Page 7 of 8
Re: Does gender matter?
Posted: Thu Dec 04, 2025 10:00 am
by popeye1945
Male and Female are two aspects of one thing, a species. Only in a rat shit crazy culture like the one we presently live in could one get confused over that. Where in the natural world do you see all these genders? It's called mental illness; if the slipper fits, Cinderella, wear it. Perhaps humanity is just too f****** stupid to survive.
Re: Does gender matter?
Posted: Thu Dec 04, 2025 6:13 pm
by MikeNovack
accelafine wrote: ↑Wed Dec 03, 2025 10:51 pm
a) YOU are the one who said it's 'grossly unfair' with regard to sports! I've already asked you to clarify that-- which you didn't bother to. I'm pretty sure you meant 'unfair' to men though,
b) Your writing is hard to decipher at the best of times. Do you have massive sausage fingers by any chance? You should read what you write before submitting.
c)Why are you banging on about rare genital birth defects anyway? What does that have to do with anything? This isn't a medical thread.
a ---that is you, blinded by your assumption that since I am a male I MUST be on the silly side of that debate, being unable to see I have answered. But to help, I will be very explicit. Unfair to girls/women of "c" (those genetic defects you think irrelevant) because THEY would be unable to compete as women were the standard "genetic testing"
b --- sorry about "fat finger, but yes, my finger pads are large, and often hit adjacent keys. I do look, but can miss some.
c --- Well the two types I described not so rare that I have not personally known one of each (why I picked those) . Do note that SIZE depends on multiple genes, not single genes/hormones produced. So either of these GIRLS might have advantage in women's sports, not because transitioned from men but because large women. In other words, they are more or less the size they would have been as men had the defect not screwed up their fetal development.
LOOK, this discussion is supposed to be about GENDER. It is only if you do not see gender as a social classification and only if you think can only be two genders that your problem of "men in women's sports/locker rooms" exists. IF you allow a gender term for "men => women" (a term OTHER THAN "female") then there is no problem. Now English, as of yet has no term, but Samoan does, so I'll use that, OK, "fa'afafine". See, problem goes away. Men and fa'afafine not allowed in women's sports/locker rooms. That rule works, and does so without having to deny fa'fafine are not men.
Re: Does gender matter?
Posted: Thu Dec 04, 2025 6:58 pm
by accelafine
MikeNovack wrote: ↑Thu Dec 04, 2025 6:13 pm
accelafine wrote: ↑Wed Dec 03, 2025 10:51 pm
a) YOU are the one who said it's 'grossly unfair' with regard to sports! I've already asked you to clarify that-- which you didn't bother to. I'm pretty sure you meant 'unfair' to men though,
b) Your writing is hard to decipher at the best of times. Do you have massive sausage fingers by any chance? You should read what you write before submitting.
c)Why are you banging on about rare genital birth defects anyway? What does that have to do with anything? This isn't a medical thread.
a ---that is you, blinded by your assumption that since I am a male I MUST be on the silly side of that debate, being unable to see I have answered. But to help, I will be very explicit. Unfair to girls/women of "c" (those genetic defects you think irrelevant) because THEY would be unable to compete as women were the standard "genetic testing"
b --- sorry about "fat finger, but yes, my finger pads are large, and often hit adjacent keys. I do look, but can miss some.
c --- Well the two types I described not so rare that I have not personally known one of each (why I picked those) . Do note that SIZE depends on multiple genes, not single genes/hormones produced. So either of these GIRLS might have advantage in women's sports, not because transitioned from men but because large women. In other words, they are more or less the size they would have been as men had the defect not screwed up their fetal development.
LOOK, this discussion is supposed to be about GENDER. It is only if you do not see gender as a social classification and only if you think can only be two genders that your problem of "men in women's sports/locker rooms" exists. IF you allow a gender term for "men => women" (a term OTHER THAN "female") then there is no problem. Now English, as of yet has no term, but Samoan does, so I'll use that, OK, "fa'afafine". See, problem goes away. Men and fa'afafine not allowed in women's sports/locker rooms. That rule works, and does so without having to deny fa'fafine are not men.
You stupid old p****. A MAN with a genital defect is NOT a woman. Women's sports are for WOMEN. That means NO Y chromosomes allowed. EVER! The only reason that chromosome tests have even been considered in the first place is because of all the cheating arsehole men who are dependent on useful idiots like you to muddy the waters with your googled bullshit about EXTREMELY RARE birth defects where one baby, once in the history of the universe, was born with XXXXXXYYYYYYYYYY dhromosomes and gave birth to chimpanzee octuplets!
