Zone1 Focusing the LGBTQ debate

[alang1216]

Is that what you say to the fathers whose daughters have been raped in such situations?

I would suggest you do

There are already laws against rape and I've never seen any correlation between being a rapist and being trans. Have you?

 

[alang1216]

Very good moves that have no resemblance to FBI agents enforcing single sex bathrooms.

You're right I should have just said federal agents.

False.

Congress has passed no law granting males access to girls locker rooms, bathrooms, and sports. To vote for such a law would be political suicide and overwhelming majority of districts.

False.

In this case, a 4th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling, affirmed by the Supreme Court's refusal to hear the case, found that the school board's policy barring a transgender student from using the bathroom corresponding to his gender identity violated Title IX and the Equal Protection Clause.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

There are already laws against rape and I've never seen any correlation between being a rapist and being trans. Have you?

You want any man dressed up as a woman to have access to women's intimate spaces.

Rapes in these situations have, indeed, occurred.

Your glib dismissal of rape is the height of misogyny. Should ALL rape victims just "take care of themselves" as you put it?

 

[Seymour Flops]

You're right I should have just said federal agents.

You would have still been just as wrong.

False.

In this case, a 4th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling, affirmed by the Supreme Court's refusal to hear the case, found that the school board's policy barring a transgender student from using the bathroom corresponding to his gender identity violated Title IX and the Equal Protection Clause.

Refusing to hear a case does not 'affirm' the lower court's ruling. It may be the USSC is waiting for a better case to take up.

In the highly unlikely event that the USSC ever does affirm such a "right" never stated in Title IX, and whose pretense actually violates Title IX, well that will just add to the list of judges who will need to be removed.

 

[alang1216]

You want any man dressed up as a woman to have access to women's intimate spaces.

Rapes in these situations have, indeed, occurred.

Your glib dismissal of rape is the height of misogyny. Should ALL rape victims just "take care of themselves" as you put it?

You really think someone, ready to commit a felony, will stop because they will be committing a misdemeanor too?

 

[alang1216]

You would have still been just as wrong.

So you tell me, who will enforce these EOs?

Refusing to hear a case does not 'affirm' the lower court's ruling. It may be the USSC is waiting for a better case to take up.

Actually it does affirm. That is our current system.

 

[Seymour Flops]

So you tell me, who will enforce these EOs?

Who enforced Trump's desire that Columbia University not allow anti-Semetic rioters free reign on their campus? Columbia did. Just as soon as they saw it would cost them $400 Million to keep encouraging the anti-Jewish violence.

Same will apply to Trump's EO about protecting girls' sports. Trump will hold back funds, and they will fold like houses of cards.

Actually it does affirm. That is our current system.

No, it allows one ruling to stand. It does not set precedent. That's our system.

I see you are running away from post # 178 right upthread. Why is that?

Just tell me here whether you think that the transwoman on the left of the screen is correct to claim that it is not fair that the transwoman on the right of the screen broke her record in powerlifting.

 

[skye]

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Who do you think is more at risk of rape. A woman coinhabiting a prison with a trans woman? Or a trans woman in a male jail?

The danger is equal. As we have found out by putting men in women's prisons. Actually worse. If you look at the charges that put these men in prison you will that these men have something in common. They are commonly accused of violence against women. They are rapists, beaters, murderers, of women. Some find that they are identifying as women AFTER they are sentenced.

Because gender dysphoria is a mental defect, men that are disposed of violence against women and find they identify as women during trial are not cured of their violence if they have surgery and lose their penis. They still can beat women, they can still rape with whatever is handy. They don't stop being monsters. They just get more creative at it.

 

[alang1216]

Who enforced Trump's desire that Columbia University not allow anti-Semetic rioters free reign on their campus? Columbia did. Just as soon as they saw it would cost them $400 Million to keep encouraging the anti-Jewish violence.

Same will apply to Trump's EO about protecting girls' sports. Trump will hold back funds, and they will fold like houses of cards.

At least until the Dept of Ed is neutered and the funds become moot.

No, it allows one ruling to stand. It does not set precedent. That's our system.

The ruling sets the precedent and, until overruled, is the law of the land.

I see you are running away from post # 178 right upthread. Why is that?

Just tell me here whether you think that the transwoman on the left of the screen is correct to claim that it is not fair that the transwoman on the right of the screen broke her record in powerlifting.

