February 16, 2020

"So, traditional-gender-roles folks, you have the trans crowd to thank for returning us to the 1950s!"

Glenn understands my point.

217 comments:

1 – 200 of 217   Newer›   Newest»
Ken B said...

So you had a point. Which you huffily denied.

Howard said...

With that type of publicity I imagine you can already taste the world famous coopers brisket in Austin

Ice Nine said...

Who says he does? No one else did. His readers won't either.

The Cracker Emcee Refulgent said...

I think most people got the point you were trying to make, Althouse. They just didn’t think women should lie down for it. Metaphorically, natch.

Ann Althouse said...

"So you had a point. Which you huffily denied."

False.

I stated and restated my point. I huffily complained that commenters were missing it. Go back and reread. You're still missing it.

Ann Althouse said...

"I think most people got the point you were trying to make, Althouse. They just didn’t think women should lie down for it. Metaphorically, natch."

That's not what they said. I was predicting the future and they were not saying well, I don't like that future and I hope there's a way to fight for some other result. They were treating me as if I were recommending that we go there. It was dispiriting.

Ann Althouse said...

If people get the point but then have something they'd like to say in addition, they should say something more like: I understand your prediction and see that as a problem. What can we do? I want to fight somehow. What would be effective?

That's not what happened. Go back and read that comments thread. It's really bad.

Ann Althouse said...

"Go back and read that comments thread. It's really bad."

A lot of what got said was the usual attacks on transgenders — saying they aren't really women and shouldn't be barging into women's sports and there are only 2 sexes, etc. etc.

It is OBVIOUS to me that argument is a sidetrack and dead end. You can say that until you're blue in the face (just like you said there can't be gay marriage because marriage is between a man and a woman). You are making yourself irrelevant. The people who will be affecting what happens are going to be people who want to be understanding and empathetic to those who identify as transgender. Start there and make an argument about preserving women's sports. I'm saying it's going to be really hard, and I think it is too hard. It's not going to work. Look at what happened to Martina Navratilova when she spoke out!

Zach said...

It's a shame, because the "dreams of athletic victory" are only a small part -- in fact, the worst part -- of the benefits of playing a sport.

I played a club sport in college, and a different club sport in grad school. At this point, I couldn't tell you the winner of a single competition I ever took part in. But they helped me get in good shape and make good friends.

Frankly, part of the benefit is learning how to try your hardest when somebody else is much better than you and probably going to win. Or taking an elbow once in a while and learning how to shrug it off.

Ann Althouse said...

Oops. I'm dominating the comments on this new post. I need to hold back and let other people have a turn. Let me get out of the way.

Sally327 said...

I guess I'm one of those who doesn't get the point because it seems premised on a falsehood. I grew up around the same time and I don't remember girls not liking sports back then or not wanting to participate in competitive athletic activities. The opposite actually, being good at sport was a positive, and even if you weren't good at the organized competitive sports you could at least enjoy some of the things we did in gym class. It was part of the women's lib movement actually, being able to enjoy our bodies and what they could do and not worry about how we looked doing it. I am woman, hear me roar, yadeya.

The Cracker Emcee Refulgent said...


“If people get the point but then have something they'd like to say in addition, they should say something more like: I understand your prediction and see that as a problem. What can we do? I want to fight somehow. What would be effective?”

Because the whole thing is so blatantly, utterly, undeniably absurd, that it defies straight-faced discussion. Fight somehow? Is laughing in their faces and telling them to fuck off “fighting”?

Some Seppo said...

Much like travel, if Althouse doesn't like it then there must be something wrong with it.

Zach said...

I feel like some of the unhappiness on college campuses these days could learn how to figuratively take an elbow once in a while (dealing with temporary discomfort caused by other people charging after the same prize) and how to try hard even when somebody else is probably going to win.

We have these meritocratic admission systems where everybody's got to win at everything -- get top grades, be an officer in every group, show a superficial participation in a wide range of activities. It's taking the worst part of sports and applying it to everything.

Michael K said...

Next we will have blacks demanding segregation.

Oh wait. It is already happening,.

etbass said...

"Oops. I'm dominating the comments on this new post. I need to hold back and let other people have a turn. Let me get out of the way."

Shows how completely averse you are to ever being found in a mistake.

Achilles said...

Ann Althouse said...
"I think most people got the point you were trying to make, Althouse. They just didn’t think women should lie down for it. Metaphorically, natch."

That's not what they said. I was predicting the future and they were not saying well, I don't like that future and I hope there's a way to fight for some other result. They were treating me as if I were recommending that we go there. It was dispiriting.


Actually, we noted that you helped create this monster and that you don't seem to understand your culpability.

You voted for Hillary.

You want us to go there.

hstad said...


Blogger Ann Althouse said...2/16/20, 11:44 AM

Wow, AA, with this set of sentences you show us that you really bought this propoganda 'hook, line and sinker'. Please cite credible Psychological Literature [not by activists] which states Transgender is normal and not a health issue.

Ken B said...

Here is your huffy denial.

https://althouse.blogspot.com/2020/02/i-imagine-girls-will-drift-back-into.html?showComment=1581806197667#c2323703547534168124

And

https://althouse.blogspot.com/2020/02/i-imagine-girls-will-drift-back-into.html?showComment=1581817346968#c3718391479555571134

I will let readers decide if my characterization of it is fair.

The Cracker Emcee Refulgent said...

“The people who will be affecting what happens are going to be people who want to be understanding and empathetic to those who identify as transgender.”

Historically, not so. Indeed, it’s people who are vehemently hostile to the transgressive who usually determine what happens until some kind of cultural breakpoint occurs.
I’m guessing trannies in women’s sports is the point where Wokedom begins it’s slow retreat.

hstad said...

Oops, forgot to include my citations - “Biologists and medical professionals need to stand up for the empirical reality of biological sex,” wrote Colin Wright from Penn State and Emma Hilton from the University of Manchester. Under the Wall Street Journal’s headline, “The Dangerous Denial of Sex,”

Achilles said...

Ann Althouse said...

I'm saying it's going to be really hard, and I think it is too hard. It's not going to work. Look at what happened to Martina Navratilova when she spoke out!

That is because the globalist plutarchs control the news media and virtually all of our educational institutions.

You compliantly worked for them and helped them obtain this domination. You pushed their agenda for decades.

You voted for pretty much every one of their candidates.

If you want to fight them you would support Trump and the deplorables.

But we know how distasteful that would be for you.

Annie C. said...

I guess I must have been one of the few that took the prediction seriously.

I do see women stepping back from high-powered jobs, the have-it-all mentality and are admitting that women and men are equal in rights and complementary in abilities.

I don't know, maybe it's a Texas thing. But I am seeing a step back from the radical feminism in the people around here.

And compassion, which Althouse cites, is an important part of a woman.

Will they step back from sports? I can't say. Since money is involved, all bets may be off.

Wince said...

"So, traditional-gender-roles folks, you have the trans crowd to thank for returning us to the 1950s!"

Heck, Hillary came in a Goldwater girl and left a John Bircher.

mccullough said...

Women are going to step back from more than sports

Ken B said...

For the record, I was not one of those who missed the point Glenn identified. Any regular reader should know you would not approve of women metaphorically stepping aside and conforming to a stereotype.

znaiman said...

Seems like the original post muddles the subject by treating two different populations as the same: girls and women. "I imagine girls will drift back into not participating in competitive sports, which is the way it was when I was in high school." And then "...I believe women, known for our empathy and our desire to appear compassionate, will let go of competitive sports and return to the inclinations that dominated back in the days when I went to high school." Girls and boys are not the same, but the differentiation between girls and boys vs women and men is smaller. Empathy may rule in women, but not so much in girls. The lawsuit is about high school kids, and I'd bet there are many, many more girls in high school who want to compete than there are trans girls. Although the trans girls might be very vocal, the competitive ones are very, well, competitive. They do not want to roll over for their trans peers or empathy-driven women.

narciso said...

its because we ignored biology, and we substituted sentiment, as well as 3,000 years of history, that's a very big deal, now were in a phantom zone, for these aren't woman, yet are claiming those privileges, it should make you angry not complacent,

Anonymous said...

I stated and restated my point. I huffily complained that commenters were missing it. Go back and reread. You're still missing it.

