But it has been pretty atrocious for a while forum wise. Oh, I would like to add that the AXP forum was a fantastic one for a long long time pre the last 6 months or so. To add quickly before bed; Woodford does come across as a sort of a smug guy with that impregnable sheen of rationalist righteousness.
This does him no favours. I do get the sense of somone who is looking for the correct information though, ultimately. Youtube front can get in in the way of that though. But hes not Armored Skeptic or someone.
Not yet anyway. If the facts are there I think he will be unable to ignore them eventually. And it is. The ACA seems to have clearly faltered in the face of this.
Did they falter because they were defending someone they personally liked or because they harbored secret transphobic tendencies? Clarity of position and diplomacy in leadership — not his strong suit. All the same I do find this idea that the transphobes have taken over at a managerial level and the ACA represents the same kind of old white skeptic dudebros as everywhere else a bit hard to see.
I feel it would be more obvious. I also think that if the ACA had this crusty legacy population something would have come out before now, back in elevatorgate, CFI days and whatever else.
The scene in the facebook group when the youtube skeptic tranphobe world descends sounds more like the end episode of Chernobyl than witting anti-trans activity. The ensuing flood shatters any chance of reasserting control. This might give the impression that this was intentional to some. But it could just be a combination of incompetence, bloody-mindedness, confusion, bureacratic stodginess and face saving all at once.
It may be that that alone constitutes a sufficient reason to sever the relationship. They tell you that your efforts to defend arguments for gender segregation are either substantively or procedurally or both driving women away — women including themselves.
You do not change course and continue prioritizing defenses of gender segregation over the actual participation of women. The most prominent women, the longest serving women, the reliably feminist women in your organization then leave. Are we, as outsiders, supposed to take more seriously protestations of undiminished feminism within the organization, scribed or voiced by those who took part in the series of actions that drove feminist women away?
Or should we take more seriously the statements by reliably feminist women that these events have been anti-feminist, have had the effect of marginalizing women, have had the effect of making feminist women unwelcome to the point that they abandoned decades long investments of time and energy? If I support racists and racism, then criticize my racism or kick me off FtB because of it.
If feminists whose analysis you trust tell you that I support sexism and sexists, then criticize my sexism or kick me off FtB because of it. What if we simply changed the question to this: How is the ACA on feminism, and how do we as an FtB community feel about that?
My girlfriend and I have discussed it when the topic comes up in the news. If there has been concerns about the ACA besides this one incident then the blog should be booted. To me it looks like someone is more concerned with the size of the organization and the well-being of the leaders than their members and original function. The ACA blog on FtB is a place where a lot of good discussion on a variety of topics related to atheism takes place and booting that does the atheist community a disservice.
Tracy and Jen made this exact argument in the video posted above. Testosterone is also tied to moment to moment social behavior. Is this related to how people want to shove women female people into certain social boxes and behavior? What does it look like when we look at these hormones and what we try to make the two birth boxes do? Make your weight classes and such and deal with the bigotry that makes separation by sex difficult. Please throw them out, and fuck Matt Dillahunty specifically, he still defends a transphobic bigot, has doubled and tripled down on it.
Please throw them out. What Jen, Tracie and Claire described in the linked video is absolutely horrifying. They had an election where every single person that did say anything against RR got voted out. I am a cis man who has been enjoying the ACA content for over a decade and I can no longer in good conscience continue do so. Listening to Jen, Claire and Tracie describe what had gone on behind the scenes was pretty grim.
I only learned of people leaving today. I spent some time today bringing myself up to speed on this issue, and I thought I might share a few links that I found helpful. Essence of Thought has a video explaining the timeline of events. And for those who avoid videos, HJ Hornbeck has a brief post in text format. I want to watch it, but maybe when I have more time later. In some women can compete, in many they can not. In some sports we do have results, e. In football women can no longer compete when we would expect, post puberty.
At 15 years old elite regional boys teams are too fast, big and strong for even the national womens team to compete. Women play in the football world cup on TV, or play football professionally, exactly because they have their own divisions.