Sorry, I missed that one. If I ran the powerlifting, barring any medical issues I'm not aware of (e.g., effects of hormones on upper body), I would NOT allow men to compete against women, I don't see that as a Right.

 

[Seymour Flops]

At least until the Dept of Ed is neutered and the funds become moot.

Now that is a fair point.

Once the Department of Education stops handing out taxpayers' hard-earned dollars to states like they're Santa Claus and states pay for their own children's educations, the federal government will have no more power over them.

Ore-ee-gone can let as many boys pummel girls and call it sport as they please. Until all the decent families move away, and are left with nothing but Xanax and addirol addled middle-aged parents who encourage their boys to be trans.

Good luck harvesting the hay or whatever the fuck Oregon's economic base is, with only transwomen for workers.

The ruling sets the precedent and, until overruled, is the law of the land.

False. All it means is that in that district, that case was decided by that district court. It sets no precedent for the nation, because the USSC did not rule on it.

Sorry, I missed that one. If I ran the powerlifting, barring any medical issues I'm not aware of (e.g., effects of hormones on upper body), I would NOT allow men to compete against women, I don't see that as a Right.

What men?

Those are two women, aren't they?

Or are you being a transphobic bigot?

Would you also keep those ladies out of female locker rooms before they go to the floor (?) to break more records? You would subject them to being raped by forcing them into the male locker room?

The horror!

 

[alang1216]

Now that is a fair point.

Once the Department of Education stops handing out taxpayers' hard-earned dollars to states like they're Santa Claus and states pay for their own children's educations, the federal government will have no more power over them.

Ore-ee-gone can let as many boys pummel girls and call it sport as they please. Until all the decent families move away, and are left with nothing but Xanax and addirol addled middle-aged parents who encourage their boys to be trans.

Good luck harvesting the hay or whatever the fuck Oregon's economic base is, with only transwomen for workers.

The question I never hear asked in these cases is why we created the DoEd in the first place. As I recall, many (most?) funded their schools by property taxes. Worked great for wealthy communities, not so great for poor ones. Funding for disabled students is very expensive and generally a low priority in most school districts. Those are two issues DoEd was created to address.

Do you really think, once Federal funding ends, those issues will return?

False. All it means is that in that district, that case was decided by that district court. It sets no precedent for the nation, because the USSC did not rule on it.

I'll call my lawyer and get back to you.

What men?

Those are two women, aren't they?

Or are you being a transphobic bigot?

I prefer the term 'pragmatic'.

Would you also keep those ladies out of female locker rooms before they go to the floor (?) to break more records? You would subject them to being raped by forcing them into the male locker room?

The horror!

I don't frequent female locker rooms so I don't see why I should make that decision.

 

[Seymour Flops]

The question I never hear asked in these cases is why we created the DoEd in the first place. As I recall, many (most?) funded their schools by property taxes. Worked great for wealthy communities, not so great for poor ones. Funding for disabled students is very expensive and generally a low priority in most school districts. Those are two issues DoEd was created to address.

Do you really think, once Federal funding ends, those issues will return?

Do I think they will return? I think you mean not return?

If so, they will not "return" because they never left. The DOE has cratered our public education system and not achieved any of its puported goals for it.

Sure, schools in poor neighborhoods now are given large amounts of federal funds. Have those funds produced improvement in those schools? No. We now have one of the worst school systems on the planet among industrialized nations, if you measure by results. Where we used to consistently outperform students around he world on standardized tests, before the DOE, we now perform among the worst.

Schools in wealthy or suburban districts are the exception and they perform very well, relatively speaking. But even thouse have suffered from the dumbing down of the curriculum made made necessary by the DOE's emphasis on social goals rather than education.

Have they achieved those social goals? Not at all. Fifty years ago, they noticed that schools located in primarily black neighborhoods had an overwhelming black student population and that schools located in primarily white neighborhoods had an overwhelmingly white student population. Segregation! they cried and set out to fix it.

Schools are as "segregated" as ever, only now the black schools do not have dedicated black educators teaching black children whose parents require them to make the most of their opportunity for free education. Instead we have chaos in the inner city schools, with violence and drugs taking attention off the learning. Fatherless boys grow up watching their mothers complain that the welfare benefits "ain't enough," and turn to gangs and crime to avoid being caught in that trap.