You huffily ignored commenters who were responding to points you also wanted to make and did make, but which you apparently didn't want to be taken to task for. They didn't miss The Point, they just noticed the other points. If all you wanted to say was what Glenn noted, you could have been much more succinct. It's not like that particular observation about the consequences of accepting the transgender line is original with you, anyway, so perhaps it's not nearly as interesting to readers as you think it ought to be.

Along the way you were most definitely *advocating* (huffily) for the acceptance of certain assumptions - about sports, about the relative importance of values. If you weren't, you were expressing yourself in a very muddled manner, so don't blame your readers for that.

I can understand your impatience with people who don't read with care but apparently just scan for key words and then regurgitate the same canned opinion that they post in every other thread in which the key word appears. You're right, it's boring. But that occurs in every thread on every topic.

Wince said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
gilbar said...

So, IF i understand Professor Althouse's point (correct me if i'm not), she's saying...

That HER PREDICTION of the future, is that;
of transes, women will Voluntarily go back to not competing in sports

And this is Based on HER RECOLLECTION of the past, which is that;
Women don't WANT to compete in sports

The cool thing about predictions, is that they can't be disproven at this point
BY DEFINITION, SHE IS CORRECT: IT IS HER PREDICTION

The cool thing about recollections, is that they exist SOLELY in a person's mind
BY DEFINITION, SHE IS CORRECT: IT IS HER RECOLLECTION

of course, MY prediction is: Women won't Stand for This
and i'm basing on the fact that among the high school basketball players in my family that have made it to post season, include
My Grandmother
My Aunt
My 1st Cousin(s)
My 1st Cousin(s) once removed
My 1st Cousins(s) TWICE removed

My Aunt, my cousin Cathy, her daughter Angie, and HER Daughter ALL MADE IT TO STATE
LOTS of Girls in Iowa play Basketball

Now, Excuse Me; i've got to go listen to the Cyclones beat the SHIT out of the TCU Lady Horned Frogs

Ken B said...

I personally won’t miss women's sports when they are gone. But I will miss women having the right to say they are different from males. In some circumstances it doesn’t matter. Bathroom stalls for instance. But sometimes it does, and we need to respect the women who care about those times.

Dave Begley said...

"Look at what happened to Martina Navratilova when she spoke out!"

Yeah, the thought police crucified her. Free speech be damned. And I thought Althouse was all in favor of free speech.

There are only two sexes. It's science. Are you denying science, Ann?

These trans people are mentally ill. And they are a tiny minority. They shouldn't be allowed to wreck a valuable thing for REAL girls and women.

Paul Zrimsek said...

In the 1950s you had the ladies' room to yourselves. So a little ways to go yet.

Achilles said...

Ken B said...
For the record, I was not one of those who missed the point Glenn identified. Any regular reader should know you would not approve of women metaphorically stepping aside and conforming to a stereotype.


If she didn't want it why did she vote for it?

Rabel said...

You got off on the wrong foot by generalizing from your own limited experience.

In my small high school in the sixties the prettiest girls played basketball (half court) and ran track.

So we would be "going back" to something that may have existed in your part of the country as you remember it, but not in mine.

Reynolds' fifties reference is beyond my experience but looks to be a shifting of the goalposts, so to speak.

Ken B said...

Achilles
I am not one who subscribes to the theory that because she voted for Hillary she agreed with everything Hillary said, thought, implied, or sold out to.

Achilles said...

Ken B said...
I personally won’t miss women's sports when they are gone. But I will miss women having the right to say they are different from males. In some circumstances it doesn’t matter. Bathroom stalls for instance. But sometimes it does, and we need to respect the women who care about those times.

I have two girls. If they don't have a chance to play sports without getting run over by boys there will be shit going down.

I had to take one to the bathroom the other day. She wouldn't go in the women's bathroom alone.

So we went in the public men's room.

Girls shouldn't have to go in a public men's restroom. They have to sit.

Nichevo said...

They were treating me as if I were recommending that we go there. It was dispiriting.


Of course you were and are recommending that we go there. We can read. Maybe you were writing badly. Unless you're really ladling on the irony and mocking how women value their feelings, just as rhhardin suggests, over rationality and reality, and will allow this to happen, because after all you probably won't win a medal anyway, so why not be nice? Civil, even.

Howard said...

Way to let your cuck flag fly KenB. We need more kids and adults participating in athletics of all genders and identifications. Why because it makes our society stronger more resilient antifragile.

It goes hand-in-hand with my co-ed softball theory of maintaining a strong Nation or society. When I was in college summer lifeguarding we had a softball league. Our team won the championship. the guys on our team we're good players but not great players. The teams we defeated had great male players but their women were weak we had very strong girls on our team one was a triathlete another was a horseback Ryder and another was a water polo player. If you bother to go to a high school girls sporting event can you watch with the ferocity they play and the team spirit and the concentration they give to the coaching it makes it clear why we are the greatest nation on the Earth. The only thing I can say to those of you who want that to end is you'll be dead soon no one cares

It's perfectly understandable why a lot of you Trump supporters who identify as male are intimidated by strong women. However that horse has left the barn so you can close the door all you want.

Achilles said...

Ken B said...
Achilles
I am not one who subscribes to the theory that because she voted for Hillary she agreed with everything Hillary said, thought, implied, or sold out to.



I understand your point.

rhhardin is right on some things.

But I am going to remind her of her logical failings. It is a central compulsion for me to tell people what the logical outcomes of their actions will be.

She may not "want" it. But something inside her does because she is working to make it happen.

Ken B said...

Incidentally, Jerry Coyne just had a good post on how many sexes there are (2) over at WhyEvolutionistrue, his blog. Pace our host, I think science is relevant.

Unknown said...

Cis-women don't understand the legal problems of transexuals and should be pushed out of teaching law.

"I remember the pre-Title IX days. I never considered participating in any legal activity or regarded any female law professor as an inspiration. My friends didn't do law. We hated legalistic classes, and we were only interested in doing some simple things for the purpose of looking good. The law teachers seemed to regard us as a worthless bunch, and I think they were vaguely amused, not terribly upset with our lack of competitive spirit.

"Today, the pressure to be empathetic toward transgenders is so great that I believe women, known for our empathy and our desire to appear compassionate, will let go of teaching law and return to the inclinations that dominated back in the days when I went to high school. It's a trade-off, a trade-off between the potential for legal victory and the feeling of being kind and inclusive. The latter is something quite valuable and within the reach of all women. The former is a dream, and it's only a dream for an elite few among women." [with minor edits]

narciso said...

like I noted, this world is much stranger than anything predicted 30 years ago, well there are only two genders, the rest is behavior, no matter what procrustean boxes we make to excuse it,

Rustic Broad said...

No, Ann, the comments last night were not “really bad.” Almost everyone thought your take was really bad. I am sorry that is dispiriting for you.
What if your child was anorexic and instead of seeing him/herself as dangerously thin when they looked in the mirror, they were convinced they were fat. Would you abet them and say “if you think you are fat, then you are fat! Let’s get some diet pills for you and restrict your caloric intake even further!” Most parents would get their child medical help ASAP. Both physical and mental/emotional help. Why are trans not afforded the same help?

Nichevo said...

They were treating me as if I were recommending that we go there. It was dispiriting.


Of course you were and are recommending that we go there.



I'm prepared to concede that you may be unconscious of it. You don't have much self-knowledge. Maybe the thing you like to say, that people don't believe what they say they believe, relies on this unconsciousness.

POSIWID: The purpose of a system is what it does. What you do is to do everything you can to bring about this state of affairs. That is therefore your purpose. Your lips say no no no but your eyes say yes yes yes. Same thing. You're taking off your clothes, Ann, and you don't even know it. You're sleepwalking.

Dave Begley said...

So we believe science for global warming but we don't believe science when it comes to two sexes and chromosomes.

How, exactly, does that work?

narciso said...

their argument was lie, it wasn't about justice, it was about hegemony, over all institutions,

Achilles said...

Dave Begley said...
So we believe science for global warming but we don't believe science when it comes to two sexes and chromosomes.

How, exactly, does that work?



Science says whatever gives the patrons who are funding their science more power.

rhhardin said...

Without misunderstanding there can be no agreement.

rhhardin said...

Trans granstanders depend on women's sports. If women stop sporting then the trans granstanders have to start winning competitions with real men. Which gets rid of the advantage of being trans. So it's not a stable end-state.

Systems analysis.