The variations among different individuals amount to far more than the difference in averages ever could and also nobody talks about the areas where women are superior to men. Very few sports are primarily about strength. By skipping these points, criticism of trans people over sports is just a backhanded, sneaky way of concern trolling the frail womenfolk. Back then we had little flares with anti-trans people and trans posters that made that known did share sentiments of discomfort.
I just shook my head and thought that things were still the same over there. Any enthusiasm I had to return to watching the show and the group related to it is dead. Thanks, Crip Dyke As usual, you get straight to the chewy center when everyone else is still licking around the outside of the analytical tootsie pop. There are other people who should reasonably demand that.
I do think it would be more useful to approach this pro-actively rather than re-actively and push them to do the same. Then they need to keep on that and enforce it or part ways. Can you show that your concern in reasonable? Whatever a sport does to structure things to make things interesting or fair. Eliminate the bigotry. And yet, Pharyngula continues. I was a Patreon patron of Rationality Rules.
He made 2 videos that demonstrated he has big flaws in his reasoning. First was one on Brexit where he claimed that democracy demands that a decision made, no matter how flawed, no matter how long it takes to learn new data, no matter how much circumstances have changed, must be followed through before new decisions are made. Then came the trans women in sport and I stopped being a Patron. The ACA is different. They are a valuable community resource. They not only interact well with the world they help people and they are primarily a real face to face community.
The thing with RR as a guest is a cascading series of errors. Matt Dilahunty did his best to give the facts about it on the show itself. I was distressed that Tracy et al left because they are heroes to me. It should be possible to fix this but it probably needs a life conference call between principles at FfB, ACA, and those that left. You know, actual real discussion rather than commentariat time wasting.
Not my cup of tea. Your own blog is not exactly active, is it? If it went, I could hardly miss it, whereas TAA is at least entertaining and actually has content. Cool story bro. Because I assure you that I have. The argument is badly flawed, and ultimately is just a cover for transphobia in my opinion. First, the HRT that many trans people undergo eliminates most, if not all, of the advantages conferred by testosterone.
Cis-women occasionally grow taller than 6 feet, I went to high school with one who was at least Should she not be allowed to play basketball because she had an unfair advantage over the other women who were only ? John Morales 51 Opinions based on quotes from rationality rules, other critics, research…. Issues involving percieved transphobia outside of my blog.
The relevance is that if a non-active blog is gone, nothing much changes here. Just another placeholder gone. If a well-trafficked blog goes, things do change. It was not a placeholder. I still have very little idea of what actually happened. I think Crip Dyke explained my feelings best above, quoting for emphasis:.
I still know very little about what happened and is happening. Maybe this video in the OP will help me on that. I was hoping to get secondary confirmation from other sources, and, well, I now have it in abundance. The bigots have taken over, and the ACA is no longer the welcoming organization it once was.
Honestly, I think we can safely call Dillahunty a transphobe at this point. Within hours of Rationality Rules posting his original video, the one RR himself declared as flawed, Dillahunty added this comment emphasis mine :. Perhaps EACH sport will need to change…. That said, Joe Rogan may make some valid points , but he repeatedly slips into misgendering.
Matt Dillahunty is A-OK with spreading misinformation about transgender people. One important clarification for a friend. No relation. On top of that was his shameful performance during the linked video. He popped into the comment section calling everyone a liar, and directly accusing a longtime ACA member of lying and trying to evade responsibility. You better believe there will be more controversies if we keep the AXP blog here, simply through his bumbling reflexive actions.
Whoops, forgot the link to that first blockquote. And which never need to be sustained, since no criticism is allowed. Yeah, I know HJ says anyone can just email him with a response. Do you have to go to a special room to get on the computers, or did they install WiFi in the sea lion tank? Essence of Thought has text transcripts of every video, including their recent one where a dozen former members and people associated with the ACA spoke out.
Fair enough. One of the reasons I restrict comments on my main blog posts is to encourage more thoughtful replies. People put a lot more effort into writing up blog posts than comments usually. These get more visibility than any comment could ever hope, better limiting the damage if I am guilty of misinformation.