The school on which the largest amounts of federal dollars are spent are the most spectacular failures.

I'll call my lawyer and get back to you.


I prefer the term 'pragmatic'.


I don't frequent female locker rooms so I don't see why I should make that decision.

So, you give up on that? Good thinking.

 

[Invisibleflash]

After a few months absence I finally feel motivated/masochistic enough to post again on this board. I have decided however for my own sanity to clearly state what I hope to achieve here and how I will go about achieving this.

My goal is to have an honest, good faith debate with people who disagree with me.

In order to achieve this I will try my utmost of not following those that are not interested in the slightest to do the same, down every rabbit hole.

I wanted to preface the OP with this.


Now for the actual meat of the OP.

In order to focus the debate I think it's important to clearly define the terms sex and gender. Since they are often conflated, purposefully by some, but most often out of ignorance by those that listen to those "some".

Sex are the biological traits that are used to define gender. Gender is the social construct with which peoples identity is defined.

This is a distinction that is at the heart of the discussion in my opinion, and one that is denied to exist at all, by those on the right.
It's the common trope. "Leftist can't tell you what a man or woman is." The implication of course being that the distinction is so clear that it's ridiculous to not be able to define a gender clearly.

So here's the thing. I would like to ask anyone if they can give a consistent set of biological traits that clearly designate a person as male and another for female? I bet that I can give an example of a person that has characteristics of both. Be it genetic, or anatomical.

This brings me to the social aspect of the question. I've yet to see any rational reason for opposing/hating the trans community that doesn't boil down to the argument that since they feel harmed (using that term very broadly) by the way people define THEMSELVES, therefore any harm (again used broadly) I cause them is justified.

So this is my second question. Can anybody give me a rational reason to assert that their rights supersede those of others?



Questions are encouraged and will be answered without deflection providing those that choose to respond engage with the 2 questions I just posed. I hope this OP to be a 2-way street of people actually talking TOO each other instead of past one another

Bub...queer / fag / trans is a mental illness.

The alphabet people can do what they like. But, when they force me to participate in their nightmare, that is where I draw the line. Same thing with them promoting mental illness and sickness to the kids. It is no different than pedophiles out on the hunt. They need to be put down.

 

[alang1216]

Do I think they will return? I think you mean not return?

Yes I missed the 'not'.

If so, they will not "return" because they never left. The DOE has cratered our public education system and not achieved any of its puported goals for it.

Sure, schools in poor neighborhoods now are given large amounts of federal funds. Have those funds produced improvement in those schools? No. We now have one of the worst school systems on the planet among industrialized nations, if you measure by results. Where we used to consistently outperform students around he world on standardized tests, before the DOE, we now perform among the worst.

Schools in wealthy or suburban districts are the exception and they perform very well, relatively speaking. But even thouse have suffered from the dumbing down of the curriculum made made necessary by the DOE's emphasis on social goals rather than education.

Have they achieved those social goals? Not at all. Fifty years ago, they noticed that schools located in primarily black neighborhoods had an overwhelming black student population and that schools located in primarily white neighborhoods had an overwhelmingly white student population. Segregation! they cried and set out to fix it.

Schools are as "segregated" as ever, only now the black schools do not have dedicated black educators teaching black children whose parents require them to make the most of their opportunity for free education. Instead we have chaos in the inner city schools, with violence and drugs taking attention off the learning. Fatherless boys grow up watching their mothers complain that the welfare benefits "ain't enough," and turn to gangs and crime to avoid being caught in that trap.

The school on which the largest amounts of federal dollars are spent are the most spectacular failures.

I don't know if any of that is true but, talking to local teachers, they praise DoE for providing funds to sponsor programs that, in their minds, benefit the students. Essentially, DoE gives money to local schools, if they misuse it, I'd say it's on them.

So, you give up on that? Good thinking.

I changed nothing. I never believed trans body builders should compete against women, only that the decision should be a local one, not a Federal one. I have no problem with trans girls competing in the girl's chess club.

 

[Seymour Flops]

I don't know if any of that is true

It is true. You should probably research it before you go praising the non-existent accomplishments of DOE.

Admittedly, I have no proof that the DOE caused the incredible decline in our public schools since Jimmy Carter signed the DOE into existance. Could be coincidence. Could be that Carter somehow ingeniously foresaw the decline and created the DOE to try and stop it.

