Open mike 22/07/2024

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, July 22nd, 2024 - 110 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:


Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

110 comments on “Open mike 22/07/2024 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. SPC 1
    22 July 2024 at 6:33 am

    *Some one is not going to the Convention as a candidate for the nomination.

    They will remain POTUS until January 2025.

    He was hoping for a Convention bounce, but it was going to be a divided convention.

    If he won the nomination and remained behind in the polls, to pull out then would have created the problem of how and when to determine a new nominee for the party (then there would be the party awareness of the other matter of managing a late change to the campaign – ads, fun-raising etc).

    *Heard it on the RNZ news, apparently official – if true, links everywhere. Biden posted it on X, just to say hello to Musk (and annoy those liberals who wanted him to stand down).

  2. Maurice 2
    22 July 2024 at 7:22 am

    "As endorsed by Joe Biden" is going to be a bit of an Albatross to carry into the election ….

    • SPC 2.1
      22 July 2024 at 7:55 am

      All any opponent to Trump has to do is quote what those of the GOP on Capitol Hill, those who served in government under Trump and his own choice as running mate have said about him.

  3. SPC 3
    22 July 2024 at 7:27 am

    RNZ

    Biden has indicated personal support for Harris, but is not handing over his delegates (he is not able to) – this means an Open Convention.

    Mike Johnson BOTH claims Biden is unfit to continue in office AND any other nominee apart from Biden is illegal. Which sounds like a call for Harris to be POTUS and then hold an uncontested election.

    Donald Trump chooses to show his lack of class and repeat his past attacks, essentially boasting of a capacity to destroy anyone who stands up to him by being mean. The strongman bully to be feared and obeyed. Possibly the worst ever American – they pray kingdom come send us a tyrant and God gave them Trump, because they did not love freedom for other Americans, thus they did not respect the constitutional republic their founding fathers created (unless they see it as a return to making slaves of the working class and denying choice to women).

  4. Caitlin Spice 4
    22 July 2024 at 7:48 am

    British women break men’s Pacific rowing record!
    Another big win for women's sports – showing once again women dominate endurance events.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/07/19/british-women-break-mens-pacific-rowing-record/

    • Ad 4.1
      22 July 2024 at 8:31 am

      Any time women want to get paid for three sets of tennis…

      https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36802328/

      • Karolyn_IS 4.1.1
        22 July 2024 at 9:08 am

        Maybe women should play best of 5 sets. Women's muscular endurance is known to be greater than men's. Men are stronger and faster than women – more explosive speeds. And that includes most competitive sports. This means, as said in the article I linked to,

        "According to a 2010 study published in Exercise and Sports Science Reviews, women generally take longer to fatigue. The differences aren't monumental, but they may explain why men and women gravitate towards different types of exercise."

        Elite women's sports teams have only recently become more aware of how the differences between male and female physiology require some different training techniques than men, and some slightly different styles of sports wear: eg shoes.

        There are some sports that women can compete on an equal footing with men, and that includes equestrianism. And in those ultra long endurance races, such as the 2,800-mile race and others that some of the women in the article have won, women can be competitive with men – hence no need of separate male and female divisions.

        • Caitlin Spice 4.1.1.1
          22 July 2024 at 9:20 am

          One of the fascinating things about transitioning has been the extreme body changes I've undergone. My endurance has absolutely increased, while my general strength has massively decreased. I've also (as you pointed out) had to change my training techniques and my equipment. The Q angle of my knees has increased and my pronation is worse, for example, and I need better back support because obviously breasts are heavy and change load on the spine. Overall body fat distribution has changed wildly as well, and now my center of gravity is much MUCH lower than it was before.

          Aren't bodies wonderful?

          • Anker 4.1.1.1.1
            22 July 2024 at 8:44 pm

            Bodies are effected by hormones. That's why there are significant changes for boys and girls going through puberty.

            However what makes a man male and a woman female is thier capacity to produce either small or large gametes at some point in their life. Men produce small gametes (sperm) and women produce large gametes (ova).

            This is what makes someone male or female.

