I hesitantly checked St. Patrick's Day parade. I am not a parade person. However, back when they had the parade on March 17th every year, I would be working in the loop on that day, and was definitely part of the experience. One time eating lunch at Exchequer some guys with bagpipes and drums spontaneously walked in and played for a few minutes and then moved on. It was the best of both worlds, I got to experience the revelry and not have to stand for a long time.
The only other thing I have not ever done is go to the top of Willis Tower.
"...if we assume these average differences don’t matter, then we have no excuse for separating sports by gender identity at all." I thought the same thing when I read the comment.
The article below gives her props for her dominating 50-point performance 10 years ago, but explains why Brittany Griner, in her prime, could probably not make a men's college D1 program. "It is not lesser, it is just different."
Regarding your “Never Have I Ever” survey, the only thing I’ve never done is go to the top of the Willis Tower, despite the fact that I worked in it for 5 years.
Ms. Wilmer seems intent on arguing by refusing to address the argument you made. ONCE we segregate by sex, why would we allow those we allow those born male to participate in women’s highly competitive sports? Like you said, otherwise there is no justification for segregating at all. My personal view is that you eliminate anyone with a Y Chromosome from womens highly competitive sports. I don’t want to make rules which involve proof of secondary sex characteristics. Those with a Y chromosome should still be entitled to participate in less competitive sports activities on a team that matches their identity. I would include all in school sports before high school as well as all non Non competitive club and intramural athletics.
Oh, Jo A., but Ms. Wimmer did address the argument that Eric Zorn made. Trans men are men, and trans women are women. So if we segregate by sex, we should place trans women with the women, at least once they have been on hormone therapy long enough that their current testosterone levels are like those of any other woman. What you and Eric have not addressed is that the only genetic advantages trans women have once they have been on hormone therapy are, on the average, taller height and larger lung capacity, which should certainly not be disqualifying if there are cis-women (just not as many of them) with the same advantages. What gives me comfort is my belief that, years from now, when trans people have achieved full equality (which we will), our society will look back on those who fought to keep us out of sports the way we look back today on people who tried to keep black people out of professional or competitive sports.
I am not qualified to make this argument, I was born in Northeastern Indiana and moved to the suburbs in 2004. But former longtime WGN radio host Nick Digilio, a native of and still a resident of Chicago, regards deep dish pizza as a tourist thing. True Chicagoans like their pizza thin and cut into squares according to Mr. Digilio. I have had deep dish pizza and I do like it but my preference is thin cut into squares. Nick also believes no one under 6 should put ketchup on a hot dog.
As to the terminology “natal males” and “natal females,” I’m not a big fan because that suggests that transgender people are not born the way we are, or that physical genitals take precedence over the brain or mind in determining someone’s sex or gender. Why not use cisgender males and females, or nontransgender males and females?
Ramaswamy's jab at Nikki Haley is simple and obvious to anyone of color: He is trying to "out" her for passing for white, or for trying to. Or is this just his way of complaining to her detriment that having a complexion a shade or two richer than hers has disadvantaged him because, as perceived by whites, who, in America, are the most color-conscious population on Earth, he gets challenged more often than she does?
Haley IS a phenomenon in that sense, having foound acceptance in a moderately prejudiced part of our United States (the border South), inasmuch as from innocent childhood, she grew up among white kids. (Kids accept all other kids on he basis of likeability and collaborativeness; they would happily integrate if their parents would let them, but instead, kids are TAUGHT sin color prejudice, followed by appearance & manner of speech aside from complexion.)
In American society, smooth, straight (or moderately curly) hair is favored over tightly-curled (kinky?) hair. Which is preoccupation with FORM, inasmuch as ALL hair is made of the same basic material: Keratin, the same substance that toenails and fingernails are made of. The shape of the hairshaft derives from the shape of its follicle (the root bulb of the hairshaft) just under the scalp: If the follicle is straighnt and situated perpendicular to the plane of the scalp, the hairshaft will grow out straight. If the follicle is slightly curved, the hairshaft will emerge curly. If the hairshaft is very curved, the hairshaft will emerge supercurly, often classified as "kinky." But place a "kinky" hairshaft in a saucer of water and watch it form a circle consistent with the tightness of its curve or curl.
