When it comes to sports there really is not any question any more. Again, I'm not a physician, but any given sports body can determine what a trans woman needs to do to compete on a level playing field with cis women.

This is best evidenced by the lack of trans women superstars. Despite the Daily Wire's recent magnum opus, trans women compete and lose all the time in women's sports, it's only the transphobes who have a problem with them ~~competing~~ at all.

a candidate should work to appeal to 100% of their voter base

Less a proposal and more of a fact: People won't vote for a candidate who does not support the issues that they support. You can't expect a voter who is against fracking to vote for a candidate who supports fracking.

If Kamala supports fracking and the majority of voters do not, it is up to her to change, not the voters.

i consider this a voter skill issue

Yeah... Democrats want to blame the voters so they can continue to court wealthy donors. If everyone in Michigan promises to "Vote Blue No Matter Who" then they can continue arming Israel without losing any Muslim votes. Unfortunately that's not how things work.

Maybe

Granted, I think a human stomach is more difficult to traverse than a frog, and it's more likely that it came in the back door. I'm just not willing to rule it out.

i mean that's a fair statement, but she wouldn't be running on fracking if she thought it was detrimental, so it's either not a huge concern for most voters, or there is something more than being let on in the rhetoric here.

You're begging the question here. If Democrats paid attention to their voters we wouldn't be having this conversation. Generally, critics of Dem strategy believe that they are too beholden to wealthy donors.

Democrats blame Jill Stein for Clinton's loss. But Dems can't force her not to run again, or people not to vote for her. If Kamala doesn't win, it will be because she didn't convince enough people to vote for her, not because Jill Stein is running.

The signal to noise ratio is so low these days. There's so much information out there but everyone wants to profit from you before you can get it. Even worse, the people with good information generally can't buy as big a megaphone as the people who profit from lying to you.

Honestly, I think humans have been more likely to believe an easy lie than a hard truth all along, but it's easier than ever these days.

Thank you for your reply. I don't think we disagree that much, but I'm afraid we may be miscommunicating a bit.

What determines "biological sex"?

Chromosomes? Except someone with Androgen Insensitivity may have XY chromosomes, but physically appear to be female.

Genitalia? But we have intersex people with ambiguous genitalia

Testosterone? Caster Semanya

Full disclosure: this seems more your field than mine. I don't think I'm educating you, just trying to clarify my point. It seems like you're arguing against "There's no such thing as assigned gender at birth". What I'm saying that there is no objective way to categorize all humans into neat little sex boxes. Biological sex is a spectrum with most people either at the "male" point or the "female" point, but some examples everywhere in between.

I don't know who stole your history book, but you should probably go look for it.

I'm sorry, apparently I can't read. I somehow glossed over that part. Thanks for the clarification.

I'm new here. I don't really know anything about the Lemmy devs.

~~But...that tweet is not particularly transphobic? I'm going to take a hard look at anyone who uses the phrase "the transgender topic". But if that's the best proof that the Lemmy devs are transphobic, it's not terribly convincing.~~

Not really sure how I misread the tweet.

Or the store just got their Dasani shipment. Or they ordered twice as much because it's so popular.

Sometimes jokes are funny as long as you don't think about them too much.

Way ahead of you, buddy.

The dystopian part is something about having a robot standing between us and human contact. I prefer texting over calling as much as the next millennial, but no one asked for them to insert AI into the process. No doubt this is an opt out "service" primarily designed to allow Apple to use all of their customers'conversations as training data.

This scenario is a comic exaggeration of the worst case, but serves as a good example of exactly what's wrong.