Republican Congresswoman provides the definition of a woman. (It's worse than you think)

kc78

HR MVP
Nov 25, 2002
2,299
5,736
113
44
Pensacola, FL
And in how many cases in such a scenario were professors unable to correctly match gender by appearance? 1 in 100? 1 in a 1,000? 100,000? 1,000,000?

?

We are frequently told (e.g) transgender girls competing in athletic competition is a wedge issue because the numbers are so nominal they’re practically obsolete. That’s fine, but what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. If <1% of U.S. adults identify as transgender, and that number doesn’t include the cases where gender dysphoria is due to mental health, then how in the world can it be argued that that number is statistically significant enough to even suggest there’s a possibility biological determinants of male and female are more ambiguous than originally thought? It’s absolutely ludicrous.

Gender, gender identity, and gender expression are very fluid. I don’t disagree with that. But this notion biological determinants that make one male or female upon birth is not cut and dry is laughably ridiculous. And frankly, not even worth debating.
So because it only affects a small amount of people it's not important? That's the very point. What percentage of the population identifies as Trans? That's hard to say as they're just starting to feel ok with coming out. But they still have rights regardless of whether it's less than one percent or not. Even if we're only talking about half of a percent, that's still over 1.5 million people in the US alone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RileyHawk

BlackNGoldBleeder

HR Legend
Jun 23, 2017
40,665
68,864
113
But I keep asking, what about people who have more than one set of gentalia so their parents simply choose a gender, what about those who have chromosomes that don't match their organs? You keep saying it's set. Yes, for most people it is. By nature doesn't work that clearly all the time. Trans people are a very small percentage of the population which would fall well with those who are several deviations outside of the norm.
Yes, anomalies occur. That is not in question. And if someone is genuinely transgender and their biology doesn’t match their gender identity, I support their right to change their biology to properly match their gender identity.

In doing so, that pretty much confirms my point on biology. If it weren’t so, the person who identifies as a different gender than their biology would have no need to seek surgeries changing their biology.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TennNole17

kc78

HR MVP
Nov 25, 2002
2,299
5,736
113
44
Pensacola, FL
Yes, anomalies occur. That is not in question. And if someone is genuinely transgender and their biology doesn’t match their gender identity, I support their right to change their biology to properly match their gender identity.

In doing so, that pretty much confirms my point on biology. If it weren’t so, the person who identifies as a different gender than their biology would have no need to seek surgeries changing their biology.
Admittedly, a much smaller portion, but still affecting several thousand births a year in the US. What do we do with the 1/1500 births where the biology is indeterminate at birth? But the point I'm making is that people struggle to even define what it means to be born female? Is it strictly having a vagina? Well intersex is a problem. Is it chromosomal? Well Chromosomes don't always match the "biology".

And what I'm discussing is the ridiculousness of trying to use this as a trap question and to call people crazy for discussing the nuance. You at least agree there is nuance. We're probably much closer on agreement than it seems. My frustration is with the Republicans who refuse to even consider it at all and ignore every bit of science that says things aren't as binary as they like to believe.
 

BlackNGoldBleeder

HR Legend
Jun 23, 2017
40,665
68,864
113
So because it only affects a small amount of people it's not important? That's the very point. What percentage of the population identifies as Trans? That's hard to say as they're just starting to feel ok with coming out. But they still have rights regardless of whether it's less than one percent or not. Even if we're only talking about half of a percent, that's still over 1.5 million people in the US alone.
My point is on the contradictory messaging. When the topic of transgender girls competing against cis girls is brought up, defenders assert the numbers are statistically insignificant and therefore a non-issue. However, when the question of biology is brought up, with the exception of anomalies, the argument flips.

Look, I agree the science is showing that gender identity is more complex than the usual paradigms of male and female as identified at birth. I’m also very sympathetic to individuals with a gender that clearly doesn’t match their biology. Additionally, I not only support their right to exist but to seek whatever modern medical practices are available to match their gender and biology as well as be treated with the same dignity and respect any human person merits.

If that position is objectionable, then I have nothing more to add.
 

BlackNGoldBleeder

HR Legend
Jun 23, 2017
40,665
68,864
113
Admittedly, a much smaller portion, but still affecting several thousand births a year in the US. What do we do with the 1/1500 births where the biology is indeterminate at birth? But the point I'm making is that people struggle to even define what it means to be born female? Is it strictly having a vagina? Well intersex is a problem. Is it chromosomal? Well Chromosomes don't always match the "biology".