Chemically speaking, there is no difference between a straght hairshaft and a curly hairshaft. It's all genetically decided and passed down as one of many traits, like freckles or eye color. But back to Ramaswamy vs. Haley. One would need to Google to learn whether Haley is an East Indian family name, or an adopted Western name as a tactic to "fit in." Or, maybe her father is white, and named Haley. ) Given her appearance, the second guess is shaky on its face, given her rich complexion, which nevertheless is lighter than that of many East Indians, whose complexions range from almost white in the Anglo sense, to quite dark, darker even that Mahatma Ghandi's.
It would be easy to assume Ramaswamy's sensitivity in this matter derives from their disparate experiences gaining acceptance from Anglos. Advantage: Haley, whose upbringing even endowed her with Anglo social and socializing habits, unspoken nuances of gesture, behavior, pronunciation, etc. that silently signal membership in a social group.
Example (without straying too far afield on this point): Though clearly Negroid in appearance, Sidney Poitier was born and reared in The Bahamas, so spoke in a manner that differentiated him from American-reared blacks. This worked in his favor in our prejudiced society, setting him apart for further social consideration. He had no "South in his mouth." That, plus a winning, outgoing personality and genuine acting ability worked to his advantage. He also studied our speech patterns by listening to "American" as spoken on the radio, mimicking it, to fit in, like any white British actor in a film role cast AS an American.
The same with Niki Haley. Her social behaviors, manner of speech, education and acquaintances from childhood all worked in her favor to gain acceptance by middle-south whites who normally snub people of color, especially if they come without references from whites, or confreres (fellow credentialed achievers of color). Visitors from Europe, Africa or elsewhere overseas are flummoxed by all these subtle complications of social life in America, a carryover from our history of slavery that has caused adoption of a crazy quilt of behaviors based on appearances that even vary from place to place in the South, ground zero for appearance prejudices. Face it: Americans are the most socially provincial on our planet; lacking in worldly sophistication, self-centered in their whiteness if indeed they happen to be white. This blanket statement pertains only to, say, 95% of our white population, so take heart, Mr. Ramaswamy: be patient and tolerant, for we are so underexposed to our fellow humans who display visual & social characteristics different from their own. Educating them is hard work. They make poor students because of their preconceptions which are invalid outside our borders.
Ramaswamy's jab at Nikki Haley is simple and obvious to anyone of color: He is trying to "out" her for passing for white, or for trying to. Or is this just his way of complaining to her detriment that having a complexion a shade or two richer than hers has disadvantaged him because, as perceived by whites, who, in America, are the most color-conscious population on Earth, he gets challenged more often than she does?
Haley IS a phenomenon in that sense, having foound acceptance in a moderately prejudiced part of our United States (the border South), inasmuch as from innocent childhood, she grew up among white kids. (Kids accept all other kids on he basis of likeability and collaborativeness; they would happily integrate if their parents would let them, but instead, kids are TAUGHT sin color prejudice, followed by appearance & manner of speech aside from complexion.)
In American society, smooth, straight (or moderately curly) hair is favored over tightly-curled (kinky?) hair. Which is preoccupation with FORM, inasmuch as ALL hair is made of the same basic material: Keratin, the same substance that toenails and fingernails are made of. The shape of the hairshaft derives from the shape of its follicle (the root bulb of the hairshaft) just under the scalp: If the follicle is straighnt and situated perpendicular to the plane of the scalp, the hairshaft will grow out straight. If the follicle is slightly curved, the hairshaft will emerge curly. If the hairshaft is very curved, the hairshaft will emerge supercurly, often classified as "kinky." But place a "kinky" hairshaft in a saucer of water and watch it form a circle consistent with the tightness of its curve or curl.
Chemically speaking, there is no difference between a straght hairshaft and a curly hairshaft. It's all genetically decided and passed down as one of many traits, like freckles or eye color. But back to Ramaswamy vs. Haley. One would need to Google to learn whether Haley is an East Indian family name, or an adopted Western name as a tactic to "fit in." Or, maybe her father is white, and named Haley. ) Given her appearance, the second guess is shaky on its face, given her rich complexion, which nevertheless is lighter than that of many East Indians, whose complexions range from almost white in the Anglo sense, to quite dark, darker even that Mahatma Ghandi's.
It would be easy to assume Ramaswamy's sensitivity in this matter derives from their disparate experiences gaining acceptance from Anglos. Advantage: Haley, whose upbringing even endowed her with Anglo social and socializing habits, unspoken nuances of gesture, behavior, pronunciation, etc. that silently signal membership in a social group.
