Transgender man wins women's 100 yd and 400 yd freestyle races.

Gender originated from the French gendre meaning grouping i.e. male or female. It was horrific paedophile John Money that started pushing the gender spectrum nonsense. Gender activists should really look into the father of their movement and see if that’s what they really want to be associated with.

It's more a subject for the other thread but relevant here: Purdue managed to convince the entire medical establishment that Oxy, a more powerful opiate than heroin, wasn't addictive. One of the tactics used mentioning "as published in journal x" (sorry I can't remember which one) as if they were referring to peer reviewed research, when in fact they were talking about a letter to the editor which the writer later claimed had been misrepresented. Gender affirming doctors like to refer to WPATH guidelines in the same way, as if they have a sound basis in research rather than just being something written by a committee.

There's an unfortunate tendency among some to assume that membership of a particular group equates to uniformity of opinion across a wide range of topics. The moderates wouldn't have had a lot in common with Andrea Dworkin for example.

Well no, feminists were always trans inclusive and still are today.

Being trans inclusive is not virtue signalling.

I was really hoping for some expansion on the many reasons why point 6 is interesting…I guess I'll have to live out the rest of my life in blissful ignorance.

I do wonder though, how many times do you think you'd need to post a list of opinions containing an offensive word used against ideas, before your use of the same word against a person becomes acceptable? She owns her opinions, you haven't as yet owned your offensive slur.

Of course she knew the consequences of exercising her free speech - there's nothing wrong with accepting them while railing against the fact that exercising free speech should attract such consequences. If you lose your livelihood for expressing opinions, however controversial, then your speech isn't really free, is it? Her gripe was that Levi Strauss had no problem with her expressing her personal opinions when they aligned more closely with "woke" values. (I don't really like the "W" word but it's useful shorthand in this case).

What lies did she tell, and how did they undermine public health officials? That is a big claim, I'm sure you can stand it up.

Given the choice between keeping her large salary and free speech, she chose free speech. Given the choice between $1M in severance and free speech, she chose free speech. Given the choice between taking up a new job (which would have required recanting her heresy) she turned down the money. She certainly put her money where her mouth is.

You said nobody has a problem with people being successful, but you seem to disapprove of Sey earning a living - you've admitted that she's pretty good at marketing clothes.

I've read the list you kindly twice posted a few times, and I'm not seeing anything that constitutes ranting and raving when compared to the language contained in many of your posts - is your reaction coloured by your disagreement with her?

I would have thought that to really make a holy public show of ones self would require giving a sh1t about what the public would think - I doubt she does.

And, to reiterate, I would never vote for Trump or anyone like him, but I think his EO on this topic has merit, as has the MAHA one.

Of course she knew the consequences of exercising her free speech - there's nothing wrong with accepting them while railing against the fact that exercising free speech should attract such consequences. If you lose your livelihood for expressing opinions, however controversial, then your speech isn't really free, is it?

Of course it is.

Again ones right to Freedom of Speech does not mean one is free from the consequences of that speech.

Like you pointed out she knew the consequences.

I stand corrected. I have to admit that although I read some writings by and about Dworkin, that stance attributed to her is the only thing I remember, though I recall it as "all heterosexual sex is rape". I saw her on the Late Late, and she seemed like a very unhappy person - her back story would suggest she had good reason for that. Definitely a woman who incited strong opinions in others.

She chose to leave.

I have no idea how a employment tribunal would square that circle.

But she is welcome to sue Levi's if she wants.

The only thing about that is in court you need to produce proof to substantiate your claims.

As I recall, her point was meant to be about sex within a patriarchal context, ie that young men were taught that sex with women entailed dominating them.

Given that she died a decade before Andrew Tate became famous, I think she was prescient rather than extremist (she was very concerned about the effects of pornography, particularly on young men, in exacerbating those "patriarchal" views of what a sexual relationship is, and her comments need to be understood in that light.)

Her belief was that if one could "smash the patriarchy" there would no longer be any onus on men to dominate women during sex. Not that all relationships would become same sex. Personally I think that was naive of her, but then as I suggested above, if she had lived to 2025, she might have modified her opinions somewhat.

Do you think she would have left if staying and continuing to express her personal opinions was an option? If a robber pointed a gun at my head and asked for my wallet, then I'd have to chose between two likely sets of consequences, just as Sey did.

Levi's asked her to leave - perfectly legal, but morally dubious. If they were going to restrict her in expressing her personal opinions on social media, then they should have applied that restriction to all of her opinions, not just the inconvenient ones.

Producing proof to substantiate your claims is a great idea, in courtrooms and discussion forums.

Your mention of prescience reminds me of this - I know I'm supposed to elaborate when linking but it would ruin the sketch for those who are not familiar with it. Little did they know - if ever there was a case of life imitating art, this is it.

I think all this nonsense with biological males im female sports will be over soon, also think parents with mental illness brain washing their young children at 5 years of age to go on hormone treatment or blockers will be over with soon too.

Im not anti transgender, people can make up their own minds when there 16 instead of parents pushing it on the child. A lot of females are Tom boys when they’re younger and when they hit puberty they grow out of it. Same with male children acting feminine

World Has to stop accepting this at some point. One thing I can agree with trump on.

What podcast and who said that "vaccines were a government initiative to extend the 5g network"?

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-57374241

I assume she is back on it.

Yep, the authorities, by extolling a benefit which had not been assessed in the clinical trials, have now created a scenario where if there's another pandemic, this time with a high fatality rate, people might be reluctant to take a vaccine even if it is effective in preventing disease. The FDA who's job is to protect the public, abandoned all professionalism and became cheerleaders for major corporations.

Some of Sey's opinions have aged a lot better than those of public health officials.

Your mistake was not getting full protection by consuming copious €9 pizza slices - they had to be consumed in the pub, sans mask, for the full immune benefits.😃