Show newer

@b6hydra i see where you're coming from but as someone who hasn't got the vax, and is seeing various forms of arm-twisting becoming the new governmental fashion, it's no longer a theoretical question.

@Moon @vriska this is also a valid point, I can see a situation where we do gender neutral teams and it turns out that either the quality of the sport degrades or we end up just having certain sports dominated by a certain gender

On the other hand, would be genuinely interesting to see men and women taking different roles in team sports on average and how that might change the complexion of the sport

@vriska agreed, I also don't like being pressured into nodding along with stuff I feel is patent bullshit

Not that what you're saying is, seems perfectly reasonable, it's the anti-biological narrative that I take particular issue with.

But yeah, I'll leave it there cos I'm way out of my depth on sport adjudication

@vriska I'm open minded, I struggle with the anti-biological nature of some of the arguments used by trans activists though.

If it becomes the new cultural norm to not make the distinction in sports then I'm easy, but there's something profoundly disingenuous with the schtick that a trans woman is a woman in every biological sense.

I'm not sure how much the make believe is helpful to people who are already struggling to square themselves with the dice fate has rolled for them, particularly as it often seems more about others around them pretending everything is fine, rather than confronting some of the real challenges I'm sure trans people face.

Speaking from limited experience but sincerel reflection on the issue.

@vriska still think it's bullshit, although I sympathise with the difficult position it puts trans competitors on

I wouldn't have a problem with gender neutral categories

skells boosted

Google and Facebook love you and want what's best for you. That's why they censor: to help you and keep you safe.

Show thread

@b6hydra my central issue is failure to apply the precautionary principle - quarantines (people coming into the country have to spend 2 weeks or so without contact) have been used for millennia and rare is the case where 2 weeks in a room causes long term health issues.

However, the vaccines are new technology ( I know mRNA have been used before but only on very sick people, never rolled out into the general populace.) I've often brought up the case of Thalidomide in these conversations - the word for word response seems to be "times have moved on from then"

Indeed, our medical tech has become considerably more complicated - our means of communication more manipulable.

That several repurposed drugs have been suppressed is sufficient for me to disregard all health authorities. Lord knows they've fucked up plenty of times in the past.

skells boosted

@skells
Personally I put myself somewhere in the middle. Medical intervention is sometimes necessary and private companies are even worse at providing for the common good than governments. We've seen what happens when intervention works out well, like preventing typhoid outbreaks, but also when it goes really, really wrong like eugenics and forced sterilization. We could all stand to be a little more practical and learn from history rather than reject differing opinions out of hand.

Anyway, after much rambling... My answer is no. The COVID-19 vaccine should not be legally required for anyone.

@b6hydra there are already signs that the vaccines might be selecting for more virulent and transmissible strains of the virus.

value judgements on whether people should be allowed to harm themselves should be based on science, not political expediency.

particularly when the topic of conversation is violation of human rights

my body, my choice, no?

@Zerglingman @11112011 @jeffcliff @runfox by all means go ahead, you're going to struggle to persuade those who prefer bitcoin

skells boosted

@Zerglingman @11112011 people will always lose coins, don't think you need to put bells on a whistle

@Zerglingman @11112011 precisely, check out some of willy woo's work, he does a lot of on chain analysis on this subject

skells boosted
@skells @11112011 That is, prices adjust to account for the amount of coins in circulation rather than the amount in existence?

@bonifartius "If ye love wealth better than liberty,
the tranquility of servitude
better than the animating contest of freedom,
go home from us in peace.
We ask not your counsels or your arms.
Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you.
May your chains set lightly upon you,
and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen."

@Zerglingman @11112011 haven't read the link but supply and demand imply that dormant coins do release their value to the market, it's deflationary pressure

@vriska fighting the man, one pizza and craft cocktail lunchtime combo at a time

Show older
CleverLibre Social

CleverLibre Social is an inclusive social instance for open discussion, learning, and community.
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.