Yeah, I get it. You are basically saying the only responses you desire are either from existing bloggers in their own blogs or from people who create a blog merely to comment on one of your blog posts. Which is fine, but which is also why the only times I check your blog is when someone refers to you whether on an OP or as a comment and I want to verify the claim. To HJ If I could ask you some questions here. Based on everything I know, I strongly lean towards the position that there is a large biological component that explains the difference in performance at the elite level in almost every sport between assigned-male-at-birth athletes and assigned-female-at-birth athletes.
I know that you cited a counter-example, a man boxer who was assigned female at birth, and who won professional fight. I am not saying that a women can never beat a man in a sport, but I am saying at the very top level, it seems that cis-men enjoy a gigantic advantage over cis-women. You seem to doubt this. How can you doubt this on the basis of the facts that I cited above? Are my facts wrong?
Do need I find citations for these facts? I admit that I might be wrong, but some summary websites that I found said these are the facts, and I have not found anyone saying that these fact claims are wrong concerning Olympic records and the high frequency of high school cis-male athletes who regularly outperform the Olympic records of adult women.
I hope to take it as given that trans-women without medical or surgical changes have the same athletic capability and competences as cis-men. It would discourage them from sports, exactly like young cis-women were discouraged by seeing only male winners before the creation of gender-segregated sports. The big remaining question for me is whether standard hormone replacement therapy rules are enough to reduce the competence of trans-women to that of cis-women levels.
It seems to me to be special pleading to say otherwise. However, it does seem that my legal understanding of the 14th amendment and human rights would forbid gender-segregation of bathrooms, and HJ, it seems that your understanding of human rights would also require to forbid gender-segregation in sports.
And I know I have been remiss, so after this I shall shut up]. Is sport about getting the best score under artificial conditions? Is it about besting your peers?
In your category, stage, league, format, division? Is it about extracting the best of yourself? To John I did read harpermae comments, and to be sure, I just reread them again.
I agree on most points, and I disagree that my concerns are just cover for transphopbia. Regarding the rest of your post, it seems to be to be targeted towards a person who has concerns other than my own. To answer your specific questions:. Different people will have different answers, and no position is special. Sports is a cultural construct, and we create it, and we assign its goals. Sports is ought to be here to serve humanity, and not the other way around.
Not about sports, either. Just about whether commenters want to express a view on the circumstances applicable, which is nice of FtB to do]. OK, but my statement was less about intent and more about effect. So how many people do you think there are who, in addition to the 3 points I mentioned in the previous paragraph, have no desire to take any kind of HRT?
I just do not share any sort of fear that trans women are going to destroy the participation of cis-women in sports. I have seen the best solution at a swimming pool I visited in Italy several years ago.
The changing area was a long series of lockable stalls, each with a door leasing to the main entrance and a door leading to the pool area. They were large enough to contain an adult and a couple of young children. There were open-space showers that allowed rinsing oneself off while wearing a bathing suit, but also some individual stalls with lockable doors for those who wanted to shower once they changed out of their bathing suits.
Toilet seats were obviously also in individual, lockable stalls. None of the lockable stalls of any kind was gendered. This arrangement supports not only transgender folk but also anyone who prefers privacy while changing, regardless of reason.
However, if it was a few percent, then that might be enough for trans-women to dominate womens-only sports without a HRT rule. You are totally right that many trans-women would take standard hormone replacement therapy anyway. However, I suspect that you underestimate the competitive drive that many people have, especially with fame and large amounts of prize money on the line. There are plenty of people for whom winning is all that matters, and when you add large amounts of cash. It seems that the only thing that would stop them is social pressure and shaming, or personal integrity, or the great inconvenience of a mandatory rule for hormone replacement therapy.
I am really puzzled why you call this a conspiracy. This is the part that confuses me the most. Persons who reach elite level competitions of sports are like one of the first groups of people that I would suspect of cheating and having weaker integrity.
