@pkpjpm.bsky.social
Fair point - we live in a golden age of grifting, and honest people can be trapped by fear, knowing that there are truthfully few protections.
December 20, 2025 at 5:13 PM
Fair point - we live in a golden age of grifting, and honest people can be trapped by fear, knowing that there are truthfully few protections.
I recall a line from the movie The Flimflam Man:
> you can’t cheat and honest man
> you can’t cheat and honest man
December 20, 2025 at 2:18 PM
I recall a line from the movie The Flimflam Man:
> you can’t cheat and honest man
> you can’t cheat and honest man
This is exactly my position: give the athletic organizations authority to resolve the issue as they see fit. I would frame this as empowering and protecting the independence of local communities, and the right wing position as interference and overreach. But I’m hearing that’s not strong enough.
December 18, 2025 at 1:12 AM
This is exactly my position: give the athletic organizations authority to resolve the issue as they see fit. I would frame this as empowering and protecting the independence of local communities, and the right wing position as interference and overreach. But I’m hearing that’s not strong enough.
I’m saying treat them like neighbors and treat their concerns with an open mind. You don’t have to agree, but you also don’t have to make them enemies.
December 18, 2025 at 12:16 AM
I’m saying treat them like neighbors and treat their concerns with an open mind. You don’t have to agree, but you also don’t have to make them enemies.
Right! So what I’m trying to advocate is that we protect the independence of sports governance, which means no hard right trans bans *and* no requirements for inclusion. Not perfect, but avoids the trap being set by right, I believe.
December 18, 2025 at 12:13 AM
Right! So what I’m trying to advocate is that we protect the independence of sports governance, which means no hard right trans bans *and* no requirements for inclusion. Not perfect, but avoids the trap being set by right, I believe.
I think we can agree that the right is using this issue disingenuously to advance a revolting anti-trans agenda. What I don’t see clearly is access to participation in women’s sports being a human rights issue. Are we saying anyone who identifies as a woman has a right to compete as a woman?
December 18, 2025 at 12:08 AM
I think we can agree that the right is using this issue disingenuously to advance a revolting anti-trans agenda. What I don’t see clearly is access to participation in women’s sports being a human rights issue. Are we saying anyone who identifies as a woman has a right to compete as a woman?
I’m not imagining that we have any chance to placate bigots. My concern is that we want to turn voters who don’t have strong feelings on trans rights, but are concerned about protecting women’s sports into allies, not enemies.
December 18, 2025 at 12:01 AM
I’m not imagining that we have any chance to placate bigots. My concern is that we want to turn voters who don’t have strong feelings on trans rights, but are concerned about protecting women’s sports into allies, not enemies.
Sure, the right would never offer such a deal, because they know intolerance works for them in this case. I’m asking: if we meet their intolerance with inflexibility, aren’t we missing a chance to appeal to people who’d love to see the temperature turned down on this issue?
December 17, 2025 at 11:03 PM
Sure, the right would never offer such a deal, because they know intolerance works for them in this case. I’m asking: if we meet their intolerance with inflexibility, aren’t we missing a chance to appeal to people who’d love to see the temperature turned down on this issue?
The testosterone issue shows how complicated rules for participation can be. I’m saying it’s better not to impose ideas of rules for fair access. But if there is an obvious, simple, and fair standard I could change my mind: does such a thing exist?
December 17, 2025 at 10:59 PM
The testosterone issue shows how complicated rules for participation can be. I’m saying it’s better not to impose ideas of rules for fair access. But if there is an obvious, simple, and fair standard I could change my mind: does such a thing exist?
This is a very good point, and I think this fact can be used to good effect by advocating that sports governance bodies should have the freedom to operate, rather than a proscribed outcome.
December 17, 2025 at 10:01 PM
This is a very good point, and I think this fact can be used to good effect by advocating that sports governance bodies should have the freedom to operate, rather than a proscribed outcome.