Look for maximum grandstanding as the stable point. Women's sports but with enough grandstanding to stay in the papers.

rhhardin said...

If you put a hot system in contact with a cold system, they don't switch temperatures. The come to a stable state where nothing changes, at an intermediate temperature.

Why is that? Something is maximized, and it maximizes in the middle. No slippery slope result.

Quick physics. Call something S. Energy E is conserved (none added or taken away).

E1+E2=Etotal energies in system1 and system2

S1+S2=Stotal The something that maximizes in the middle.

It maximizes when taking energy from system 1 lowers S1 by the same amount that adding energy to system 2 raises S2. That is, that energy transfer neither raises nor lowers Stotal.

d for change: dS1/dE1 = dS2/dE2

S is entropy, and the ratios that are equal are the (inverse of the) temperature.

Systems in contact stop changing when the temperatures are equal, and entropy is maximized.

Mentioned only because so little is required to prove that.

Lesson, look for something maximized whenever you want to argue that a system stabilizes but doesn't go to an extreme.

techsan said...

If the patriarchy holds feminists down, then what is a trans-domination of a sport labeled that holds biological women down? There's a victim here that must be labeled...but which is the higher-order victim? The disadvantaged biological woman who didn't get a scholarship? Feminism? The biological man? School administrators who have to make a choice? American society who is being made to care? Some other laundry list of grifters?

If there were only some thread which could override this tribalization...some sort of melting pot...some sort of...I don't know...system of government that accepts differences...that promotes local organization over federal mandates...

Nah....that would never work. 'Cause then we'd have to get to know each other.

Big Mike said...

That's not what they said. I was predicting the future and they were not saying well, I don't like that future and I hope there's a way to fight for some other result.

@Althouse, and I was telling you what the consequences would be if women refused to fight for their own interests, or the interests of their more athletic sisters. Too hard?!?! I Hell, woman, it was too hard to fight Jim Crow, but people did it, did they not? I remember when women were discouraged from pursuing STEM doctorates — my then girlfriend (and for the past 45 years my wIfe) overheard her dissertation advisor telling another professor that if you grant a doctorate to a woman then she’ll just take a job away from a man who needs to feed his family. Her advisor! Lucky for her Madame Curie didn’t have that asshole on her dissertation committee. It was hard work, but women won, and we’re the better for it. Indeed, Emmy impression of women today is that they bitch about nothing, when they’re not huffily declining to help their sisters oppressed in Muslim-dominated countries.

I have a vivid memory of a woman who worked for me back in the early 2000s. We were both swimmers in high school in the 1960s. But where I lettered, she swam AAU, so she had to travel to a YWCA pool to work out. Unlike me, she was damned good, good enough to make it to the Olympic team tryouts and up to the semi-finals in her event. She wasn’t even on the ballot when her high school voted for best athlete. Years later she was still bitter about that. She’ll fight, even if Althouse thinks it’s too hard.

Yancey Ward said...

Althouse,

The article you linked to yesterday actually contradicted your prediction, which is what I found odd. The women aren't laying down and taking it- they are starting to sue. Now, the courts may force them to go back to a different time, but it wouldn't be because they value empathy differently.

Bob said...

Disagreeing with Althouse's point is not the same as not getting it. My concern was mostly with the generalization about women. Women think this, and women think that. Women will step aside for transsexuals because women are (or want to appear) compassionate.

Women won't vote for Trump. Yet a hell of a lot of women did in 2016.

All women are not the same. I read some stereotyping in that last paragraph.

BUMBLE BEE said...

"I don't fuck much with the past, but I fuck plenty with the future."
Patti Smith.

n.n said...

The State-established religion is Pro-Choice, selective, opportunistic. Oh, and there are four fingers... five fingers... a baby... a Fetal-American... a colorful clump of cells. Diversity is not a color judgment (e.g. racism, sexism). Political congruence ("=") is not [selectively] exclusive. Be a good American. Let us bray to mortal gods.

n.n said...

All women are not the same.

Au contraire. According to diversity doctrine, under the Pro-Choice religion, women are a color bloc, or should be, interchangeable, exchangeable, and disposable.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

It does feel good to be understood, and paraphrased so well. Some say clarity is preferred over agreement. Better than nothing is a high standard sometimes.

n.n said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Gospace said...

The people who will be affecting what happens are going to be people who want to be understanding and empathetic to those who identify as transgender.

Being understanding and empathetic fails when basic reality starts being ignored. Basic reality 101- males are not and cannot be females, females are not and cannot be males. The more the elite push the idea that gender is a construct and not a biological reality, the more the masses will revolt against it. Eventually, same sex marriage will be undone in law. Reality 101 again. man-man, woman-woman, is not the same as man-woman, and can't be made the same by saying it is.

Glenn refers to "things that cannot go on will not on" in reference to economics all the time. The same applies to ideas that make no sense. Eventually they fail of their own weight.

n.n said...

If she didn't want it why did she vote for it?

Piecewise consensus for leverage. It's a form of reconciliation through avoidance. We all do it: "the lesser evil", etc. None of us are a universe unto ourselves.

Howard said...

What a difference 10 years makes, big Mike when I was in high school in the mid-to-late 70s our swim team was completely co-educational in fact there were more girls on the girls swim team than boys on the boys team. I also swam for an AAU club which had more girls than boys swimming at it as well. in any event it was like going to a wet t-shirt contest twice a day and we had parties every weekend. On the AAU club several other girls were faster than me. So that meant I had to swim behind them. This was also the early days of using goggles so your vision underwater was crystal clear. It was especially rewarding while doing breaststroke (you know the drill up out together up out together) oh my God nothing gets your motor running faster than that.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

Now that I’ve read the comments I’ll just say: WTF? Why are people ascribing to Althouse the current Progressive fad of transworship when there is no evidence of that or a belief in any of the other totalitarian trends of the Progressive left? To the contrary she has revealed herself to be a classical Liberal in her belief in free speech even going so far as to leave this an open forum, largely (as I see it anyway) as a testament to her stated desire to provoke thought and expression on subjects she finds of interest. Every fucking day. And for making a rather astute PREDICTION people I normally find reasonable or at least readable here pile on as if she’s secretly funding Antifa.

So I repeat, WTF?!?!?!

Dave Begley said...

I want reliable numbers on the total number of transgenders in the US. How is it that a tiny, tiny number of mentally ill people can totally uproot and change many aspects of American life?

Empathy can only go so far and I don't think the law has to accommodate these mentally ill people.

Seeing Red said...

What’s interesting is if women actually GASP stand up for themselves.

The CT lawsuit might be a bellwether. A win could lead to another.

Dave Begley said...

Ann's prediction about the future will only come true if the Left regains total power like it had in the Obama years. I'm not seeing that at all. I'm also not seeing feminists buying into the trans agenda. These male to female trans people are screwing things up too much for the real women.

Seeing Red said...

OTOH, there are other forms of protest. A lot of the girls could go to State and refuse to run.

If they don’t hang together, they’ll hang separately.

There’s more than 1 way to skin a cat.

Wince said...

I'm interested in Althouse's take on whether extending same sex marriage "constitutionally" through the courts, rather than the ballot box, will undemocratically cement the consequences of this trend in transexual "equality"?

eddie willers said...

Oops. I'm dominating the comments on this new post.

Yesterday's thread was a jawdropper. Of course you were correct and I expected a short, 30 post thread. But wow....people were coming out of the woodwork to slam you. So many names were new to me. I'm guessing lurkers who finally felt they had something worth posting.

Reminds me of a thread early in my Internet life. Someone posted something about circumcision and all hell broke loose. This was one topic that had no left/right slant. Regardless of political stances, there was nothing but vehemence voiced 'yea' or 'nay'.

At least it gave me a chance to post one of my best comments ever. It was a warning against circumcision:

"Be careful. I had it done shortly after birth and couldn't walk for a year!"

Seeing Red said...

It’s a shame you don’t practice, Professor. If a case came up in WI, you could pro bono.

Achilles said...

eddie willers said...


Yesterday's thread was a jawdropper. Of course you were correct and I expected a short, 30 post thread. But wow....people were coming out of the woodwork to slam you. So many names were new to me. I'm guessing lurkers who finally felt they had something worth posting.

What was she correct about?

Ann Althouse said...