I was not personally that impressed with rational debate on the axp blog. Asked a clear question about the dogma Jen and Tracie was claimed to have and ended up having to hear what was this months the one true woman making thing. Still, there was point raised that still puzzles me and has even expanded a little to think labels so it was not all time wasted. I think you are underestimating the desire to transition that most trans people have.
OK, so your argument is that cis people are going to pretend to be a member of a group that are often straight up killed, beat, and otherwise mocked and mistreated to give them what would probably only amount to a slight increase in their chance of winning. Particularly considering that female athletes are generally paid far less, and famous trans people are generally mocked and mistreated, even when the pass fairly well….
That someone else might do something unethical with the rights I deserve is not a justification for taking my rights away. It singles trans women out for discrimination based on the mere possibility that a cis person might do something unethical.
This, if I understand you correctly, is an argument that because some people will break some reasonable rule, all people belonging to a particular minority class will assumed to be rule breakers and banned from competition. Not only does this involve doping many of their athletes, they actively engaged in research on how to beat tests designed to detect cheating. Knowing that persons from certain countries have a history of excessive cheating that has continued unevenly to the present day, and knowing that they have often gone undetected for years — long enough to make it impossible for would-be-winners to profit from such things as endorsement deals, etc.
Would you be willing to ban all persons who hold citizenship in the countries of the former USSR from international competition to prevent some persons in that class of athletes from cheating?
Why or why not? The 14th amendment to the constitution cannot restrict behavior to which the government is not a party. Since the vast majority of sport is overseen by governing bodies that are private, non-profit corporations like the NCAA or its K school equivalent in Oregon, the OSAA or private, for-profit corporations e. Thus gender-segregation of sports itself is not unconstitutional, though gender segregation of sport by direct government action might be. I wonder if other states have non-profits running K competitions the way Oregon does, or if other states have government-chartered organizations similar to special boards created to regulate industries that are created by law and whose members are nominated by an executive official or even directly elected, like state utility regulatory commissions sometimes, but not always, acquire their directors.
Therefore, racial segregation — or disparate legal treatment on the basis of race — is subject to what is called Strict Scrutiny.
But, as movie stars can attest, not all that glitters is gold. With their newfound fame, these content creators are finding that there is a lot more speculation swirling around their personal lives than ever before.
However, not all of the rumors are of the gossip variety. Some of the loose lips around these vloggers have caused lawyers to become involved. Most recently, the Ace Family fell victim to the rumor mill, with Austin McBroom being accused of rape and bribery. He, of course, is working to clear his name and get justice for the alleged "extortion" he's confronted with, but with all the controversy people are questioning if the Ace Family will be able to bounce back. But, as history has proven, these YouTube subscribers are fiercely loyal and stick with their content creators until the drama blows over.
To see for yourself, check out some of YouTube's biggest scandals from over the years:. After revealing his upcoming makeup launch, Jeffree Star received backlash over its name : the Cremated collection. Many claimed it's especially insensitive and offensive in light of the COVID outbreak, which has caused an overwhelming amount of deaths.
However, Austin said in a statement, "If you have not heard, I have recently been a victim of extortion defamation and slander. I knew this was a cold world but never did I foresee something this disturbing upon me. Moreover, the gossip vlogger has vehemently denied Cole's accusations. Now he said making a expose vid. Truth is the woman I planned on interviewing went MIA," he claimed. Westbrook, a cosmetics guru with more than 6 million subscribers, sent the YouTube community into a frenzy when she publicly addressed her dramatic falling out with Charles in a nearly minute video posted on May 10, In it, Westbrook, who Charles has heralded as his mentor and "mom," shared her side of the apparent betrayal, which involved Charles promoting Sugar Bear Hair Care vitamins on his Instagram, a direct competitor to Westbrook's own supplement company.
You do not get to wake up and stress out about how unfair your job is. That is so ridiculous to me. Get off your high horse and have some respect.
You don't have any for the people who are in this industry and that's the sad fact. Dawson's need to clarify that an old joke about participating in sexual acts with his cat was just that—a joke—was hardly the first time the popular vlogger has found himself embroiled in scandal over questionable comments or behavior.