And what I'm discussing is the ridiculousness of trying to use this as a trap question and to call people crazy for discussing the nuance. You at least agree there is nuance. We're probably much closer on agreement than it seems. My frustration is with the Republicans who refuse to even consider it at all and ignore every bit of science that says things aren't as binary as they like to believe.
That, we have 100% agreement on. And I also agree Republicans are playing the “gotcha” game for the sole purpose of pandering to their base of bigots.
 

TennNole17

HR Legend
Sep 18, 2003
31,369
2,182
113
Admittedly, a much smaller portion, but still affecting several thousand births a year in the US. What do we do with the 1/1500 births where the biology is indeterminate at birth?
what did we do before?

I still come back to the point that we’re reacting to social cues to generate unnecessary laws, than creating laws out of necessity.
Further, we’re making it a combat sport to battle each other over these issues.

**** the man. Leave us alone, let us smoke weed, and shit 😂
 

kc78

HR MVP
Nov 25, 2002
2,299
5,736
113
44
Pensacola, FL
My point is on the contradictory messaging. When the topic of transgender girls competing against cis girls is brought up, defenders assert the numbers are statistically insignificant and therefore a non-issue. However, when the question of biology is brought up, with the exception of anomalies, the argument flips.

Look, I agree the science is showing that gender identity is more complex than the usual paradigms of male and female as identified at birth. I’m also very sympathetic to individuals with a gender that clearly doesn’t match their biology. Additionally, I not only support their right to exist but to seek whatever modern medical practices are available to match their gender and biology as well as be treated with the same dignity and respect any human person merits.

If that position is objectionable, then I have nothing more to add.
Fair enough. I don't think we're too far off then. It felt like you were debating the entire thing, you've mellowed your initial response at least enough to a place that seems fair. I don't know what the proper answer is to trans women competing in sports. I'm not even certain how we determine that. I would say it's statistically small, but I am friends with a trans female who is trying to make it as a pro athlete this year and is out on tour. She finished in the top 20 and cashed at a recent event. Many of the women here are supportive, many are angry. I have no idea which side is right.
 

BlackNGoldBleeder

HR Legend
Jun 23, 2017
40,665
68,864
113
The problem for me, as I tried to allude to earlier is that, as you acknowledged there is a difference between gender and sex. Republicans and Blackburn in particular with her question to Jackson, are trying to argue they’re the same thing. And they get away with it because people want simple solutions to not-simple problems, whether or not it’s actually a problem in the first place.
I 100% agree. And it was definitely intended to be a “gotcha” question.

With that said, progress should not come at the expense of common sense. We can respect nuance while clearly defining basic principles of biology related to being male and female. And while I think it’s sad we’re at a point where adults have to pause to answer a simple question (that should have never been asked in the first place) due to the polemics of the day, I think it’s equally ridiculous that (e.g.) elected officials would cloak their bigotry by using a hearing on a SC nominee as political theater for the ostensible purpose of attacking a minority group, as if transgender people aren’t marginalized and ostracized enough.

The whole thing is just pathetic.
 
Dec 30, 2021
2,223
1,474
113
Fair enough. I don't think we're too far off then. It felt like you were debating the entire thing, you've mellowed your initial response at least enough to a place that seems fair. I don't know what the proper answer is to trans women competing in sports. I'm not even certain how we determine that. I would say it's statistically small, but I am friends with a trans female who is trying to make it as a pro athlete this year and is out on tour. She finished in the top 20 and cashed at a recent event. Many of the women here are supportive, many are angry. I have no idea which side is right.
I'm trying out for the WNBA next season. 🤞
 

BlackNGoldBleeder

HR Legend
Jun 23, 2017
40,665
68,864
113
Fair enough. I don't think we're too far off then. It felt like you were debating the entire thing, you've mellowed your initial response at least enough to a place that seems fair. I don't know what the proper answer is to trans women competing in sports. I'm not even certain how we determine that. I would say it's statistically small, but I am friends with a trans female who is trying to make it as a pro athlete this year and is out on tour. She finished in the top 20 and cashed at a recent event. Many of the women here are supportive, many are angry. I have no idea which side is right.
My response is generated from the annoyance I experience every day from the vast majority of people not being willing to budge an inch because of tribalism.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TennNole17

kc78

HR MVP
Nov 25, 2002
2,299
5,736
113
44
Pensacola, FL
what did we do before?