“ The article you linked to yesterday actually contradicted your prediction, which is what I found odd. The women aren't laying down and taking it- they are starting to sue. Now, the courts may force them to go back to a different time, but it wouldn't be because they value empathy differently.”

Yeah, these young women are fighting the trend. I still think their side will win, because I think women are so deeply invested in compassion and kindness, much more than competition and winning.

Achilles said...

Wince said...
I'm interested in Althouse's take on whether extending same sex marriage "constitutionally" through the courts, rather than the ballot box, will undemocratically cement the consequences of this trend in transexual "equality"?


The flip side of this coin is what conservatives think about demanding that government define marriage and then getting made when the government defines it.

gilbar said...

. I still think their side will win, because I think women are so deeply invested in compassion and kindness, much more than competition and winning.

you meant that as a joke, right? Their side? Whose side?

Seeing Red said...

On another note since I’m out of the country, AF 1 buzzed the track?


Bwaaaaaaaaaa

I haven’t had this much fun since Ronnie Raygun!

Achilles said...

Ann Althouse said...

Yeah, these young women are fighting the trend. I still think their side will win, because I think women are so deeply invested in compassion and kindness, much more than competition and winning.

You are saying that the evil side will win and destroy women's sports before my kids get a chance to participate because women are so compassionate and kind.

This is just Althouse justifying her votes for people like Hillary.

She knows that it will end badly.

But she is just so compassionate.

I want to defend the 19th amendment. I believe in the 19th amendment. Why do you have to do this?

Splanky said...

are we assuming that transgenders will not infiltrate high school color guard ? i think they will. nasty business this patriarchy. the eyeliner is just a disguise. next ... field hockey

cubanbob said...

Why not go for the practical solution ? Female sports for biological females. Male sport for biological males. Woman's sports for those who identify as woman and men's sports for those who identify as men. Each has a level playing field of its own. Would AA be happy with this solution?

purplepenquin said...

Always surprises me how one person can say something and others will attribute it to the "blacks" or "liberals" or "Republicans" having said it.

There truly is no reasoning with people like that.

n.n said...

what conservatives think about demanding that government define marriage

Some class of "conservative". Americans considered normalization, tolerance, and rejection. When trans/homosexuals denied reconciliation, then civil unions for all consenting adults. Equal, not "=" (i.e. political congruence).

Bay Area Guy said...

Our gracious Hostess sez: ".. I think women are so deeply invested in compassion and kindness, much more than competition and winning."

Permit me to adduce a counter factual:

Currently, I am in Las Vegas at a massive all- girl volleyball tourney. At Mandalay Bay, there are at least 60-80 volleyball courts, with, say, 1,000 teenage girls setting, passing and spiking the crap out of the ball. It is packed! My 14-year old is on a competitive Club team. These gals are serious athletes. They train as hard as I did for high school sports. They are invested in "competing and winning". I'd roughly guess each team has 2-3 girls who will play competively in college.

If a 6'3 boy in wig tried to muscle into this tourney, claiming to be a young woman, you'd have open revolt by the parents. His team would be isolated and excluded for cheating these competitive girls out of their hard work and dreams.

Yes, we can have a degree of compassion for transgendered folks, but let's not lose common sense or be blind to Leftwing madness that pushes it.

Dave Begley said...

The thing that I think Ann is missing is that Trump's election was a political and cultural watershed moment. It is no longer inevitable that every Leftist position will win.

Trump killed the Paris Agreement. Normal people don't believe in the global warming scam. People don't want electric cars. Electric guitars, yes. Electric cars, no.

When Tesla crashes and burns (and it will), it will become obvious that it was a scam and it was built on top of the global warming scam.

And Trump will win in 2020. The Green New Deal is totally dead.

No longer will the arc of American politics bend to the far Left. Americans have said, "Stop!"

Dave Begley said...

Here's the semi-official cheer at Omaha's Duchesne Academy of the Sacred Heart.

We may belong to OCC*
But we've got grit
And pepability
We're rough
We're tough
We're debutantes.

Bay is totally right. No way do the DASH girls give up their sports.

* OCC = Omaha Country Club

Char Char Binks, Esq. said...

I get it. Sports fans love sports, and pretend that they are important. They love that winners are glorified and losers are humiliated. It's bread and circuses. You pretty it up by saying you don't remember who won past contests, you go for PB, the old college try, etc., but we know what it's all about.

Scholarships are charity, but in a break with the tradition of charity, athletic scholarships are given not to the weak, the poor, the infirm, the handicapped, they are instead given to the swift and strong, at the expense of the weak and slow, and at the expense of the academically strong who aren't athletes.

It used to be considered scandalous when a college athlete wasn't actually a student. Now it's a scandal when students are passed off as athletes by wealthy parents and bribed admissions officials.

Academic scholarships can be justified because they are given to those who can benefit from them, and those who receive them will likely be highly productive members of society if given a boost. In the case of STEM, they may directly benefit the weak and infirm. Seen in that light, sports scholarships are immoral. Justify them with your sophistry, with your blather about team spirit (conformity) and leadership skills (indistinguishable from bullying), or not. You have it your way, so it doesn't matter.

There's another important way athletic scholarships are immoral, not that most people care. Think of the criminal record of Div 1-A major sports team members. If the anthropology department had that record, it would be shut down.

n.n said...

Empathy can only go so far and I don't think the law has to accommodate these mentally ill people.

Yeah, em-pathetic, the foundation of the liberal quasi-religion (e.g. Pro-Choice). That said, we do need to be rational and practical, and reconcile, when possible, when reasonable, with people... persons in the transgender spectrum. So, in context, who are the peers of trans/neogenders, of trans/neosexuals, of trans/homosexuals? And will we practice a form of affirmative diversity in order to discriminate for cause or opportunity?

Rory said...

"Seems like the original post muddles the subject by treating two different populations as the same: girls and women."

Yes, girls will stop playing because women choose not to support them. Exactly the same as men on college campuses having targets on their backs because women support their daughters against their sons.

But empathy don't enter into it. There's money in that "woman" pile, and it has to be protected above all else.

n.n said...

"So, traditional-gender-roles folks, you have the trans crowd to thank for returning us to the 1950s!"

Women should be taxable, available, and leveraged is not a traditional characterization. The first, second, third, and fourth choices are traditional, but the fifth Choice is not.

exiledonmainstreet, green-eyed devil said...

gilbar said...
. I still think their side will win, because I think women are so deeply invested in compassion and kindness, much more than competition and winning."

Oh, good Christ.

So all of the female attorneys you helped train were solely invested in compassion and kindness, and not competition and winning? They didn't care about their rank in the class? They didn't care about working for top law firms? Or winning cases?

Pookie Number 2 said...

It is OBVIOUS to me that argument is a sidetrack and dead end. You can say that until you're blue in the face (just like you said there can't be gay marriage because marriage is between a man and a woman). You are making yourself irrelevant.

It’s certainly possible that cultural changes are monotonic and that American culture will steadily move in the direction of accepting identification as reality. On the other hand, history also contains a lot of examples of people pushing back after being pushed too hard, too fast (or too ridiculously).

I’m far less certain than is Althouse that the movement represented by Jessica Yaniv will be as effective at changing hearts and minds as was the movement represented by Martin Luther King, Jr.

exiledonmainstreet, green-eyed devil said...

And I guess girls never competed to get dates with the star football player, or the hunky guy who drove the cool Trans Am? They never gossiped and spread ugly rumors about other girls behind their backs because they were so invested in compassion and kindness.

The truth is women have always been ruthlessly competitive with each other, even before feminism and hs sports. Their competitive drive was channeled into getting Mr. Right.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

I still think their side will win, because I think women are so deeply invested in compassion and kindness, much more than competition and winning.

Women who participate in sports are by their very nature competitive and interested in winning. No one goes into a sport with the certainty that they are going to lose. There is no point.

Compassion and kindness are NOT necessarily "invested" traits in women. Women want to win and succeed. They want the competition to be fair.

When there is no point to continuing to compete, because the rules of the game have suddenly been changed by inserting men into the women's sports and pretending that there is no difference.... the sheer unfairness of it will cause young girls to just give up and women's sports will be a thing of the past. Men, in general, are always going to be able to beat women, in general, in sports endeavors. That is just biology.

No matter how much you dress the men like women or even castrate and fill the men with hormones...they are still biologically and structurally men who have a different body, different musculature, different proportions, different strength ratios. You can put lipstick on that pig, but it is still a pig.