In January of , a since-terminated YouTube channel released a video entitled "I think Shane Dawson is a pedophile. Here's my proof. I cannot believe I'm having this make this video," he said, before declaring that he is "not a f--king pedophile. That same year, he also found himself embroiled in controversy courtesy of his sponsor BetterHelp, a wellness app that described itself as "the largest online counseling platform worldwide," aimed at helping people deal with issues "such as stress, anxiety, relationships, parenting, depression, addictions, eating, sleeping, trauma, anger, family conflicts, LGBT matters, grief, religion [or] self esteem.
She's energized too. I can't wait to see what Joe does with the new comedy club. First, a little about Perkins. She's the former executive director of TreeFolks, an Austin nonprofit dedicated to planting trees in urban and rural areas. She left that job in without knowing that a year later, she would be running a pod school for the neighborhood kids. Her children are 11 and Reverie Books in South Austin has a reading area and a children's area.
Addie Broyles. Perkins has a masters degree in forestry and grew up in the "middle of nowhere Louisiana. She eventually went back to school and became a university instructor and researcher, focusing first on swamplands and then on watersheds. After working in environmental regulation at a water treatment plant in Austin, Perkins became the executive director of TreeFolks in During all these life and career changes, Perkins was making an annual pilgrimage to the Kerrville Folk Festival.
It used to be where you'd show up with your CD, and they'd put you on staff. Reverie Books sells a variety of notebooks, notecards, stickers, magnets and other items that aren't books, but most of the store is dedicated to books.
That's where she met David Schunck, a Vietnam war vet turned "peace-loving hippie" who ran Good Buy Books for decades. A year-old Vietnam vet and a something lesbian, it turns out they have quite a lot to say to each other.
They are both songwriters who see books as a way of building community. Schunck still has some shelves of used books in the back of the store, and the rest of the shelves are filled with contemporary and classic books, zines and non-traditional titles, puzzles, a few well-curated toys, notecards, magnets and other gifts. And it's working. A customer left this note in Perkins' suggestion box. Perkins reaches over to the wall by her computer to peel off a handwritten note on a blue notecard.
I feel seen, heard and represented," the patron wrote. She keeps this reminder by her desk so she can remember why she opened the store in the first place. It's not nothing," she says. My wife is the breadwinner, and I'm not used to being someone who doesn't. Perkins points out the connection between starting a bookstore and spending all those years on the road as a singer-songwriter. She says the whole family has been on board with the project, especially now that the sense of community is building.
Having just come from the non-profit world, Perkins is constantly thinking about giving back to the community. In her little corner of the parking lot in front, she's hosting some outdoor events that will eventually move indoors once COVID subsides, where the rolling bookshelves can make way for chairs. Her neighbors at Captain Quackenbush's Coffeehouse next door have brought her pie, and Austin author Lauren Hough is hosting a presentation there on Friday night.
Customers can also rent out the space for a private shopping session or a date night, including cheese, wine and charcuterie.
Perkins says that hers is one of many indie bookstores that have opened during the pandemic, which from a commercial perspective seems counter-intuitive. But when thinking from the point of view of what's best for the community, it's exactly what we needed.
Addie Broyles is a longtime food writer, who wrote for the Austin American-Statesman for 13 years. That kind of behavior has some worried about how Austin might lead the Pentagon, a much bigger organization than Central Command.
Austin spent a lot of time fighting wars in the Middle East against insurgents and terrorists. Few in the US have such experience, and it make him incredibly valuable when discussing that kind of conflict. Minimizing the chance for war with China is a good thing, not a bad thing.
The problem is that few know exactly what Austin believes on it — or anything, really. He rarely gives his views on key issues in public, and those who know him say he barely speaks his mind in private. One thing he has been clear on is not wanting to significantly reduce the number of US troops abroad. After he spent over 40 years in uniform, his confirmation hearings will be among the few times much of the nation will get to hear what Austin thinks.
Alexander remembers watching that event with fellow aides. As part of the confirmation process, Austin will get another shot in front of Congress. Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment: to empower through understanding.
0コメント