But the DOE has not done anything worthwhile to help our students. Many teachers benefit from Title I funds which often create teaching positions that the district would otherwise not have. But the students have not seen results.

but, talking to local teachers, they praise DoE for providing funds to sponsor programs that, in their minds, benefit the students.

But there is little to no evidence that these programs benefit students. I'm a teacher myself, and a Special Education teacher at that. I see every day the effects of Federal Government on local schools.

Teaching students with disabilities is still a colossal failure, and not because of not enough money. Student with disabilities need specialized instruction in small groups. The Individuals with Disabilities Act bizarrely makes it a civil rights issue that such students NOT get instruction in small groups or get very little of it. It's a concept called "inclusion," and it is spoken about in the most glowing terms in the Special Education community.

I could rant about that for hours, but I'm getting off topic.

Essentially, DoE gives money to local schools, if they misuse it, I'd say it's on them.

"On them" in that it is their fault," but "on me" and every other federal taxpayer who has to fund billions pumped into failing schools in California, Ilinois, New York, and worst of all, DC.

I changed nothing. I never believed trans body builders should compete against women, only that the decision should be a local one, not a Federal one. I have no problem with trans girls competing in the girl's chess club.

Do you believe schools should even have a girl's chess club? What about women's chess tournaments at the professional level?

If so, why?

 

[alang1216]

It is true. You should probably research it before you go praising the non-existent accomplishments of DOE.

The department identifies four key functions:

1. Establishing policies on federal financial aid for education and distributing as well as monitoring those funds.
2. Collecting data on America's schools and disseminating research.
3. Focusing national attention on key issues in education, and making recommendations for education reform.
4. Prohibiting discrimination and ensuring equal access to education

Which of these did DoE fail at?

Admittedly, I have no proof that the DOE caused the incredible decline in our public schools since Jimmy Carter signed the DOE into existance. Could be coincidence. Could be that Carter somehow ingeniously foresaw the decline and created the DOE to try and stop it.

But the DOE has not done anything worthwhile to help our students. Many teachers benefit from Title I funds which often create teaching positions that the district would otherwise not have. But the students have not seen results.

But there is little to no evidence that these programs benefit students. I'm a teacher myself, and a Special Education teacher at that. I see every day the effects of Federal Government on local schools.

Teaching students with disabilities is still a colossal failure, and not because of not enough money. Student with disabilities need specialized instruction in small groups. The Individuals with Disabilities Act bizarrely makes it a civil rights issue that such students NOT get instruction in small groups or get very little of it. It's a concept called "inclusion," and it is spoken about in the most glowing terms in the Special Education community.

I could rant about that for hours, but I'm getting off topic.

It is a topic near and dear to my heart since I have a disabled child. My child benefited greatly from being included in the mainstream, even though it took lots of extra resources. They are currently working, paying taxes, and living independently and I don't know if that would have happened without those extra resources.

"On them" in that it is their fault," but "on me" and every other federal taxpayer who has to fund billions pumped into failing schools in California, Ilinois, New York, and worst of all, DC.

Those federal taxpayers already pay for the local schools so they should put their house in order before they complain.

Do you believe schools should even have a girl's chess club? What about women's chess tournaments at the professional level?

If so, why?

I don't know and I don't care. It was just an example of an activity where being a certain gender has no advantage.

 

[Seymour Flops]

The department identifies four key functions:

1. Establishing policies on federal financial aid for education and distributing as well as monitoring those funds.
2. Collecting data on America's schools and disseminating research.
3. Focusing national attention on key issues in education, and making recommendations for education reform.
4. Prohibiting discrimination and ensuring equal access to education

Which of these did DoE fail at?

They failed to improve public education, or even maintain it at the level that existed before DOE did.
If they did not "identify" improving public education in public schools as a key function, then that was their first collosal failure.

From your list, they certainly did not ensure equal access to education. School are more divided by race than they were in the days of official segregation.

I hope you are not about to make the "separate but equal" argument.

It won't hold water. Predomenently white schools perform far better than predomently black schools, and more so than before the DOE. A complete and total failure, but even the low standards they set for themselves.

As to the other three, they are "successful" only in that no other federal agency has been assigned that function. If they provided you evidence that they are performing well on:

• Establishing policies on federal financial aid for education and distributing as well as monitoring those funds.
• Collecting data on America's schools and disseminating research.
• Focusing national attention on key issues in education, and making recommendations for education reform.