The Travesties and surgically mutilated men in women sports movement, wants real women to just lay down and be doormats to the politically correct delusion that men can choose to be women and vice versa that women can choose to be men.

Insanity.

Sally327 said...

If women are more invested in compassion and kindness than in competition and winning then it should follow that trans women will not want to compete with an unfair advantage, that they will be more into compassion and kindness as well.

n.n said...

Compassion and kindness. Sacrificial, even. Sym-pathetic, maybe. Em-pathetic, probably not. There are precedents.

David Begley said...

Any parent or grandparent who has seen girls compete in high school sports is totally against letting boys compete against girls. As DBQ noted, it is unfair.

Mark said...

Glenn understands my point

Your point was to criticize the transgender ideologists???

That would be a first.

Phil 314 said...

My conclusion:

If you're a woman and you compete in and really dominate a sport,

You're not REALLY a woman.

Sebastian said...

"Glenn understands my point."

You made several points.

We disagreed with them -- the prediction, the postulated mechanism, the underlying assumptions.

We know what we said.

But then, Althouse doesn't have to play the game. She's always already a winner in her own mind.

JML said...

. I still think their side will win, because I think women are so deeply invested in compassion and kindness, much more than competition and winning.

Why isn’t it compassionate and kind to be on the side of biological women competing against each other? I get so sick of society having compassion and kindness for one at the expense of all others.

etbass said...

It is not "compassion and kindness" to agree with mentally insane positions. These trans people are not normal! it is not compassion and kindness to accept their insanity even when it harms the vast majority of women. It is not compassion and kindness to allow misguided liberals to try to change the basic laws of nature to the detriment of the vast majority of the population.

Paco Wové said...

"women are so deeply invested in compassion and kindness"

This seems like quite a broad-brush stereotype, which I wouldn't expect from Althouse. I guess I'll have to wait for Instapundit to mansplain it to me again.

etbass said...

When a person attributes feelings of compassion and kindness for a position there is a strong implication that the position is worthy and deserving of compassion and kindness. That is why, in my opinion, Althouse drew such powerful responses. She evidently thinks the trans position is a valid and worthy one, deserving compassion and kindness.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

"women are so deeply invested in compassion and kindness"

I'm a woman. I have no idea what that above even means. Being "invested" in.

I have compassion for some things and some people. I am invariably kind to animals and small children. I have zero empathy or compassion for many things and many people.

I'm not invested any viewpoint. It varies on the circumstances.

Paco Wové said...

"Why are people ascribing to Althouse the current Progressive fad of transworship"

Because her original post included language that clearly (to most commenters) included advocacy for a social change – allowing transexuals to destroy women's sports – that said commenters considered bad.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

She evidently thinks the trans position is a valid and worthy one, deserving compassion and kindness.

I have compassion for the mentally ill. Express kindness to those who are in need. Charitably give to less fortunate.

That doesn't mean that I am obligated to roll over and surrender, abase myself, give up my own dreams, goals or successes for some fantasy..... or allow others to be unfairly cheated out of their own dreams and goals either.

That isn't compassion or kindness. It is just stupidity.

urpower said...

Perhaps cis female athletes could do tribute to their trans sisters by adopting their techniques-- lawsuits, public shaming, hysterics in the face of facts--in the dogged pursuit of personal advancement. How interesting sports could become.

Big Mike said...

Yeah, these young women are fighting the trend. I still think their side will win, because I think women are so deeply invested in compassion and kindness, much more than competition and winning.

@Althouse, I assume you meant “the other” when you typed “their.” And I am pulling for those young women to win, because of fairness, and because I admire a person who won’t be bullied by bullying disguised as appeals to “compassion and kindness.”

Mark said...

It is not "compassion and kindness" to agree with mentally insane positions.

Yes, there was not simply a neutral prediction. There was not simply stereotyping of female attributes. There was an assertion by her in her premise/assumption that the compassionate and kind thing is to acquiesce in, if not embrace, the subjective claim of one sex who say they are a different gender, leaving aside the whole militant ideology aspect of it all.

Those who protested got that, even if she did not want to admit to her own biases.

Sebastian said...

I don't think anyone has noted yet the odd assumption in Althouse's syllogism.

1. Women care about caring more than competition.
2a. Accommodating Tranny claims for inclusion in women's sports is the caring to do
2b. Giving up competition is no big deal,
3. Therefore, women's preferences will lead them to step aside (or have their girls step aside).
4. If women step aside, tranny claims will succeed.
QED

Others have already challenged to assumption that women do not care enough about competition to resist stepping aside, with enough anecdotes to amount to data. Of course, they are bound to be right: traits like competitiveness are distributed more or less normally; the curves differ for boys/girls, but they are bound to overlap a great deal, hence some substantial resistance is likely, simply based on a nontrivial set of female preferences.

But regardless of the distribution of preferences, for Althouse's prediction to work, not only do women have to care sufficiently about caring over competition, they also have to perceive stepping aside as the caring thing to do. Why should they? Why is it an expression of caring and compassion to give in to the bullying of a small group of trannies and their prog allies? Why should a substantial majority of women want to step aside, or have girls step aside, so that large numbers of them will be deprived of opportunities and pleasures--of choices they otherwise would be able to make?

Wasn't the primacy of choice important to feminists at one point?

Mark said...

She evidently thinks the trans position is a valid and worthy one, deserving compassion and kindness.

Well, now she is trying to dodge that and insists that it doesn't matter (what she or anyone else thinks) because the trans side won and you lost, so move on and shut the hell up about it.

Mark said...

She evidently thinks the trans position is a valid and worthy one, deserving compassion and kindness.

Of course, the converse is that anyone who doesn't go along with it -- which includes nearly everyone else here -- is an asshole. Which is also implied in her subsequent hostility.

mockturtle said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
narciso said...

it is isn't a return, but a supplanting of traditional rules,

tim in vermont said...

It’s a “point" that the right has been making for a long time. That’s why I sincerely hope that the first "woman president” is transgendered.

Achilles said...

Dave Begley said...

Trump killed the Paris Agreement. Normal people don't believe in the global warming scam. People don't want electric cars. Electric guitars, yes. Electric cars, no.

Global warming is a scam.

Electric cars are superior to gas cars. If we had the same infrastructure for electric cars that we have for gas cars everyone would switch.

1. Better torque.
2. No maintenance.
3. Last for millions of miles.
4. No transmissions.
5. Cleaner and quieter.
6. Cheaper to build.
7. Safer.

They are just better.

Seeing Red said...

Actually, it’s not the trans-gendered folks but the females who refuse to fight to keep what they fought for.

So what’s the point of the ERA again?

tim in vermont said...

"She evidently thinks the trans position is a valid and worthy one, deserving compassion and kindness.”

This is one of Althouse’s best trolls ever. I don’t believe she ever addressed that point.

Seeing Red said...

What about the batteries?

mockturtle said...

I have compassion for the mentally ill.

So do I, DBQ, which is why I consider it child abuse to allow a mentally unstable minor child to change his or her gender. It is cruel and it is unthinkable. It has become a trendy practice that will reap misery and regret down the road.

tim in vermont said...

"They are just better.”

You mean a car that could go for 400+ miles in sub zero cold over high mountain passes and through high winds that you could recharge within the time it takes to buy a Slim Jim and a cup of gas station coffee?

I didn’t know they had that yet. Diesel electrics have been around for a long time, but they generate their own electricity on board and store their energy in the fuel tanks.

Anonymous said...

AA: Yeah, these young women are fighting the trend. I still think their side will win, because I think women are so deeply invested in compassion and kindness, much more than competition and winning.

"Kindness and compassion" in women *is* a competitive strategy. It serves a woman's interests in forwarding her own/her children/her groups interests just as the overt competitiveness of men serves his. And we all know just how ruthless otherwise "kind and compassionate" human females can be when their interests are threatened. So the question is, what exactly is going on when women start deploying their "kindness and compassion" in ways that do not in any way serve their own ends?

You see yielding female space to trannies as the predictable expression of universal female "kindness and compassion"; I say that a less parochial observer sees a dysfunctional and ultimately disadvantageous expression of those traits in a pathological social environment. It won't end as you predict, because it *is* pathological.

