Facebook Follies of Friends and Families

[Valmy]

I don't think the Bolsheviks had done any of those.

Or any of the Communist regimes that ever existed. It is almost like they just made that up or something.

[Razgovory]

Typically Authoritarian regimes take away rights after they come into power, not before.  Guns have proven extremely ineffective at stopping communists.

[Valmy]

Typically Authoritarian regimes take away rights after they come into power, not before.  Guns have proven extremely ineffective at stopping communists.

Having the population armed actually kind of helps Communists seize power

[viper37]

It is almost like they just made that up or something.

you shoud notify them.  Maybe they'll retract their message and apologize.

[viper37]

Typically Authoritarian regimes take away rights after they come into power, not before.  Guns have proven extremely ineffective at stopping communists.

Having the population armed actually kind of helps Communists seize power

I'm sure in a few years, some American history books will claim the people rebelled when the British tried to seize their guns.

[Valmy]

Typically Authoritarian regimes take away rights after they come into power, not before.  Guns have proven extremely ineffective at stopping communists.

Having the population armed actually kind of helps Communists seize power

I'm sure in a few years, some American history books will claim the people rebelled when the British tried to seize their guns.

See? If the British were still in charge they could keep the Communists at bay.

[Valmy]

It is almost like they just made that up or something.

you shoud notify them.  Maybe they'll retract their message and apologize.

Only if they read Languish. But if they do I hope they do respond so appropriately.

[Razgovory]

Typically Authoritarian regimes take away rights after they come into power, not before.  Guns have proven extremely ineffective at stopping communists.

Having the population armed actually kind of helps Communists seize power

I'm sure in a few years, some American history books will claim the people rebelled when the British tried to seize their guns.

They already make that claim.

[Admiral Yi]

It's a non issue.
Who qualifies as a woman for the purpose of taking part in high level sport is something the sports themselves have been struggling with since the mid 20th century. It's an interesting topic if you're into sports rules nerdery but nothing to get yourself worked up about. Definitely not a political issue.

And yes. Bigotry is their motive. They often pretend to be about protecting women and other such nonsense but this is a shallow bad faith mask.

The fallacy is that they pretend it's the left trying to push unreasonable rules to change the way things are when in fact its them trying to introduce brand new rules to stop trans people just getting on with their life.

So say there is a father who gets upset because his daughter has to wrestle a trans.  He is arguing in bad faith?

[Valmy]

Ah going right for the women's sports thing.

[Josquius]

So say there is a father who gets upset because his daughter has to wrestle a trans.  He is arguing in bad faith?

If he's upset about the mere fact they're doing sports with someone who is trans?
Yes. He's just a cunt.

Interesting you go right for wrestling there.
That's part of the problem of how bad faith all this is. It's always the same few examples as a reason why all trans people should be banned from all sports at every level.
Theres absolutely zero interest in the fig leaf of women's safety and other such nonsense. It's all about how much they can deny trans people, and through them push back broader LGBT rights.

[Valmy]

I don't think anybody is saying they should be banned from sports (Well ok somebody probably is...but not people arguing in good faith on this issue). I just think this calls into question the whole point of having women's and men's sports to begin with. If the issue isn't that XY people have an advantage over XX people then why have separate sports to begin with? What is the point? Just segregation based on gender identity for its own sake and no practical reason? Especially with the existence of non-binary people. What are they supposed to do?

[Josquius]

I don't think anybody is saying they should be banned from sports (Well ok somebody probably is...but not people arguing in good faith on this issue). I just think this calls into question the whole point of having women's and men's sports to begin with. If the issue isn't that XY people have an advantage over XX people then why have separate sports to begin with? What is the point? Just segregation based on gender identity for its own sake and no practical reason? Especially with the existence of non-binary people. What are they supposed to do?

It's not a new issue. Sports governing bodies have been dealing with defining just who is a woman since the mid 20th century. They're constantly changing how they do this as we know gender isn't a simple xx/xy woman/man thing. Bimodal rather than binary.

As said overall its an interesting topic but fundamentally not a big deal to the vast majority of people. It's a manufactured concern. Something the right have identified as a soft target in lgbt rights to suitably enrage the poor and ignorant enough to vote for rich old arse holes who want to impoverish them even more. And to get people worked up about this non issue they have to pretend it's something where the evil left are trying to change things and hurt people's way of life.

[Admiral Yi]

If he's upset about the mere fact they're doing sports with someone who is trans?
Yes. He's just a cunt.

Let's say he claims it's about the strength imbalance.

[Razgovory]

I didn't even know there was girls wrestling.