Example (without straying too far afield on this point): Though clearly Negroid in appearance, Sidney Poitier was born and reared in The Bahamas, so spoke in a manner that differentiated him from American-reared blacks. This worked in his favor in our prejudiced society, setting him apart for further social consideration. He had no "South in his mouth." That, plus a winning, outgoing personality and genuine acting ability worked to his advantage. He also studied our speech patterns by listening to "American" as spoken on the radio, mimicking it, to fit in, like any white British actor in a film role cast AS an American.
The same with Niki Haley. Her social behaviors, manner of speech, education and acquaintances from childhood all worked in her favor to gain acceptance by middle-south whites who normally snub people of color, especially if they come without references from whites, or confreres (fellow credentialed achievers of color). Visitors from Europe, Africa or elsewhere overseas are flummoxed by all these subtle complications of social life in America, a carryover from our history of slavery that has caused adoption of a crazy quilt of behaviors based on appearances that even vary from place to place in the South, ground zero for appearance prejudices. Face it: Americans are the most socially provincial on our planet; lacking in worldly sophistication, self-centered in their whiteness if indeed they happen to be white. This blanket statement pertains only to, say, 95% of our white population, so take heart, Mr. Ramaswamy: be patient and tolerant, for we are so underexposed to our fellow humans who display visual & social characteristics different from their own. Educating them is hard work. They make poor students because of their preconceptions which are invalid outside our borders.
Re Vivek vs Nikki- For what it is worth Haley is her married name. I don't see using it as a cover-up. I know lots of women who didn't keep their birth names upon marriage because they were happy about the new name for all kinds of reasons!
At last, the ultimate Chicago never-have-I-ever survey
re: never have I ever...
I hesitantly checked St. Patrick's Day parade. I am not a parade person. However, back when they had the parade on March 17th every year, I would be working in the loop on that day, and was definitely part of the experience. One time eating lunch at Exchequer some guys with bagpipes and drums spontaneously walked in and played for a few minutes and then moved on. It was the best of both worlds, I got to experience the revelry and not have to stand for a long time.
The only other thing I have not ever done is go to the top of Willis Tower.
I stand with Johanna!
"...if we assume these average differences don’t matter, then we have no excuse for separating sports by gender identity at all." I thought the same thing when I read the comment.
The article below gives her props for her dominating 50-point performance 10 years ago, but explains why Brittany Griner, in her prime, could probably not make a men's college D1 program. "It is not lesser, it is just different."
https://bleacherreport.com/articles/1558226-could-baylors-brittney-griner-play-on-a-mens-college-basketball-team
Regarding your “Never Have I Ever” survey, the only thing I’ve never done is go to the top of the Willis Tower, despite the fact that I worked in it for 5 years.
Ms. Wilmer seems intent on arguing by refusing to address the argument you made. ONCE we segregate by sex, why would we allow those we allow those born male to participate in women’s highly competitive sports? Like you said, otherwise there is no justification for segregating at all. My personal view is that you eliminate anyone with a Y Chromosome from womens highly competitive sports. I don’t want to make rules which involve proof of secondary sex characteristics. Those with a Y chromosome should still be entitled to participate in less competitive sports activities on a team that matches their identity. I would include all in school sports before high school as well as all non Non competitive club and intramural athletics.
I have never been to the top of the Sears tower. I'd rather have a drink at the Signature Lounge at the John Hancock.
I've never been to a Cubs game anywhere.
I've never been to a St. Patrick's Day parade. The only thing worse that a huge crowd is huge drunk crowd.
I've had deep dish pizza once. Never again. And I've never had an Italian beef sandwich (I assume that's what you meant)?
Also - I don't get the Howard Cosell tweet.
I'm with Johanna.
Oh, Jo A., but Ms. Wimmer did address the argument that Eric Zorn made. Trans men are men, and trans women are women. So if we segregate by sex, we should place trans women with the women, at least once they have been on hormone therapy long enough that their current testosterone levels are like those of any other woman. What you and Eric have not addressed is that the only genetic advantages trans women have once they have been on hormone therapy are, on the average, taller height and larger lung capacity, which should certainly not be disqualifying if there are cis-women (just not as many of them) with the same advantages. What gives me comfort is my belief that, years from now, when trans people have achieved full equality (which we will), our society will look back on those who fought to keep us out of sports the way we look back today on people who tried to keep black people out of professional or competitive sports.
I'm with Joanna.