I think your understanding of the "kindness and compassion" of women is based on the very restricted, and anomalous, sample set of middle- and upper-middle-class liberal white women. The Krazy Karen demo, if you will. Gushing all over "the Other" to the disadvantage of their own and their own children's interests is a weird manifestation of Western cultural degeneracy, an anomalous behavior that is usually far more a mis-directed, dead-end expression of intra-group competitive status-signaling than it is any kind of expression of the innate female "kindness and compassion" that is attractive to potential mates, and beneficial to their children and society. (Aka, adaptive.) Not even most middle-class white women consider "inclusiveness to trannies" as a high moral imperative. Non-white women? Please.

tim in vermont said...

"What about the batteries?”

Mr Fusion! It’s only 20 years away!

RMc said...

Oops. I'm dominating the comments on this new post. I need to hold back and let other people have a turn. Let me get out of the way.

Naah, you're just trolling your readers, while accusing them of all sorts of ugly things. Again.

How tiresome.

Anonymous said...

Aunty Trump to etbass: "She evidently thinks the trans position is a valid and worthy one, deserving compassion and kindness."

This is one of Althouse’s best trolls ever. I don’t believe she ever addressed that point.


I'm still favoring that position, while enjoying the ride.

tim in vermont said...

Althouse is right abut women, in the main. Obviously not eveyr single woman, and you guys will be able to cite exceptions by the boatload, but women in general, she’s right.

tim in vermont said...

"How tiresome.”

To date, there are more than 500 million blogs out of 1.7 billion websites in the world. Their authors account for over 2 million blog posts daily.

https://hostingtribunal.com/blog/how-many-blogs/

Narayanan said...

I asked earlier ...

Is *Stepping Aside* different from *Walking Away*?

Why / why not

wholelottasplainin' said...

narciso said...
like I noted, this world is much stranger than anything predicted 30 years ago, well there are only two genders, the rest is behavior, no matter what procrustean boxes we make to excuse it,
*****************

IIRC those were procrustean beds, not boxes.

tim in vermont said...

Women like to win, just not the same kinds of things that men like to win.

Sebastian said...

"Electric cars are superior to gas cars . . . 6. Cheaper to build."

?

minnesota farm guy said...

Big news for Ann: there are only two genders. I will also say that some exceptionally bright commenters here seem to have misunderstood - and after two days still misunderstand - Ann's comment according to Ann. In that case I would have to say that she would have received a failing grade in her own course for lack of clarity.

wholelottasplainin' said...

If women are kind and compassionate, explain the popularity of movies like "Mean Girls".

I can explain it---it depicts women as they often behave toward each other. IOW it spotlights a truth.

Next, explain why "woke" female superhero movies bomb at the box office.

I can explain it---they depict women as they are NOT.

Achilles said...

Sebastian said...
"Electric cars are superior to gas cars . . . 6. Cheaper to build."

?

Price it out. Do you know what the components of an electric car are?

The only thing that is currently expensive are the batteries. But even those are decreasing in price tremendously.

Electric cars are extremely simple machines.

Achilles said...

Seeing Red said...
What about the batteries?

I agree there are tradeoffs. Batteries are the limiting factor.

There are inductive chargers that could allow quick periodic charging to overcome this. But the infrastructure is also a limiting factor.

If you had equal capital investment a system that supported electric vehicles would be superior.

I understand it is not feasible or true in practice.

n.n said...

Women like to win, just not the same kinds of things that men like to win.

Equal and complementary. For example: women as mothers, men as fathers.

n.n said...

If you had equal capital investment a system that supported electric vehicles would be superior.

The energy source is the only difference. Batteries are low-density, current-limited, environmentally-sensitive, storage devices, which constrain their use to niche applications.

tim in vermont said...

"There are inductive chargers that could allow quick periodic charging to overcome this.”

You mean like the proximity chargers for cell phones? I know that the original Tesla believed in that, but I don’t think he ever showed the way to build one. That also seems like a pretty dangerous device, a focused beam that contained the same potential energy as a tank of gas. Like firing a “photon torpedo” into a magnetic bottle, maybe, IDK.

Oh, this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inductive_charging

Basically every major road would have to be outfitted with a series of magnetic resonance chargers to keep the cars topped up as they sped by. Not technically impossible... I guess. Kind of like the overhead wires for street cars or commuter trains, like you see on the line from Boston to NYC once you get close to New York.

tim in vermont said...

Maybe you could just put them in places where there were long climbs, like out of Denver into the Front Range.

mockturtle said...

Women like to win, just not the same kinds of things that men like to win.

Nonsense. If I'm playing a tennis match with another woman, you can bet we both want to win. Same with golf. Women may try to act as if it's unimportant but it is and if they lose, they are inwardly seething. Women are every bit as competitive as men. And men are more team-oriented than women.

n.n said...

If women are kind and compassionate, explain the popularity of movies like "Mean Girls".

Sym-pathetic, maybe. Em-pathetic, not unless they have a sadomasochistic orientation. Perhaps just bigots. That said, first, no color blocs ("diversity"), although there are normal distributions, and the inevitable trans-orientations should, in principle, be rare.

Achilles said...

Aunty Trump said...

Basically every major road would have to be outfitted with a series of magnetic resonance chargers to keep the cars topped up as they sped by. Not technically impossible... I guess. Kind of like the overhead wires for street cars or commuter trains, like you see on the line from Boston to NYC once you get close to New York.

It would be more systemic than that. More like parking spaces. Maybe a turnout on long stretches of road. Specific lanes at stop lights.

There is a lot of space and capital wasted on fixed track mass transit. If we put all of the money wasted on light rail into an electric vehicle infrastructure we would be there by now.

An automated vehicle control system would help greatly too.

tim in vermont said...

Or the pole on the back of a bumper car that contacts the electrified screen at the ceiling of the ride.

tim in vermont said...

"If women are kind and compassionate, explain the popularity of movies like "Mean Girls”.”

Those movies are made so that the women can identify with the always very pretty nice girl.

"Women may try to act as if it's unimportant but it is and if they lose, they are inwardly seething.”

I don’t think that the women who post here on an site that attracts overwhelmingly male posters is representative of women in general. But if the stakes of the golf game were the affections of an attractive man, I could believe it.

n.n said...

I hope that the first "woman president” is transgendered.

I don't think trans/homo or trans/bi would suffice. Preferably trans/neo-feminine with natural or simulated physical gender attributes, and trans-social while wearing a dress and high heals. Fast forward to the past, to the future.

Mark said...

a site that attracts overwhelmingly male posters

That presumes too much. There have been more than a few commenters here who I had assumed were male, but later revealed they are, in fact, women. Others with neutral handles may very well also be women, but they've not yet tipped their hand one way or the other.

Laslo Spatula said...

Althouse writes: "Yeah, these young women are fighting the trend. I still think their side will win, because I think women are so deeply invested in compassion and kindness, much more than competition and winning."

I understand her sentiment, but I will extrapolate from this through Daddy Issues Theory what Women Really Want To Have Happen:

They want to be nice and non-confrontational. And they want men to come straighten this mess up without being asked.

That way they can have plausible deniability to keep the fluffy robe of kindness, while blaming Daddy for feeling like he had to come to the rescue.

Then they will thank Daddy quietly over a burger at McD's when no one is watching.

I win.

I am Laslo.

exiledonmainstreet, green-eyed devil said...

Aunty Trump said...
Women like to win, just not the same kinds of things that men like to win.

2/16/20, 3:34 PM

My husband beat me at Scrabble the other day. I was quite pissed off.

To start off using all my tiles ("romance") at the beginning only to be beaten by stupid "ox" on a triple letter score at the end...

Grrrrrrr....

bagoh20 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Dust Bunny Queen said...

I don’t think that the women who post here on an site that attracts overwhelmingly male posters is representative of women in general

Probably not, but then again I don't think that the men who post here are representative of men in general.

I think you guys underestimate just how competitive women actually are.

Having worked in probably one of the most competitive, testosterone drenched occupations around...Stock Brokerage Firm, I know competitive. Competition just makes you stronger. And it is exhilarating too.

Quaestor said...

I haven't seen this in print, but it is quite certain the Olympic Committee has already determined not to quibble about reproductive biology, anatomy, genetics, and other unimportant things that may impede the sacred and absolute right of anyone to self-identify as anything they choose and be honored as such. However, it occurs to me that the former Soviet Union may demand that the standing records from several past Olympiads be expunged or amended to reflect the fact that several Russian trans-people things were banned, disqualified, or otherwise denied medals or recognition because they were unjustly classified as men but were in fact actually women because they said so.

bagoh20 said...