I still come back to the point that we’re reacting to social cues to generate unnecessary laws, than creating laws out of necessity.
Further, we’re making it a combat sport to battle each other over these issues.

**** the man. Leave us alone, let us smoke weed, and shit 😂
My understanding is that it's left up to the parents to decide what the sex should be and then surgeries take place to make the child look like that gender while they're a baby. I suppose they could choose to simply leave them indeterminate and allow them to decide when they're older. I have no idea what they do for sex on the birth certificate in those cases. I've never had to deal with it. They may never know that it even happened unless their parents tell them.
 

gohawks50

HR Heisman
Gold Member
Dec 28, 2010
8,554
14,282
113
And in how many cases in such a scenario were professors unable to correctly match gender by appearance? 1 in 100? 1 in a 1,000? 100,000? 1,000,000?

?

We are frequently told (e.g) transgender girls competing in athletic competition is a wedge issue because the numbers are so nominal they’re practically obsolete. That’s fine, but what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. If <1% of U.S. adults identify as transgender, and that number doesn’t include the cases where gender dysphoria is due to mental health, then how in the world can it be argued that that number is statistically significant enough to even suggest there’s a possibility biological determinants of male and female are more ambiguous than originally thought? It’s absolutely ludicrous.

Gender, gender identity, and gender expression are very fluid. I don’t disagree with that. But this notion biological determinants that make one male or female upon birth is not cut and dry is laughably ridiculous. And frankly, not even worth debating.
The question was a gotcha question. Did you read the article I posted in this thread about the answers given to the question by the Republicans that were upset by Jackson? They were ridiculous as well. Biology evolves like all sciences. If we only went by "common sense" most of us would claim the sun revolves around the earth. Biologists now claim that not everyone is born with XX or XY chromosomes and I'm not just talking about intersex people.

Neither you, Hoosier, or I know the biological sex of the people we see everyday. That's why the bathroom bills were so dumb. Woman have been sharing bathrooms with transgender females all our lives and we have no idea which women might have been born with a penis.

Transgender people are rare and even fewer of them participate in athletics. There is no reason for the mass hysteria currently happening other than creating a wedge issue.

I would prefer to defend an individual's right to live their lives without persecution as long as they are not harming others.
 

NCHawk5

HR Heisman
Gold Member
Aug 7, 2019
7,581
5,476
113
The question was a gotcha question. Did you read the article I posted in this thread about the answers given to the question by the Republicans that were upset by Jackson? They were ridiculous as well. Biology evolves like all sciences. If we only went by "common sense" most of us would claim the sun revolves around the earth. Biologists now claim that not everyone is born with XX or XY chromosomes and I'm not just talking about intersex people.

Neither you, Hoosier, or I know the biological sex of the people we see everyday. That's why the bathroom bills were so dumb. Woman have been sharing bathrooms with transgender females all our lives and we have no idea which women might have been born with a penis.

Transgender people are rare and even fewer of them participate in athletics. There is no reason for the mass hysteria currently happening other than creating a wedge issue.

I would prefer to defend an individual's right to live their lives without persecution as long as they are not harming others.
Lol. I could pick a biological make out of a lineup. They’re only fooling themselves.
 

NCHawk5

HR Heisman
Gold Member
Aug 7, 2019
7,581
5,476
113
I don't know how, you can't even keep straight which person you're pretending to be on HROT.
Does the fact that I’m a black man who doesn’t bleed team blue offend you? I understand if it does, I get that a lot.
 

gohawks50

HR Heisman
Gold Member
Dec 28, 2010
8,554
14,282
113
  • Like
Reactions: RileyHawk

tarheelbybirth

HR King
Apr 17, 2003
66,783
49,631
113
MTG is a fugging idiot, for sure, but it absolutely astounds me we’re at a place in society where some adults don’t feel comfortable offering a simple definition of what a woman is.

Unbelievable.
Are you talking about XX/XY? What then is an XXY individual? Are you talking about gender identity? They are, most certainly not the same thing. There are native American tribes with as many as five gender identities. You want a definition for "woman"? Define your terms first.,
 

tarheelbybirth

HR King
Apr 17, 2003
66,783
49,631
113
That is the same person, me. Not sure what your point is.
Oh FFS...you claimed your GREAT grandmother was black. That does NOT make you black. The days of the "one drop" rule are over. You have not the slightest idea what it means to be black in this country. No clue. Quit smearing yourself in blackface...it's insulting.
 