You also deliberately ignore every point I make and then just keep repeating yourself over and over agian. Do you think I'm going to change my mind because you keep repeating yourself?
Now piss off and stop annoying me with your horribly written crap. It's not worth the stress trying to read and decipher it induces!
Re: Does gender matter?
Posted: Thu Dec 04, 2025 9:57 pm
by MikeNovack
Continuing at cross purposes.
You want the definition of man "one (or more) Y chromosomes."
I was suggesting that YOU might not want that to apply to certain genetic abnormalities. But apparently you consider those too negligible (in terms of statistics AND/OR simply don't think what I am describing exists.
Nor does a low frequency in the total population mean a low frequency in a subset of that population. Women in sports where size matters, matters greatly.
I am NOT talking about MEN becoming women. I am talking about individuals who were thought to be female at birth, raised as females, thought of themselves as females, who did not know anything was wrong with them till puberty (OR possibly earlier by an abdominal MRI). These usually get diagnosed because menses should have begun and hasn't (they don't have ovaries or uterus, etc.)
I am saying THESE should not be judged by Y chromosome alone. I am saying THAT would be unfair (to them). I am saying it should be a defense against "disqualified for having a Y chromosome" to have one of those particular genetic defects. Don't worry, none of the men trying to become women will have one of those defects. Doesn't work the other way around.
Re: Does gender matter?
Posted: Fri Dec 05, 2025 12:51 am
by accelafine
. wrote: ↑Thu Dec 04, 2025 9:57 pm
blah blah blah.... you need to listen to me. I'm a man, dammit! Male genital deformities supersede women's rights hands down! If a man has been 'raised as a woman' i.e. he has been bombarded with barbie dolls and princess dresses (because everyone knows this is the magic formula for 'womanhood'), then he is a WOMAN!
Get lost, man. You are irrelevant. You might as well be telling women that they shouldn't be allowed to vote because the bible told you so, and then expect them to give a shit what you think.
Re: Does gender matter?
Posted: Fri Dec 05, 2025 3:49 am
by MikeNovack
Well at this point I certainly don't give a damn about what YOU think. Did I say think? You are so fixated on what you imagine me to be saying (because I am a man) you can't see what I am saying. Which side I am on.
For some (less than intelligent reason) you persist to think I am talking about male babies with genital abnormalities. You are so convinced of that you won't bother to look up for yourself what I am describing < THAT is how you should respond if you doubt my description -- LOOK IT UP FOR YOURSELF >
PS -- Totally out of order to FORGE quotes.
Re: Does gender matter?
Posted: Fri Dec 05, 2025 4:55 am
by accelafine
MikeNovack wrote: ↑Fri Dec 05, 2025 3:49 am
Well at this point I certainly don't give a damn about what YOU think. Did I say think? You are so fixated on what you imagine me to be saying (because I am a man) you can't see what I am saying. Which side I am on.
For some (less than intelligent reason) you persist to think I am talking about male babies with genital abnormalities. You are so convinced of that you won't bother to look up for yourself what I am describing < THAT is how you should respond if you doubt my description -- LOOK IT UP FOR YOURSELF >
PS -- Totally out of order to FORGE quotes.
Oh diddums. Have a cry. It's not the job of women to be experts in rare choromosomal anomalies. As I said, the only reason sex tests have even been considered is because of cheating male arseholes and perverts who want to harm women. Take it up with your sex. I don't give a shit what you have to say.
Re: Does gender matter?
Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2026 3:05 pm
by Walker
Lindsay Clancy
https://cdn.patriotpost.us/cdn-cgi/imag ... g?v=tkfkvl
What will the patriarchial culture of nine women and three men decide?
Re: Does gender matter?
Posted: Wed Sep 09, 2026 7:50 am
by Walker
(continued)
- The judge in the case declared a mistrial because the jury could not reach a unanimous decision.
- One juror disagreed with the other eleven.
- He disagreed because his focus was on justice for the three murdered children ...
- ... rather than on justice for the mother who murdered them.
- It’s an interesting distinction that he apprehended, and he followed his conscience ... rather than sacrificing it to peer pressure.
The Observation: The individual still has an officially recognized say at times, in the USA.
Re: Does gender matter?
Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2026 6:48 am
by Walker
(Clancy case, continued)
Clancy Juror Appears To Admit Jurors Used Outside Expertise To Badger Holdout
https://thefederalist.com/2026/09/09/cl ... r-holdout/
While the jurors portrayed the lone male holdout as arrogant for refusing to defer to them, their own words suggest he may have been the only juror in the room willing to decide Clancy’s verdict based on the actual evidence presented.
Comment: In other words, one of the men was an objective juror.
Re: Does gender matter?
Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2026 2:48 pm
by MikeNovack
Walker, have you ever sat on a jury? Do you know what it means to follow the rules, base only on evidence presented, to accept evidence you know is wrong because was not challenged in court, etc.
The issue with this one juror was the rules of deliberation. Apparently the juror did have doubt, but was deciding as if were a CIVIL case (more likely than not). A criminal case has to be without REASONABLE doubt (not ANY doubt).
I have sat on one where we convicted even though we were convinced both the police and prosecution expert were lying (because we concluded that was "lily gilding" unnecessary to our decision as to the law). And one where we acquitted because the prosecutor (new to the area) asked all the wrong questions of witnesses (who came prepared to lie and were surprised to be able to answer with strict truth). So based on testimony presented, not guilty.
In this case, the prosecution's expert witnesses all indicated "doubt". Prosecution opening and closing arguments are not testimony jurors are supposed to consider.
Re: Does gender matter?
Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2026 8:11 pm
by Walker
The prosecution had to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Clancy was not experiencing a psychotic episode when she murdered her three helpless children, up close and personal.
Don’t you think that’s a bit of a stacked deck? After all, are not those actions the very definition of crazy town?
However, one juror followed the instructions perfectly. He had a reasonable doubt that the murderer was not in psychosis, that in fact she knew what she was doing and she knew it was bad, knew it was wrong, based on the evidence presented in court rather than based on the jury members (nurses) who were relying on their preconceptions and thus biased.
This is why the judge did not remove the lone dissenter from the jury before the jury hung itself. If it doesn’t come to some plea deal that lets Clancy off the criminal hook, the prosecution can have another shot at getting justice for her little children who she slaughtered, on behalf of the state and civilization, by finding her guilty of murder rather than providing a comfortable rest of her life.
Re: Does gender matter?
Posted: Sat Sep 12, 2026 6:37 am
by Walker
“Who controls the memes, controls the Universe.” –attributed to E. Musk.
https://patriotpost.us/memes/1000880-control-the-memes
The contradiction in this meme indicates a wrong premise is afoot.
https://patriotpost.us/memes/1000874-i-have-doubts
Re: Does gender matter?
Posted: Sat Sep 12, 2026 5:17 pm
by Walker
Re: the 12th juror who disagreed with the other 11.
Interesting.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/TnI327uBiHE
In this clip, upon learning new information, the interviewer says she has to sit with the facts for a second, which indicates she has encountered an internal processing glitch that contradicts her world view. Will the processing change her premises, preconceptions, and the continuity of her narrative? Probably not, since she thinks she only needs a second to resolve her perceived paradox, the one that gave her pause (pronounced paws).
Re: Does gender matter?
Posted: Sun Sep 13, 2026 11:06 pm
by MikeNovack
Walker wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2026 8:11 pm
However, one juror followed the instructions perfectly. He had a reasonable doubt that the murderer was not in psychosis, that in fact she knew what she was doing and she knew it was bad, knew it was wrong, based on the evidence presented in court rather than based on the jury members (nurses) who were relying on their preconceptions and thus biased.
WTF! Are you telling us that you too have no understanding of "reasonable doubt" in a criminal case. It is NOT bi-directional. A jury is asked to decide if GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt. Not INNOCENT beyond a treasonable doubt.
Likely ALL the jurors had reasonable doubt that the accused was not in psychosis. That's equivalent to "the accused MIGHT BE criminally responsible". As a juror, you are not supposed to convict if "might be guilty".
Actually, the based on evidence presented in court was quite relevant. The PROSECUTION'S expert witnesses weren't willing to express certainty that the accused wasn't psychotic. Usually in a criminal proceeding where sanity is the issue, it is competing expert witnesses that the jury has to decide between (*). Not in this case.
* "Expert witness" is special. If NOT contested must be taken as true. I have sat on a jury where all of us believed the expert witness was lying (gilding the lily for the prosecution case) but we decided we HAD TO accept as if true because the defense did not present an opposing expert. We were able to do that in good conscience because LEGALLY the "lily gilding" not relevant to the convict/acquit decision.