Please share that evidence.

It is a topic near and dear to my heart since I have a disabled child. My child benefited greatly from being included in the mainstream, even though it took lots of extra resources. They are currently working, paying taxes, and living independently and I don't know if that would have happened without those extra resources.

I won't comment on your individual child, sorry not taking that bait.

But I have educated far more than one disabled child, and I can tell you that the emphasis on "mainstreaming" them is THE key factor in hindering their educational progress.

Those federal taxpayers already pay for the local schools so they should put their house in order before they complain.

I don't know and I don't care. It was just an example of an activity where being a certain gender has no advantage.

Well, I'll tell you, since you don't know and don't care, but come here to express your opinion on it anyway.

They do have women's chess competitions, and they also allow woment to compete in Men's chess, which is not called "Men's chess," but just chess.

The Women's World Chess Championship 2025 will take place in 2025 as a match between Ju Wenjun, the current champion, and Tan Zhongyi, the winner of the Women's Candidates Tournament 2024.

Again, Men's chess is just called "Chess."

The World Chess Championship is played to determine the world champion in chess. The current world champion is Gukesh Dommaraju, who defeated the previous champion Ding Liren in the 2024 World Chess Championship.

Now that you know, I'd like your opinion: If Ding Liren gets tired of being second banana and declares himself to be a woman, are you okay with him taking the women's title from Ju Wenjun or Tan Zhongyi?

Or should they stop having Womens Chess competitions?

 

[alang1216]

They failed to improve public education, or even maintain it at the level that existed before DOE did.
If they did not "identify" improving public education in public schools as a key function, then that was their first collosal failure.

From your list, they certainly did not ensure equal access to education. School are more divided by race than they were in the days of official segregation.

I hope you are not about to make the "separate but equal" argument.

It won't hold water. Predomenently white schools perform far better than predomently black schools, and more so than before the DOE. A complete and total failure, but even the low standards they set for themselves.

Thanks to our history, Blacks generally are poorer than Whites and so are their neighborhood schools. My gut and personal experience tells me that poor schools don't do as well as richer ones, regardless of the demographics.

As to the other three, they are "successful" only in that no other federal agency has been assigned that function. If they provided you evidence that they are performing well on:

• Establishing policies on federal financial aid for education and distributing as well as monitoring those funds.
• Collecting data on America's schools and disseminating research.
• Focusing national attention on key issues in education, and making recommendations for education reform.

Please share that evidence.

Got none to share but, in my experience, bureaucrats are bureaucrats, regardless of where they work, and the majority try and do the best job they are able.

Well, I'll tell you, since you don't know and don't care, but come here to express your opinion on it anyway.

They do have women's chess competitions, and they also allow woment to compete in Men's chess, which is not called "Men's chess," but just chess.

The Women's World Chess Championship 2025 will take place in 2025 as a match between Ju Wenjun, the current champion, and Tan Zhongyi, the winner of the Women's Candidates Tournament 2024.

Again, Men's chess is just called "Chess."

The World Chess Championship is played to determine the world champion in chess. The current world champion is Gukesh Dommaraju, who defeated the previous champion Ding Liren in the 2024 World Chess Championship.

Now that you know, I'd like your opinion: If Ding Liren gets tired of being second banana and declares himself to be a woman, are you okay with him taking the women's title from Ju Wenjun or Tan Zhongyi?

Or should they stop having Womens Chess competitions?

If Ding Liren declares himself to be a woman only to compete in their bracket I'd say no dice. Of course, knowing what is in another's heart is not easy.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Thanks to our history, Blacks generally are poorer than Whites and so are their neighborhood schools. My gut and personal experience tells me that poor schools don't do as well as richer ones, regardless of the demographics.

Either way, a failure of the DOE.

Got none to share but, in my experience, bureaucrats are bureaucrats, regardless of where they work, and the majority try and do the best job they are able.

Yes, which is why the DOE keeps failing so consistently.

If Ding Liren declares himself to be a woman only to compete in their bracket I'd say no dice. Of course, knowing what is in another's heart is not easy.

Correct, so if Ding Liren declares themself to be a woman and insists they really is a woman, she can take the women's championship if she can beat the other women?