You aren't interested in science. The science of both sex and gender is overwhelmingly in support of trans people. You reject science and expertise on this board in virtually every interaction.
All I got to say is that this is the epitome of empathy. Work out your disagreement with the guy who said this and we'll talk.
I couldn't possibly care less what Elon thinks, nor will he ever be aware of, much impacted by, my opininion.
On a side note, I don't believe in the existence of any gods, including the God of Abraham, so quoting the Bible, if your intention was to influence my opinion, will be as effective as quoting Harry Potter or the Iliad.
Show me statistics of the rise in transgenderism. Replace it with the recognition that it has always existed. Hell, they were frequently sacred in Native American cultures and have existed throughout recorded history.
Then you have fuck all reason to be concerned about it at all. I had allowed for you to have religious delusions but you're just a nosy PITA interfering in things of absolutely no concern of yours. What a jerk you are. What business is what anybody does with their body any of yours?
Women's sports don't exist as a safety issue. They exist either to shield men's egos from the small number of women who can compete with them athletically, or to foster community among women through a means that we've given more social prestige than the typical ways that women create community (both are things that happen, but it's up for historical debate which happened first).
I said public rise, meaning it's more prominent in public.
ok?
I have no idea why you keep trying to bring religion into this. My position has nothing to do with morality, nor do I believe gender dysphoria is any more immoral than bipolar disorder. My position is based in science, which is why I'm not arguing against trans men in male sports.
If you believe fairness in athletics it is necessary.
So, there are biological differences between males and females that give males a clear advantage.
This is how you rationalize your position based on empathy rather than reason.
Deflection isn't going to work.
He can say he's not opposing it for religious reasons, but it seems painfully clear that holier-than-thou puritanism is still very much alive and well in the good ole US of A, and always has been. The obsession that so many people have with other people's private lives and what they do in their bedrooms is still off the charts. As H.L. Mencken once said, Puritanism is the haunting fear that someone, somewhere, might be happy.
It has more validity that trying to combine science and fairness. Fairness is not part of any science.
Nope and it's not even close.
Biology and physics, as it relates to athletics, is most definitely a part of fairness. It's why they have weight classes in wrestling and boxing. It's why they don't allow 8-year-olds to compete against 20-year-olds and it's why men aren't permitted to compete in women's sports.
It's not a weakness. Empathy is literally the emotion on which all of civilization is built. Civilization was not built, and never could be built, by a bunch of atomized individuals. It was built out of shared identity, which is a function of empathy. Once civilization got going, there were plenty of developments like slavery -- but still, empathy is the basis of a community or even a nation.
Because it has won elections and will continue to.
Can't argue that it helped in this election. But we've seen a pattern for 30 years that I expect to continue:
I would argue that sympathy is more effective than empathy because sympathy doesn't ignore reason.
a) if it's bullshit, show me the work. women were siloed into their own sports communities separate from men to a) make sure that as sports gained cross-gender popularity, women wouldn't sacrifice attractiveness for athleticism, and b) to shield men from the possibility of losing to women. different sports historians have different ideas of how much each of those factors contributed, but they were both there. there's nothing about safety.
Strawman.