Here is my list of made up songs:
1. Too much time on my hands by Rob Delaney
2. I am right by Johanna Zorn
3. Goofy taste in humor by Eric Zorn
4. Talking the talk, but not walking the walk by Brandon Johnson
5. Take me out to the ball game by Mike Ditka
6. I will always love you by the Trump all white men’s choir
7. Happiness is a warm gun by the NRA boys.
8. War! What is it good for? By the Putin string band
9. Maybe baby by the Republican platform kazoo group
10. Go Cubs Go by the citizens of Chicago.
I am not qualified to make this argument, I was born in Northeastern Indiana and moved to the suburbs in 2004. But former longtime WGN radio host Nick Digilio, a native of and still a resident of Chicago, regards deep dish pizza as a tourist thing. True Chicagoans like their pizza thin and cut into squares according to Mr. Digilio. I have had deep dish pizza and I do like it but my preference is thin cut into squares. Nick also believes no one under 6 should put ketchup on a hot dog.
“…natal males and natal females (if that terminology is acceptable)”
So naysayers would have to reply… “unacceptable?” 😂
As to the terminology “natal males” and “natal females,” I’m not a big fan because that suggests that transgender people are not born the way we are, or that physical genitals take precedence over the brain or mind in determining someone’s sex or gender. Why not use cisgender males and females, or nontransgender males and females?
Ramaswamy's jab at Nikki Haley is simple and obvious to anyone of color: He is trying to "out" her for passing for white, or for trying to. Or is this just his way of complaining to her detriment that having a complexion a shade or two richer than hers has disadvantaged him because, as perceived by whites, who, in America, are the most color-conscious population on Earth, he gets challenged more often than she does?
Haley IS a phenomenon in that sense, having foound acceptance in a moderately prejudiced part of our United States (the border South), inasmuch as from innocent childhood, she grew up among white kids. (Kids accept all other kids on he basis of likeability and collaborativeness; they would happily integrate if their parents would let them, but instead, kids are TAUGHT sin color prejudice, followed by appearance & manner of speech aside from complexion.)
In American society, smooth, straight (or moderately curly) hair is favored over tightly-curled (kinky?) hair. Which is preoccupation with FORM, inasmuch as ALL hair is made of the same basic material: Keratin, the same substance that toenails and fingernails are made of. The shape of the hairshaft derives from the shape of its follicle (the root bulb of the hairshaft) just under the scalp: If the follicle is straighnt and situated perpendicular to the plane of the scalp, the hairshaft will grow out straight. If the follicle is slightly curved, the hairshaft will emerge curly. If the hairshaft is very curved, the hairshaft will emerge supercurly, often classified as "kinky." But place a "kinky" hairshaft in a saucer of water and watch it form a circle consistent with the tightness of its curve or curl.
Chemically speaking, there is no difference between a straght hairshaft and a curly hairshaft. It's all genetically decided and passed down as one of many traits, like freckles or eye color. But back to Ramaswamy vs. Haley. One would need to Google to learn whether Haley is an East Indian family name, or an adopted Western name as a tactic to "fit in." Or, maybe her father is white, and named Haley. ) Given her appearance, the second guess is shaky on its face, given her rich complexion, which nevertheless is lighter than that of many East Indians, whose complexions range from almost white in the Anglo sense, to quite dark, darker even that Mahatma Ghandi's.
It would be easy to assume Ramaswamy's sensitivity in this matter derives from their disparate experiences gaining acceptance from Anglos. Advantage: Haley, whose upbringing even endowed her with Anglo social and socializing habits, unspoken nuances of gesture, behavior, pronunciation, etc. that silently signal membership in a social group.
Example (without straying too far afield on this point): Though clearly Negroid in appearance, Sidney Poitier was born and reared in The Bahamas, so spoke in a manner that differentiated him from American-reared blacks. This worked in his favor in our prejudiced society, setting him apart for further social consideration. He had no "South in his mouth." That, plus a winning, outgoing personality and genuine acting ability worked to his advantage. He also studied our speech patterns by listening to "American" as spoken on the radio, mimicking it, to fit in, like any white British actor in a film role cast AS an American.