This is why I’ve replied: to give you folks a chance to talk to the idiot. Honestly, women’s sports isn’t something I normally think about, but I see that this issue has helped stoke hatred, as noted by other posters. I’m asking: is it possible that compromise and engagement can defuse the hate?
December 17, 2025 at 8:52 PM
This is why I’ve replied: to give you folks a chance to talk to the idiot. Honestly, women’s sports isn’t something I normally think about, but I see that this issue has helped stoke hatred, as noted by other posters. I’m asking: is it possible that compromise and engagement can defuse the hate?
Couldn’t allowing women’s sports governance bodies some latitude in considering the affect of transitioning on physical performance, combined with an assertion of trans equity in other areas, take this issue away from the right and block this strategy?
December 17, 2025 at 8:15 PM
Couldn’t allowing women’s sports governance bodies some latitude in considering the affect of transitioning on physical performance, combined with an assertion of trans equity in other areas, take this issue away from the right and block this strategy?
Seriously question: doesn’t being inflexible on women’s inter-mural sports help the right lever up this fringe issue? To put it another way: if you were offered solid trans rights legislation that excluded women’s sports, would you take the win?
December 17, 2025 at 7:24 PM
Seriously question: doesn’t being inflexible on women’s inter-mural sports help the right lever up this fringe issue? To put it another way: if you were offered solid trans rights legislation that excluded women’s sports, would you take the win?
The public opinion was killed by Joe Lieberman, a member of the Democratic Leadership Council. That act blocked the path that could have opened the door to M4A. And Lieberman knew what he was doing. You can’t blame the Republicans for that one.
December 15, 2025 at 4:45 AM
The public opinion was killed by Joe Lieberman, a member of the Democratic Leadership Council. That act blocked the path that could have opened the door to M4A. And Lieberman knew what he was doing. You can’t blame the Republicans for that one.
Speeding is an American sacrament just like owning small arms and cheating on taxes. Interfere with this insanity at your peril.
December 14, 2025 at 1:04 AM
Speeding is an American sacrament just like owning small arms and cheating on taxes. Interfere with this insanity at your peril.
20 years ago many Americans were afraid of a system that would give them equal status with the poor. But things are so bad now they’re ready for a unified system. People will make this happen, not leaders. Those that get in front of M4A will become the new leadership.
December 13, 2025 at 5:54 PM
20 years ago many Americans were afraid of a system that would give them equal status with the poor. But things are so bad now they’re ready for a unified system. People will make this happen, not leaders. Those that get in front of M4A will become the new leadership.
Not kidding about the genius. By stealing the Heritage Foundation plan, which had been prototyped by Romney, Obama neutralized what would have been Romney’s signature policy achievement. It also left the Rs with only slogans and nihilistic neglect as a policy, as they’re incapable of ceding ground.
December 13, 2025 at 5:26 AM
Not kidding about the genius. By stealing the Heritage Foundation plan, which had been prototyped by Romney, Obama neutralized what would have been Romney’s signature policy achievement. It also left the Rs with only slogans and nihilistic neglect as a policy, as they’re incapable of ceding ground.
“sleep” is missing
December 12, 2025 at 5:01 PM
“sleep” is missing
Lieberman killing the public option should not be forgotten or excused. That said, it was a genius tactical move adopting the ACA, which was a Republican plan. Focusing on subsidy cuts also an excellent tactic. Now the Medicare for All train is leaving the station, time to get onboard.
December 12, 2025 at 1:46 AM
Lieberman killing the public option should not be forgotten or excused. That said, it was a genius tactical move adopting the ACA, which was a Republican plan. Focusing on subsidy cuts also an excellent tactic. Now the Medicare for All train is leaving the station, time to get onboard.
I prefer “immensely profitable” as a headline description. It is helpful to keep in mind that the system is working as designed by keeping a big part of the S & P 500 in the black.
December 8, 2025 at 5:44 PM
I prefer “immensely profitable” as a headline description. It is helpful to keep in mind that the system is working as designed by keeping a big part of the S & P 500 in the black.