I not going to thank them for it. First, in the 50's I was wearing a diaper, and I'm not in any hurry to get back to it. Secondly, I like women competing in sports. Many really enjoy doing so, and find a place to compete and excel outside of just being attractive or smart, which is not available to many women who can still be winners, champions, leaders, and role models. Options which may denied to them on looks or smarts alone. A now traditional and respected option, an option that gave them a kind of parity with men is being taken away from them, stolen actually. Stolen, because it is being done by cheating.

Gospace said...

Wow, did this go off topic.

Electric cars are easier to build and more reliable. True.

And have some severe limitations.

Also true.

And, in overall efficiency, from beginning to end, simply their exhaust from the tailpipe to a centralized power plant.

I own hybrids. The solution is- design the car with all electric drive, period.

Design a gender in a box (frame, whatever) that at it's most efficient speed can power the car at some arbitrary speed and grade, let's say 65 MPH up a 10% grade should the car get there with the battery completely discharged. Pick an arbitrary distance and speed. Design the car to travel 30 miles at 65 discharging the batteries from 75% to 25%. This leaves room at the top should you arrive at the top of the Grapevine headed down for regenerative braking to control your speed, and room at the bottom should you need the battery to maintain speed going up the Grapevine. If you've ever driven up or down the Grapevine you know it's a challenge for most engines and brakes.

Give it a plug in option so you can top off the battery on a 15 amp household circuit overnight. If you want to.

I own hybrids. 2014 Prius, 2019 Ioniq. 3 of my children have a Prius. All are currently at or near the 150000 mile mark.

Why put the gender in a box? The gas engine is the most likely failure point. If there are no mechanical connections, unplug it, unbolt it, pull it out and replace it. Be an easy rebuild if standardized within a manufacturer.

Overall fuel efficiency would be greater than a pure electric once you account for transmission losses. And fill up would be the same as ever. Full recharge on a trip for a pure electric is the killer. The entire electric grid would need an overhaul to handle the load. The opposition to the needed new transmission lines will come from the same people who want to ban IC engines. That's one thing most people aren't aware of. The power grid as exists simply could not handle even 10% of vehicles being all electric.

Beasts of England said...

’I think you guys underestimate just how competitive women actually are.’

Not me!! I’m laughing at the suggestion that women are non-competitive. I’ve never met one - nor do I want to. :)

Gospace said...

I hate typing on a phone!

Genset, not gender. Automispelling strikes again.

minnesota farm guy said...

@DBQ I do not underestimate women's competitiveness one bit. Have been married to a couple of very competitive women:one in the field of sport - tennis to be precise; the other in life in general. One of my sons is married to the most competitive female I have met. It's a bit of a joke between the males in the family - but a quiet one. I will say until I am blue in the face that XX persons and XY persons should have their own fields of athletic endeavor and never the twain shall met.

Hammond X. Gritzkofe said...

I still think their side will win, because I think women are so deeply invested in compassion and kindness, much more than competition and winning.

Fer real, Althouse? Or you just a'trollin' and a'chummin'?

minnesota farm guy said...

Anyone who's watched the likes of Sue Bird, Diana Taurasi, Swin Cash,Breanna Stewart, Naphesha Collier and many others play BB for UCONN as I have, can't possibly say that women are not competitive.

MayBee said...

A lot of what got said was the usual attacks on transgenders — saying they aren't really women and shouldn't be barging into women's sports and there are only 2 sexes, etc. etc.

It is OBVIOUS to me that argument is a sidetrack and dead end. You can say that until you're blue in the face (just like you said there can't be gay marriage because marriage is between a man and a woman). You are making yourself irrelevant. The people who will be affecting what happens are going to be people who want to be understanding and empathetic to those who identify as transgender.


I don't think I'm making myself irrelevant. I don't believe transgender people are really women and I don't think they should be bargaining into women's sports.....but I do want to be understanding and empathetic to those who identify and transgender. Surely you see how both things are possible.

Now....do I think people who believe transgender people need help OTHER than being encouraged to transformed their bodies are being shamed into not stating that opinion? Yes, I do. Althouse is trying to do it here. I say it is a convesation that hasn't happened.

But I also say...if it is true that people are transgendered, it is impossible that women and girls *other* than transgendered females will step aside for transgender sports, because anyone who is a woman would be stepping aside. Right?

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

There was an assertion by her in her premise/assumption that the compassionate and kind thing is to acquiesce in, if not embrace, the subjective claim of one sex who say they are a different gender, leaving aside the whole militant ideology aspect of it all.

OR she predicts the social consensus will likely coalesce around that point of view, that the compassionate and kind ACCEPTANCE of trans activism might become the default female practice AS IS THE NON-PARTICIPATION in sports is the usual default female action.

I mean I see it when Althouse slips into advocacy (“I’m for normal,” for example) and I’m saying I don’t see it here where she presented the topic fairly neutrally.

tim in vermont said...

"I think you guys underestimate just how competitive women actually are.”

I never said that women weren’t competitive. Just that they compete for different things than winning races, generally. Most of us, as boys, have competed in footraces with our friends, wanting badly to win, even, IIRC, cheating to win. There was one kid who was notorious. it’s all part of a sorting that we did. Women sort themselves in different ways.

Stock trading women are serious outliers.

tim in vermont said...

"The people who will be affecting what happens are going to be people who want to be understanding and empathetic to those who identify as transgender. “

Thus spake the Borg Queen. "Resistance is futile."

Rusty said...

Re; Electric vehicles. In the worlds present state of production the supply of readily available lithium has another ten years. There simply has to be an order of magnitude change in battery technology. The other draw back is power production. What good is a thousand electric cars if the power plants pollute more to produce the power. And don't tell me wind and solar because just manufacturing those uses tons of toxic materials. Plus neither are very efficient. Which leaves, TA DA, falling water or nuclear.

bagoh20 said...

Every tyrancial political movement claims that those fighting it will soon be irrelevant if they don't submit. It often turns out just the opposite. This is how real "heroes" are made. The threat of irrelevance is the lame play first practiced by mean girls in a high school clique, or by scorched-earth revolutionaries. People eventually despised.

Howard said...

Blogger Aunty Trump said...
That’s why I sincerely hope that the first "woman president” is transgendered.


That would be epic.

True story my older brother flew helicopters in Vietnam then continue to fly helicopters for a 45-year career most of it doing high mountain construction high mountain rescue coastal Cliff rescue and firefighting. He's also a ultra Lefty liberal suffering from TDS and PTSD. According to him the only good female helicopter pilots are transgendered.

tim in vermont said...

"The people who will be affecting what happens are going to be people who want to be understanding and empathetic to those who identify as transgender. “

Until the unworkable society that has been created collapses and the “Gods of the Copybook Headings” have their say.

BUMBLE BEE said...

Yeah... all 30,000 of em!

Mark said...

Every tyrannical political movement claims that those fighting it will soon be irrelevant if they don't submit.

There's nothing more relevant than relativism.

mockturtle said...

But if the stakes of the golf game were the affections of an attractive man, I could believe it.

But you're not a woman, are you 'Aunty'?

Ralph L said...

I don't think there are enough trans HS boys who are jocks to have a real impact on the participation of most girls, particularly as long as colleges want and give discounts for female athletes.

mockturtle said...

Hammond X asks: Fer real, Althouse? Or you just a'trollin' and a'chummin'?

The 'chum' has been poured out rather generously this weekend.

Mark said...

particularly as long as colleges want and give discounts for female athletes . . .

Male athletes that cannot make it in male athletics will say that they are female -- taking not only their places on sports teams and taking their state track championships and state track records, they will take also their scholarships away from them so that the women won't be able to go to college at all.

pacwest said...

Statistics I quoted yesterday:
55% of high school students participate in school sponsored athlecics. Of these 43% are female. That means near a quarter of females in high school participate sponsored sports. Probably more when sports outside of school are considered.

That's a pretty large base to be overrun by a miniscule number of trans athletes whose support among the general populace is low. Factor in the non athletes who believe in fair play and "compassion and caring" isn't going to be enough to make the changes you predict. I'd say that was the gist of 90% of the comments you got yesterday.

