American Politics / Current Events Thread

[docile tapeworm | 4,209]

40 minutes ago, CodysGameRoom said:

Do you think biological females with abnormally high, but natural levels of testosterone should also not compete against biological females in sport? 

Is there a reason why I should?

Edited April 13, 2022 by docile tapeworm

[arch_8ngel | 1,597]

40 minutes ago, CodysGameRoom said:

Do you think biological females with abnormally high, but natural levels of testosterone should also not compete against biological females in sport? 

I think that generally falls within the intended spirit of the rules when separating male and female athletes for physical competition.  Similar to genetically gifted male athletes being able to dominate their sport.  (Though in the case of Castor Semenya, there was some pretty invasive scrutiny to "prove" she was genetically female, given that she had a rather extreme outlier case of androgenic hormones)

 

But to your question, are you suggesting that a biological male that goes through normal male puberty, and increases muscle mass to athletic male levels due to natural testosterone ends up in a fair competition with genetic females just from suppressing their current testosterone (for 1 year, or however long it was)?  They gained essentially all of the physiological athletic  advantage of actually being male into adulthood.  That doesn't just go away and create a level playing field if the person continues to work out and maintain as much of their original male muscle levels as possible (aside from the direct mechanical benefits of being naturally larger framed due to male puberty).

 

 

It is a genuinely challenging and interesting question, where from the ethical side the decision starts to revolve around which group exercising their rights infringes more, or less, on the other group attempting to exercise similar rights (in terms of equal access to competition that lead to school admissions, scholarships, etc)

 

This is wholly separate from accepting, socially, that people can be whoever they feel they need to be, to be themselves.

 

[avatar! | 1,854]

Sometimes I wonder if I'm living in some strange alternate reality...

 

[PII | 1,925]

@avatar! Prolly, yeah.  I thought it was goofy when being a pimp got legitimized as a way to start out.  Apparently, it's now Kool-And-The-Gang to start out as a male street prostitute, you know cuz you can develop the necessary skills to become a somewhat successful fascist dictator...

...That shit is hilarious... 

[Tulpa | 3,579]

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/alex-jones-bankruptcy-filing-infowars-defamation-suits-sandy-hook/

 

Alex Jones' Infowars files for bankruptcy in wake of defamation suits over his assertions that the Sandy Hook massacre was a hoax

[avatar! | 1,854]

Marjorie Taylor Greene denied under oath that she didn't want Congress to certify Biden's election win, contradicting her previous baseless statements about election fraud

https://www.yahoo.com/news/marjorie-taylor-greene-denied-under-192122815.html

Despite multiple previous statements to the contrary, Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia testified under oath in court on Friday that she didn't actually come out against Congress certifying President Joe Biden as the legitimate winner of the 2020 election.

I know we all have different political beliefs and ideals... but can we agree that "people" such as Alex Jones and MTG are garbage? They do nothing for anyone, apart from themselves...

[avatar! | 1,854]

Tennessee passes bill requiring people to serve 100% of their sentence for some felonies 

https://thegrio.com/2022/04/22/tennessee-passes-bill-requiring-people-to-serve-100-of-their-sentence-for-some-felonies/

According to The Tennessean, the legislation would lengthen some prison sentences in the state. It was passed by the General Assembly on Thursday after some final modifications. The bill would essentially eliminate eligibility for parole through good behavior or program credits for some felonies, including attempted first-degree murder, second-degree murder, vehicular homicide, carjacking, and several others. 

Gov. Bill Lee is reportedly not “pleased” with the bill, which would roll back some of his criminal justice reforms. His proposed $150 million budget for a Violent Crime Intervention Fund was slashed by a third with special designations for law enforcement, according to the Tennessean.  According to the Tennessee General Assembly website, the legislation passed the Senate, 20-6, and the House, 86-9, before heading to Lee’s desk.

I don't know all the details, but why should violent offenders, especially repeat offenders, not serve their entire sentences? Seems to me that it would certainly cost taxpayers more money, but that is one thing I will happily pay for, since it should (in principle) keep us safe! Of course, I'm open to debate, but all these "criminal justice reforms" that came about the past few years simply do not appear to work.

[Link | 2,808]

10 hours ago, avatar! said:

I don't know all the details, but why should violent offenders, especially repeat offenders, not serve their entire sentences? Seems to me that it would certainly cost taxpayers more money, but that is one thing I will happily pay for, since it should (in principle) keep us safe! Of course, I'm open to debate, but all these "criminal justice reforms" that came about the past few years simply do not appear to work.

The earlier methods didn't work either, which is why said reforms were proposed and enacted. Whether they have proven effective or not, they at least represent progress by an attempt to increase the good. 

Now I sure can't claim to have all the answers, but about this full sentencing question, I expect time can be reduced to encourage better behavior within the penal system. This addresses issues of safety and expense directly in those facilities, and conceivably improves peoples coformance to norms both during and after their time served.

[avatar! | 1,854]

'It's Life or Death': The Mental Health Crisis Among U.S. Teens

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/23/health/mental-health-crisis-teens.html

American adolescence is undergoing a drastic change. Three decades ago, the gravest public health threats to teenagers in the United States came from binge drinking, drunken driving, teenage pregnancy and smoking. These have since fallen sharply, replaced by a new public health concern: soaring rates of mental health disorders.