The same with Niki Haley. Her social behaviors, manner of speech, education and acquaintances from childhood all worked in her favor to gain acceptance by middle-south whites who normally snub people of color, especially if they come without references from whites, or confreres (fellow credentialed achievers of color). Visitors from Europe, Africa or elsewhere overseas are flummoxed by all these subtle complications of social life in America, a carryover from our history of slavery that has caused adoption of a crazy quilt of behaviors based on appearances that even vary from place to place in the South, ground zero for appearance prejudices. Face it: Americans are the most socially provincial on our planet; lacking in worldly sophistication, self-centered in their whiteness if indeed they happen to be white. This blanket statement pertains only to, say, 95% of our white population, so take heart, Mr. Ramaswamy: be patient and tolerant, for we are so underexposed to our fellow humans who display visual & social characteristics different from their own. Educating them is hard work. They make poor students because of their preconceptions which are invalid outside our borders.
Ramaswamy's jab at Nikki Haley is simple and obvious to anyone of color: He is trying to "out" her for passing for white, or for trying to. Or is this just his way of complaining to her detriment that having a complexion a shade or two richer than hers has disadvantaged him because, as perceived by whites, who, in America, are the most color-conscious population on Earth, he gets challenged more often than she does?
Haley IS a phenomenon in that sense, having foound acceptance in a moderately prejudiced part of our United States (the border South), inasmuch as from innocent childhood, she grew up among white kids. (Kids accept all other kids on he basis of likeability and collaborativeness; they would happily integrate if their parents would let them, but instead, kids are TAUGHT sin color prejudice, followed by appearance & manner of speech aside from complexion.)
In American society, smooth, straight (or moderately curly) hair is favored over tightly-curled (kinky?) hair. Which is preoccupation with FORM, inasmuch as ALL hair is made of the same basic material: Keratin, the same substance that toenails and fingernails are made of. The shape of the hairshaft derives from the shape of its follicle (the root bulb of the hairshaft) just under the scalp: If the follicle is straighnt and situated perpendicular to the plane of the scalp, the hairshaft will grow out straight. If the follicle is slightly curved, the hairshaft will emerge curly. If the hairshaft is very curved, the hairshaft will emerge supercurly, often classified as "kinky." But place a "kinky" hairshaft in a saucer of water and watch it form a circle consistent with the tightness of its curve or curl.
Chemically speaking, there is no difference between a straght hairshaft and a curly hairshaft. It's all genetically decided and passed down as one of many traits, like freckles or eye color. But back to Ramaswamy vs. Haley. One would need to Google to learn whether Haley is an East Indian family name, or an adopted Western name as a tactic to "fit in." Or, maybe her father is white, and named Haley. ) Given her appearance, the second guess is shaky on its face, given her rich complexion, which nevertheless is lighter than that of many East Indians, whose complexions range from almost white in the Anglo sense, to quite dark, darker even that Mahatma Ghandi's.
It would be easy to assume Ramaswamy's sensitivity in this matter derives from their disparate experiences gaining acceptance from Anglos. Advantage: Haley, whose upbringing even endowed her with Anglo social and socializing habits, unspoken nuances of gesture, behavior, pronunciation, etc. that silently signal membership in a social group.
Example (without straying too far afield on this point): Though clearly Negroid in appearance, Sidney Poitier was born and reared in The Bahamas, so spoke in a manner that differentiated him from American-reared blacks. This worked in his favor in our prejudiced society, setting him apart for further social consideration. He had no "South in his mouth." That, plus a winning, outgoing personality and genuine acting ability worked to his advantage. He also studied our speech patterns by listening to "American" as spoken on the radio, mimicking it, to fit in, like any white British actor in a film role cast AS an American.
The same with Niki Haley. Her social behaviors, manner of speech, education and acquaintances from childhood all worked in her favor to gain acceptance by middle-south whites who normally snub people of color, especially if they come without references from whites, or confreres (fellow credentialed achievers of color). Visitors from Europe, Africa or elsewhere overseas are flummoxed by all these subtle complications of social life in America, a carryover from our history of slavery that has caused adoption of a crazy quilt of behaviors based on appearances that even vary from place to place in the South, ground zero for appearance prejudices. Face it: Americans are the most socially provincial on our planet; lacking in worldly sophistication, self-centered in their whiteness if indeed they happen to be white. This blanket statement pertains only to, say, 95% of our white population, so take heart, Mr. Ramaswamy: be patient and tolerant, for we are so underexposed to our fellow humans who display visual & social characteristics different from their own. Educating them is hard work. They make poor students because of their preconceptions which are invalid outside our borders.
Re Vivek vs Nikki- For what it is worth Haley is her married name. I don't see using it as a cover-up. I know lots of women who didn't keep their birth names upon marriage because they were happy about the new name for all kinds of reasons!