggest problem with the Democratic Party. If it weren't for their censorious actions suppressing our voices and slandering us when we can't be silenced, we could've peaked mainstream Democrats by now and forced the party to reform on the gender issue.

And any precedent they set allowing government suppression of dissent will be exploited by future conservatives in power. That's my litmus test for when I consider whether government should have a given power: what will happen when those I strongly disagree with are in charge? Am I comfortable with them having that authority? Because it's always a matter of when, not if, the bad guys get in charge. 2016 ought to have reminded the diehard Democrats of that, but for those it didn't, I'm sure 2024 won't wake them up either.

(New account because apparently when signing up I typed my password incorrectly the same way twice)

ChaikiKarabli