The crisis is often attributed to the rise of social media, but solid data on the issue is limited, the findings are nuanced and often contradictory, and some adolescents appear to be more vulnerable than others to the effects of screen time.

For old-timers like myself, what's the difference between being a kid in say the 90s and today? Really, the main difference I can surmise is the online connection. Without the internet (hard to believe, but yup, not that long ago you didn't connect everything and anything to the ol' net!) you had to actually meet your friends, and they were genuine friends. You got out and played baseball, basketball... and of course you spent time playing video games together - BUT again, it was just you and your friends, no hyper-competitive online games which may result in some asshole swatting etc. To me, the answer is clear, not just social media but the whole online connectivity is what leads to kids having little patience and concentration, and numerous other horrible issues including potentially depression and suicide.

[Tulpa | 3,579]

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/25/nyregion/trump-investigation-letitia-james-contempt.html

Judge Holds Trump in Contempt Over Documents in New York A.G.’s Inquiry

Former President Donald J. Trump was ordered to turn over materials sought by Letitia James, the New York attorney general, and will be fined $10,000 per day until he does so.

[Tulpa | 3,579]

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2022/04/29/politics/hannity-text-messages-meadows-trump-white-house/index.html

Read the whole article. Pretty fascinating account of the aftermath of the election and what was discussed behind the scenes.

[MagusSmurf | 577]

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/02/supreme-court-abortion-draft-opinion-00029473

don't wanna count my chickens but it looks like they're actually gonna do it this time

cool

[Californication | 1,490]

It's amazing how conservatives whine about freedom and then take it away from women and minorities every chance they get.

[Strange | 1,706]

I made a promise to myself to stay out of politics on VGS but this SC decision is heinous.

It’s not about “saving lives” although the people who wave that flag and believe it (majority of the politicians that wave it likely don’t believe it themselves) are useful tools.
 

This is about maintaining the foundations of a capitalistic society that oppresses the people and benefits the few. The structure of the traditional family is paramount to that. Especially now, after a deadly pandemic that has disrupted the supply of workers. The crony capitalism that dominates the United States relies on a constant supply of children being born to supplement the workforce. It also relies on the financial burden of a child— even better if it’s unplanned. A child increases the likelihood of families living paycheck to paycheck or in poverty. You NEED that to keep the current structure of power going.
 

That’s why you see politicians in BOTH parties against abortion. It’s not about babies at all and it’s not a real conviction for them— they’re both after the same goal: control over the working class. 

[Strange | 1,706]

Oh, and I’ve posited for awhile now that overturning Roe v. Wade is just the beginning of a long campaign. Look for restrictions to vasectomies and tubal ligations (this procedure is already difficult to receive in a lot of places). Look for efforts to make simple birth control like condoms and Plan B harder to come by. Hope you dudes have gotten all the casual sex in your lives out of your system, because the goal is to make sex without procreation a lot harder.

[MrWunderful | 2,927]

Republicans only care about babies until they are born. After they are born, especially if minority/low income, fuck em’  shouldn’t have been born into poverty.

Oh and we will make contraception almost impossible to get, because bible  

How can you care about “life”, if you force a 13 year old rape victim to bear a child even though the mother might Die? Its so ridiculous. 

[Strange | 1,706]

EDIT: Decided not to say this. Emotions are high.

Edited May 3, 2022 by Strange

[CodysGameRoom | 2,009]

Part of freedom. Pro life. What a bunch of bullshit. These people are monsters and should be ashamed of themselves.

[MrWunderful | 2,927]

1 hour ago, CodysGameRoom said:

Part of freedom. Pro life. What a bunch of bullshit. These people are monsters and should be ashamed of themselves.

You Cant make someone wear a mask in your private business, but can force a kid that got raped by a priest to raise a child. 

[Hammerfestus | 3,963]

19 minutes ago, MrWunderful said:

You Cant make someone wear a mask in your private business, but can force a kid that got raped by a priest to raise a child. 

[Foochie776 | 1,066]

15 hours ago, MrWunderful said:

You Cant make someone wear a mask in your private business, but can force a kid that got raped by a priest to raise a child. 

This statement has been a basis for a lot of my arguments the last 24 hours 

[MrWunderful | 2,927]

4 hours ago, Foochie776 said:

This statement has been a basis for a lot of my arguments the last 24 hours 

Its true too. Its so easy to capture pro-lifers into contradicting their own beliefs, because most of them havent thought about it critically- usually just parroting whatever they hear on fox news. 

[Strange | 1,706]

Every poll on the matter shows that the majority of Americans - in any state and at the national level - support having safe and easy access to abortion services. So we have a panel of 9 unelected lawyers making decisions against the will of the majority of Americans. Great system.

[Strange | 1,706]

In a stunning display of irony, SCOTUS decides they want control over what is inside of it.

Also nothing says “will of the people” like anticipating backlash because you know your decision is unpopular with the majority of the American people.

[Kguillemette | 1,567]

23 hours ago, Strange said:

In a stunning display of irony, SCOTUS decides they want control over what is inside of it.

Also nothing says “will of the people” like anticipating backlash because you know your decision is unpopular with the majority of the American people.

I don't see what they worry about. Storming government buildings is a MAGA Republican thing.