7 thoughts on “Curt Schilling the Science Guy”

  1. Thanks for this post. I had not considered what century the advocates of this and climate change was based on, assuming they are attempting to be truthful = doubtful.

  2. If anybody knows, ESPN should know that the history of the Olympics is rife with tales of uncertain ‘gender identity’ going back as far as 1932 (Stella Walsh, a Polish athlete who won a gold medal in the women’s 100 m at the 1932 Summer Olympics in Los Angeles, was discovered after her death in 1980 to have had partially developed male genitalia).
    United States Olympic Committee president Avery Brundage requested, during or shortly after the 1936 Summer Olympics in Berlin, that a system be established to examine female athletes. Brundage felt the need to clarify “sex ambiguities” after observing the performance of Czechoslovak runner and jumper Zdeňka Koubková and English shotputter and javelin thrower Mary Edith Louise Weston. Both individuals later had sex change surgery and legally changed their names, to Zdeněk Koubek and Mark Weston, respectively.
    Ewa Kłobukowska, who won the gold medal in women’s 4×100 m relay and the bronze medal in women’s 100 m sprint at the 1964 Summer Olympics in Tokyo, was the first athlete to fail a gender test in 1967. She was found to have the rare genetic condition of XX/XXY mosaicism and was banned from competing in Olympic and professional sports.
    In all the hand-wringing over the supposed rights of those people of ambiguous or ‘undecided’ gender the rights of about 50% of the overall population – normal females who do not want to have penises in the restrooms they and their underage daughters use.
    Oddly enough, nobody seems concerned about men having to share their restrooms with vaginas – although I suspect most men would not care one way or the other. 😉

  3. It is my understanding that part of the argument used by some of these men is that they are uncomfortable in the men’s bathroom because they are women in a man’s body, therefore are more comfortable in the women’s bathroom. Since, it seems that many more real women are uncomfortable with that, it is then reasonable that their feelings and comfort overrule the feelings of what I’ll call “fake women”. There is also the problem of increased risk of assault by thugs just claiming to be women, who have no “gender confusion”.

  4. Posit this situation:

    You’re a man who’s gone into a movie theater restroom appropriate to your gender, lined up to void your bladder into a urinal, and someone dressed like (and looking like) a woman enters after you, heads for a toilet stall, and enters same.

    What’s your intellectual and emotional response?

    Shall we set aside the idea that a male with a woman’s appearance is supposed to have some exceptional advantage in taking sexual liberties with women and little girls in the ladies’ room, and instead get some focus on just how…er, uncomfortable us guys are going to be if we’re gonna be forced to share the gentelmen’s jakes with drag queens?

  5. Tucci78,

    Absolutely no problem with your situation – been happening for pretty much all of my adult life. I will admit that the first time I saw a man putting on eye-liner in the mirror in the gents I was taken aback, but mainly because of the range of cosmetics he had lined up along the sink – it was more than my girlfriend used!

    Why should it be any more uncomfortable to urinate next to a man dressed as a woman as opposed to any other man? How many gay men do you know who dress as women? Would you feel uncomfortable urinating next to a gay man who dressed as a man, but who was eyeing you up?

    I have serious problems with the tyranny of a very small minority of transgender people trumping the large majority of people who are comfortable in their own bodies – whatever their sexual identity. However, I suspect that it is not even the trans community pushing this issue, but yet another progressive rallying cry to stamp their ever-so-liberal credentials with another victory over the conservative “bigots”.

    I am reminded of the loyalty oaths which were required in the base canteen in Catch 22. That was satire – not a blueprint!

  6. Rob: I confess that the notion of anyone – of any appearance – “eyeing [me] up” in a men’s room is something that’s never crossed my mind. I’m an extraordinarily unattractive specimen.

    I don’t see anything tyrannical in that “very small minority of transgender people” who wish to handle their eliminatory (and cosmetic) functions in public conveniences coordinate with the gender traits they’re simulating. Given the aptitudes of practiced cross-dressers in “passing” themselves off in appearance, speech and behavior, that might not even be all that much of a problem. How the heck does one know if the person in the next toilet cubicle over is of the sex to which the restroom is assigned? Moreover, how would it matter? One has no more legitimate interest in that person’s naughty bits than he – or she – has in one’s own.

    Genetically male and female people patronizing such restrooms have by custom and courtesy the need to accommodate the presence of fellows of their own kind, some of whom are disconcerting – even shocking – in their appearances. Consider how genuinely frightening might it be for a six- or eight-year-old boy to be doing his piddling in a men’s room when a legless amputee in a wheelchair enters to roll himself across the tiled floor into the handicapped stall at the far end of the lavatory. Even the average adult might find that sort of sight off-putting, eh? But we learn to handle it, if only because failing to deal honorably and sympathetically with our fellow human beings is shameful to us.

    Private persons, as private individuals, learn to adapt and accommodate, and that includes both the owners of such restrooms and those customers making use thereof. What stinks about the present kerfluffle is nothing more or less than the involvement of government’s malevolent jobholders, who are inserting their authority in an area of voluntary interaction where they are neither needed nor wanted, all in the name of a specious “social justice” that isn’t actually being sought by either the orthosexual majority or (as you’ve observed) that infinitesimal minority of persons who sincerely consider themselves “transgendered.”

    Insofar as I understand The Donald’s position on this “hot button” issue, he holds with subsidiarity, the premise that “social and political issues should be dealt with at the most immediate (or local) level that is consistent with their resolution.” [Wiki-bloody-pedia] To me, that seems to be at the level of these restrooms’ owners and operators, without government diktat beyond such as might be necessary for the preservation of life, liberty, and property – and there’s an end to it, one way or another.

  7. Oh, I get it. “Private institutions” / businesses like ESPN CAN fire people because of the company’s ‘values’.

    Yet private institutions / businesses such as restaurants, bakeries, social gathering services, etc. CANNOT decide who they will facilitate in their restrooms and what services they will provide because of their values.

    Boycott ESPN, Target, and those like them. The sick perversion of the left must be stopped.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.