If you had made the argument that is the people in power are going to be the deciders in this, that is within the realm of possibility given the recent idiocies enacted into law. Compassion and caring not so much.


Anonymous said...

Howard: "True story my older brother flew helicopters in Vietnam then continue to fly helicopters for a 45-year career most of it doing high mountain construction high mountain rescue coastal Cliff rescue and firefighting. He's also a ultra Lefty liberal suffering from TDS and PTSD. According to him the only good female helicopter pilots are transgendered."

Demonstrating yet again Conquest's first rule.

bagoh20 said...

Let's say that Trump wins two terms and wants to run again. Can he self-identify as a woman, change his name, and be eligible to be the first woman President?

We are now saying that genetics and science do not matter in identifying who you are, You just tell us who you are, and we must accept it, so Harriet Maude Trump could be a first time candidate. I'd vote for her.

Mark said...

Let's say that Trump wins two terms and wants to run again. Can he self-identify as a woman, change his name, and be eligible to be the first woman President?

Why go that far? He can simply say that he feels inside as if he has not really been president at all.

stevew said...

I respect you all a ton, except Inga and Chuck, and appreciate your various points of view. Speaking for myself, exclusively, I'm not giving any effs about this topic. Carry on.

rhhardin said...

If you want to know how long batteries last, ask a woman.

n.n said...

We are now saying that genetics and science do not matter in identifying who you are,

More importantly, they conflate the three zones of reconciliation: normalization, tolerance, and rejection, which is a first-order forcing of progressive corruption, confusion, and dysfunction. The same way that they conflate the four logical domains: scientific, philosophical, faith, and fantasy.

Mark said...

Over at HA, they have a story about a two-year-old little girl who has been featured on NBC. The child is actually nine now. And goes by the name of Jacob.

The "parents" have been complicit in this young innocent "transitioning" over the last seven years. Starting from THE AGE OF TWO.

Care about that??

And is that what the people in whose care this child has been entrusted to have been showing "compassion and kindness"???

FUCKING TWO YEARS OLD.

Or is it sinking into "irrelevancy" to discuss such things? Is it irrelevant to care about a two year old little girl -- now a nine year old little girl -- who has been grossly abused for the last seven years?

pacwest said...

The results of the poll, taken Oct. 31-Nov. 2, were virtually identical to a Rasmussen survey released in June, which found only 28% favored allowing transgender students “to participate on the sports team of the gender they identify with,” while 54% were opposed.

Long odds on compassion and care.

Narayanan said...

OT: To lighten up

How will Blonde Commando Koudelka sisters fare against *Trans*(ients)

chickelit said...

Blogger Mark said..."Let's say that Trump wins two terms and wants to run again. Can he self-identify as a woman, change his name, and be eligible to be the first woman President?

Why go that far? He can simply say that he feels inside as if he has not really been president at all.K"

Trump could really tick off the gays and the trannies by backing Ivanka for POTUS in 2024. For some reason, they despise her (remember the gay guy on the plane?). I think her heteronormality is what ticks them off.

Narayanan said...

Blogger bagoh20 said...
Let's say that Trump wins two terms and wants to run again. Can he self-identify as a woman, change his name, and be eligible to be the first woman President
_____&&&&&
Why wait till 2024?
He can do it for 2020 and be first Trans-Woman President.

Avoid impeachment, maybe.
One on one lunch with Pence - are you kidding.

For 2024 he can slip off high heels (they are killing me, Melania should've warned me)

Anonymous said...

Mike(MJB Wolf): I mean I see it when Althouse slips into advocacy (“I’m for normal,” for example) and I’m saying I don’t see it here where she presented the topic fairly neutrally.

The advocacy is not in the explicit prediction (women will acquiesce to trannies driving them out of sports), nor in her explicit premise (women want to be seen as kind and compassionate). It's in the claim that "kindness and compassion" = being inclusive of trannies in women's sports - iow, that the majority of women prioritize "kindness and compassion" along woke lines. That, of course, doesn't follow necessarily from her premise, but she makes no argument for the truth of that claim, she just asserts that women will go along with the people pushing this because women want to be seen as kind and compassionate. Note the circularity.

We'll ignore for the present her obvious personal distaste for competitive sport that is indeed irrelevant to her argument, but which she insists on introducing into the discussion for some reason, and then, oddly, complaining that people misunderstand her *other* point, when they respond to those specific comments.

alanc709 said...

Resistance is futile.

Otto said...

"I think women are so deeply invested in compassion and kindness, much more than competition and winning." Really. Let's take you as example. The two greatest achievements in your life were 1) H.S. class valedictorian 2) co- first in your law class.
You don't do those things without a strong competitive and winning spirit. You obviously were not a child prodigy or genius so you had to work hard for those awards and no doubt you wanted to be first, they didn't come naturally.
C'mon girl you need a vacation.

Gahrie said...

Re; Electric vehicles. In the worlds present state of production the supply of readily available lithium has another ten years.

When did you turn into Paul Ehrlich? I predict in ten years there will be more lithium available and at a cheaper price...

There simply has to be an order of magnitude change in battery technology.

That could be coming sooner than you think. Tesla's battery day may produce that change.

The other draw back is power production. What good is a thousand electric cars if the power plants pollute more to produce the power

Most electricity today is produced by natural gas. Producing the energy at a plant is more efficient than in individual cars, and natural gas is not dirtier than gasoline.

Big Mike said...

@Otto, nicely put, however the difference is that Althouse earned those honors competing against both (yes, only two) biological genders. She doesn't appreciate the huge difference in muscle strength that comes from going through puberty as a biological male. Makes her a little short in the empathy department, but win my experience most women have much less empathy than they assume.

Gahrie said...

It is OBVIOUS to me that argument is a sidetrack and dead end. You can say that until you're blue in the face (just like you said there can't be gay marriage because marriage is between a man and a woman). You are making yourself irrelevant. The people who will be affecting what happens are going to be people who want to be understanding and empathetic to those who identify as transgender. Start there and make an argument about preserving women's sports. I'm saying it's going to be really hard, and I think it is too hard. It's not going to work. Look at what happened to Martina Navratilova when she spoke out!

Repeal the 19th!

Big Mike said...

@Rusty, @Gahrie, I understand that a new form of battery based on aluminum in the presence of oxygen. Still some technical problems to be solved. Perhaps someday they will mine old landfills to recover cans that people didn't recycle?

_____________
* Reminds me that several lefties of my acquaintance pledge allegiance to recycling, then throw their empty soda cans into the trash.

Inga said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jersey Fled said...

Best estimate is that trans people make up 0.6% of the population, yet it seems we spend half our time talking about them.

Inga said...

“And for making a rather astute PREDICTION people I normally find reasonable or at least readable here pile on as if she’s secretly funding Antifa.

So I repeat, WTF?!?!?!”

This is happening with an increasing occurrence. The lighting fast jump to attribute the worst possible motives to the speaker/writer. Not only that but commenters seem to misunderstand or mischaracterize anyone who expresses an even slightly different opinion than the group as a whole does. It’s that demand for purity, for group think that has become prevalent among Trumpists. We see it here in the threads every single day.

Big Mike said...

@Gahrie, don't repeal it. Just suspend it until women choose to face up to their responsibilities. ;-}

Big Mike said...

This is happening with an increasing occurrence. The lighting fast jump to attribute the worst possible motives to the speaker/writer. Not only that but commenters seem to misunderstand or mischaracterize anyone who expresses an even slightly different opinion than the group as a whole does. It’s that demand for purity, for group think that has become prevalent among Trumpists. We see it here in the threads every single day.

We only see it in the threads where you show up. Your lack of self-awareness is awe-inspiring.

Unknown said...

This seems like a weird hill for Ann to die on.

Tim said...

There are two genders. "trans" people are mentally ill. I refuse to applaud the lunacy.

Tim said...


Blogger minnesota farm guy said...
Anyone who's watched the likes of Sue Bird, Diana Taurasi, Swin Cash,Breanna Stewart, Naphesha Collier and many others play BB for UCONN as I have, can't possibly say that women are not competitive.

Wait until Lebron decides he wants to play with them.

Will N said...

So, transgender women will be allowed to take over female sports because women are compassionate, caring, empathetic and non-competitive and will step aside. Transgendered women, having none of these expected attributes of women, will have no compunctions with this take-over of women's sports from women.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 217   Newer› Newest»