Joel3102

Member
  • Content count

    796
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Joel3102


  1. Just now, Hardkill said:

    Actually, don't you think that there shouldn't have ever been a need for any kind of states' rights in the USA?

    If you wanna abolish states all together an become more like the UK, that’s a seperate argument. But given the very founding of the US is a union of states with seperate interests, that idea would be completely unrealistic


  2. 8 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

    California and New York are currently getting fucked over.

    Why don't you care about that?

    I do, which is why I don’t think a President should get elected without the majority vote. But it’s the United *States*. Small states will basically have no say if the Senate is gone. 
     

    Australia also has a Senate is 12 Senators from each state regardless of size. Works fairly well


  3. As much of a pain in the ass Manchin is, he’s still preferable to having a Republican from West Virginia, which would almost certainly be the case otherwise. So his voting base isn’t even natural Democrats, but Republicans.

    Also note, Manchin’s popularity has increased more than any other Senator over the past year. Progressives need to understand that not all voters agree with them. 
     

    https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/3462266-poll-manchins-popularity-skyrocketed-over-past-year/amp/


  4. 31 minutes ago, vladorion said:

    Sure. Doesn't mean they're not real on a practical level.

    Using an argument of "male/female is a construct" on a practical level, which this thread is about, doesn't work. 

    Exactly, confusing relative and absolute.

    At the ultimate level life and death is a construct, but I’d still prefer to not blow my brains out and than do so.


  5. 7 minutes ago, vladorion said:

    If they're constructions then it should make no difference to you whom to have sex with, a man or a woman.

    Just cause something is a construction, doesn’t mean it can’t have use.

    The construction of gender has shown it’s limits in trans people, and broadening that construction is a good thing. But it doesn’t mean that there’s no use whatsoever for any social constructions 


  6. 49 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

    Well, when you construct categories don't be surprised when they blow up in your face at some point.

    "Male" and "female" were constructed categories which are now being deconstructed. So here we are. People are freaking out because they took it for granted that male and female were always constructions.

    The outrage is a mechanism to maintain the constructions while pretending they were not constructions.

    Yeah of course they’re constructions, but some constructions serve a pragmatic purpose. Should we just ignore the construction completely in sports and just kill sport for biological females entirely?

    Pretty sure you’ve agreed with the Rogan position on trans women in sports in the past. 


  7. 25 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

    If you wanna make these sports more fair then test for height, muscle mass, testosterone levels, etc. and have categories for them.

    Yeah but that’s not how we’ve decided to seperate groups for sports. Everyone knows that it’s not really fair, of course genetics is the most important factor for being elite.

    But we’ve decided to seperate for sex for good reason, to allow a seperate class for biological females to be competitive. 

    If we want to start creating different classes for height etc, that’s a seperate conversation. 


  8. 11 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

    You can find a clip of him saying it.

    Pretty sure that would get you banned. It's not some deep mystery.

    Nothing he said was as close to as bad as what Vaush said at 1:11 here.

    He may have gone overboard specifically on the hyper online trans community that live on Twitter all day, but in general he’s pro trans and has debated many conservatives on it 


  9. Why are people still removing Russian agency from this situation and act is if this is the fault of NATO expansion. Given his pre invasion speech, it’s pretty damn obvious he was going to invade eventually no matter what, he didn’t want Ukraine in NATO because that would make it untenable to invade.

    Even Kyle Kulisnki reckons only 10% chance they wouldn’t have invaded if NATO didn’t expand.