NCHawk5

HR Heisman
Gold Member
Aug 7, 2019
7,581
5,476
113
Oh FFS...you claimed your GREAT grandmother was black. That does NOT make you black. The days of the "one drop" rule are over. You have not the slightest idea what it means to be black in this country. No clue. Quit smearing yourself in blackface...it's insulting.
I appear black. It’s noticeable. I’m not 100% Caucasian in appearance. That’s enough for me to have been called the n word by some folks. It’s disgusting that a white man is trying to tell me I’m not black.
 

tarheelbybirth

HR King
Apr 17, 2003
66,783
49,631
113
I appear black. It’s noticeable. I’m not 100% Caucasian in appearance. That’s enough for me to have been called the n word by some folks. It’s disgusting that a white man is trying to tell me I’m not black.
YOU said you weren't even half black...you were "part black" based on your GREAT grandmother and a 23andMe analysis. That was your ONLY position. I can quote you, jackass. But NOW you "appear" to be black and have faced racial profiling.

No. I simply said I wasn’t a racist because it’s part of my heritage. I have the 23andme results that prove I’m African. I’ll try to find them, not sure how to post on here.
LOL @ "part of your heritage". First it was 23and Me results but NOW you "appear" to be black.

Sure you do.

You're a lying sack of shit who changes his story to fit the thread he's in. Did you get that from a great grandparent, as well?
 

NCHawk5

HR Heisman
Gold Member
Aug 7, 2019
7,581
5,476
113
YOU said you weren't even half black...you were "part black" based on your GREAT grandmother and a 23andMe analysis. That was your ONLY position. I can quote you, jackass. But NOW you "appear" to be black and have faced racial profiling.


LOL @ "part of your heritage". First it was 23and Me results but NOW you "appear" to be black.

Sure you do.

You're a lying sack of shit who changes his story to fit the thread he's in. Did you get that from a great grandparent, as well?
Do you know anything about genetics? I’m clearly not 100% white in appearance, and you’re poaching quotes from a different conversation in which you accused me of being a racist, which is ridiculous.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: RileyHawk

tarheelbybirth

HR King
Apr 17, 2003
66,783
49,631
113
Do you know anything about genetics? I’m clearly not 100% white in appearance, and you’re poaching quotes from a different conversation in which you accused me of being a racist, which is ridiculous.
LOL...I'm quoting your defense of being "part black in which you made absolutely NO claim to appear to be remotely black and even admitted you could make no claim to have lived as a black person in this country. But NOW you've faced racial profiling due to your appearance.

You had a black GREAT grandparent? Yes, you have lived the black experience in America.
When have I claimed I did?

Well, you didn't claim it then but you sure have now. Lying sack of crap. Crawl back under your rock.
 
Mar 11, 2020
19,606
16,971
113
Are you talking about XX/XY? What then is an XXY individual? Are you talking about gender identity? They are, most certainly not the same thing. There are native American tribes with as many as five gender identities. You want a definition for "woman"? Define your terms first.,
XXY is a male born with an extra X chromosome and is incredibly incredibly rare.


Identity and
 

NCHawk5

HR Heisman
Gold Member
Aug 7, 2019
7,581
5,476
113
LOL...I'm quoting your defense of being "part black in which you made absolutely NO claim to appear to be remotely black and even admitted you could make no claim to have lived as a black person in this country. But NOW you've faced racial profiling due to your appearance.




Well, you didn't claim it then but you sure have now. Lying sack of crap. Crawl back under your rock.
You’re a disgusting human and disgrace to UNC. You’re trying to tell someone who clearly is of a mixed race background that they don’t qualify because they’re not a high enough percentage of a certain race. Get lost.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: RileyHawk

tarheelbybirth

HR King
Apr 17, 2003
66,783
49,631
113
You’re a disgusting human and disgrace to UNC. You’re trying to tell someone who clearly is of a mixed race background that they don’t qualify because they’re not a high enough percentage of a certain race. Get lost.
There is not one thing "clearly" anything about you, dumbass. You keep shifting your claim to "blackness". That's on you.

Get your fable straight - create a new account - try again. Your current account has zero cred. Less than zero, to be honest.
 

NCHawk5

HR Heisman
Gold Member
Aug 7, 2019
7,581
5,476
113
There is not one thing "clearly" anything about you, dumbass. You keep shifting your claim to "blackness". That's on you.

Get your fable straight - create a new account - try again. Your current account has zero cred. Less than zero, to be honest.
I’m not responding to your racism anymore.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: RileyHawk and kc78