Not sure what the obvious lie is supposed to be, but to claim it would be a reasonable solution to get rid of sex segregated sports altogether is just utterly absurd. Except for a few niches and wild cards, this would remove ~99% of all woman from the Olympics! Just look at the qualifying times!

That’s an absurd argument. ~3000 men have run faster marathon times than the *woman’s world record*. Without sex segregation in *most* sports, women wouldn’t even be present on an Olympic level. (Archery being an exception as it doesn’t rely on strength or speed)

No that’s a bad comparison, because we do not have different height classes in basketball (we could of course, and then competing in the wrong height class would be banned!).

But we *do* have sex segregation in sports, so it makes sense to limit participation to the relevant sex!

Because the ban also applies to her. She’s SRY positive and has male gonads and testosterone levels, so will be banned from participating under this new policy. It’s not specific to “transwoman” but applies to all persons with male advantage.

The IOC already requires scores of much more invasive and cumbersome doping testing than this. That this requires a minimally invasive one-time test is really the weakest argument against this policy one could come up with.

i truly do think that like 70% of cost of living discussions come down to the fact that a lot of people think "roughly 50% of Americans cannot afford the median American lifestyle" is an indictment of the economy instead of just like, math

It’s in Europe’s interest to put sanctions on Israel Limiting trade, travel and freezing foreign reserves would show the EU is willing to act independently of the US

👉 About EU, Gaza and Ukraine, by @martinsandbu.ft.com: "There is no need ... to deem the two wars in any way equivalent to judge that sanctions may be justified in both. And that is why it is time for Europe to clarify specifically how it might place sanctions on Israel."
www.ft.com/content/8a82...

He’s absolutely not innocent that it came to this, but props to him for finally drawing a moral line at what’s going on. Not what I would’ve expected actually.

Völlig unmöglich ist es nicht damit auf Unternehmen Druck zu machen, aber der einfachste Weg ist es nicht grad. Und Trump war bisher ja sehr offen damit was er nutzt um Druck zu machen. Vielleicht macht er das hier auch noch, aber bisher sehe ich davon nichts.

Klar denkt er dass es seine Machtbasis sichert, aber weil er glaubt dass das der US Wirtschaft hilft und dass es US Industrieproduktion ankurbelt, was ihm helfen würde, nicht weil er glaubt es crasht sie.

Weil die tariffs je Land erhoben werden, nicht spezifisch für ein Unternehmen oder selbst eine Branche. Das ist zB bei den federal grants für die Unis ganz anders (hervorragend für pressure) und die law Firma hat er einfach ad hoc angegriffen

Entweder er glaubt das ist toll für die US Wirtschaft oder er glaubt es crasht sie, schließt sich ja aus. Sein ganzer Orbit denkt dass wäre super und würde manufacturing Jobs in die USA zurück bringen. Das meinen die schon todernst.

Ok, der Chris Murphy take ist wirklich Quatsch. Das ist keine intentional self-immolation. Trump glaubt wirklich dass das gut ist, hat er auch schon immer. Gibt 30J alte Videos von ihm wo er behauptet mit Tariffs wird man reich. Und “business by business” kann man die auch nicht aufheben.

At least on THIS topic, I don’t think we vastly disagree what’s a good take and what is funny. On other stuff, yeah, probably. 🥲

😐

Nailed it.

Donald Trump has committed the most profound, harmful and unnecessary economic error in the modern era. Almost everything he said—on history, economics and the technicalities of trade—was utterly deluded econ.st/3YbbFjq

Ok @rodmckay.bsky.social recommend a handful of accounts you thought had some good takes on this. My TL here isn’t really great, but I haven’t given up yet and willing to build it out. (Fwiw, I had no trouble seeing good takes on twitter, but ymmv ofc)

schraube:
lefty loosey, righty tighty!

Nachvollziehbar

Wir stehen zur Verantwortung für unser Land, aber nicht zur Verfügung, um die Wahlgeschenke von CDU und SPD über Schulden zu finanzieren. 1/2

Eine Übersicht aller MdBs im 21. Deutschen Bundestag, die auf Bluesky sind, findet ihr auf unserem Profil!

Entweder einfach die Accounts angucken, denen wir folgen oder unter "Starter-Packs" nach Fraktionen sortiert anschauen.

Bitte weiterverbreiten!

If you propose to get rid of female sports there would, there would not be any woman in Olympic track & field, swimming or cycling events. Sticking up for protecting this is indeed necessary for equality, not ignoring the biological *in*equality that exists.

For different reasons, but otherwise in a similar way males also outperform females in running or cycling. There are ~2500 men that have run faster marathon times than the woman’s world record.

Why are you wilfully trying to misunderstand this? The data is very clear and that is what I was talking about: at the highest levels males far outperform females in chess. That’s a simple statement of fact.

Yes it’s beyond obvious that males are better at chess. It’s also not really that surprising, as there are several well-established factors that explain this:

- IQ tails
- spatial reasoning
- interest in ‘things’ vs ‘people’
- competitiveness
- autism rate

A transgender chess master of course is not “cheating”. But if he is born male he should not and cannot participate in the separate female category. It doesn’t really impact his game in the “normal” category at all though.

Chess doesn’t have a “male” category, they only have a category that is open for all and in which males and females compete and then a *separate* female category. Precisely because there is such an enormous sex gap in very high level chess.

The old UCI policy wasn’t really fit to address this issue. Testosterone thresholds don’t really remove all of the male advantage.