            • Caitlin Spice 4.1.1.1.1.1
              22 July 2024 at 8:55 pm

              I don’t agree; but out of curiosity, which gametes do I produce? I must either produce large or small, correct?

              • weka …
                22 July 2024 at 9:26 pm

                No, that’s not correct. What defines biological sex in humans is that humans reproduce via two distinct sexes, female/ova, male/sperm. This is true irrespective of whether any individual can produce egg or sperm at any given time. Post menopausal women are still female, not because they can produce eggs, but because they have the body that developed from conception in the form of egg producers (and you can’t be post menopausal without that).

                To pre-empt someone making bringing in intersex, people with differences of sexual development still have bodies that sit within that definition, they just developed differently. There is no third sex.

                • Caitlin Spice …
                  22 July 2024 at 9:34 pm

                  Oh, you’re replying to me today are you?

                  I don’t agree that gametes is the only consideration for sex. Other than gametes, humans have primary and secondary sex characteristics, as well as hormonal profiles. My body is phenotypically female and I don’t produce gametes. For all useful, real world purposes (as well as legally), I’m female.

                  Also menopause is a hormone profile change. Until I had my meds adjusted a while back, my doctor and endo stated I was perimenopausal – and if I were to stop HRT I would have a fairly full gamut of menopause symptoms, other than spotting/irregular bleeding.

                  • Psycho Milt …
                    23 July 2024 at 5:50 pm

                    You can choose not to agree that gravity's keeping you from being flung off into space as well, if you like, but you'll remain here on the planet nevertheless.

                    • Caitlin Spice …
                      23 July 2024 at 6:24 pm

                      Unless you reach escape velocity, then you will indeed ‘fly off’ – which humans have achieved. There’s often an obvious solution to many problems, if you just apply your mind, Psycho.

                    • Psycho Milt …
                      23 July 2024 at 6:46 pm

                      Well, good luck with that. In the meantime, not agreeing with gravity doesn't make you any lighter.

                    • Caitlin Spice []
                      23 July 2024 at 6:56 pm

                      You seem to be operating under the odd assumption that I want to beat gravity, which I don’t. As I said, if you apply yourself to a problem you can solve it.

                      With time, effort and science I’ve changed my body massively, as detailed in the earlier post in this thread. I don’t follow whatever your definition of sex is, I think it’s more complex that you do.

                      Just as ‘gravity’ is more complex than just stopping things ‘flying off’ 🙂

                • David …
                  23 July 2024 at 7:50 pm

                  Every cell in the human body is either male or female, this happens at conception. No amount of hormones, surgery, or ideology will change this.

                  • Caitlin Spice …
                    23 July 2024 at 8:08 pm

                    Sorry to point out your ignorance, but red blood cells and platelets don’t contain DNA and blood is about 8% of your body weight.

                    Some other cells don’t either, corneal cells, hair, nails and the outermost skin cells.

                    Not that it matters. You can’t see the chromosomes inside the other people you meet, so they have no practical meaning in day-to-day interactions.

                  • weka …
                    23 July 2024 at 8:09 pm

                    Never really understood that every cell thing. Can you explain it in simple terms?

                    • David …
                      23 July 2024 at 10:13 pm

                      Hey Weka, our body produces all our cells, from brain cells, muscles, organs etc. A person is either male or female. I’m male, any human cell produced by me will intrinsically be male, my cells are part of my body.

                      Humans also contain non human cells, think bacteria etc. As these cells are not produced by the human body they are not human, therefore cannot be either male or female.

                      A persons sex can be determined by any human cell from their body, but not from a nonhuman cell in their body.

                    • Caitlin Spice []
                      24 July 2024 at 7:38 am

                      Hi David, that’s provably not true, as I outlined in another reply to you.

                    • David []
                      24 July 2024 at 10:17 am

                      Hey Caitlin, I’m an engineer, not a scientist. I’ve worked for some very high tech manufacturing companies overseas. One particular company designed and manufactured high tech leading edge equipment for scientific research and medical research. This is leading edge stuff, I personally do not understand the science, I don’t need to, my specialty was the manufacture of scientific equipment. However in saying that, I worked with scientists who know about this. They can now determine the sex of the person that any human cell has come from. I’m in no position to disagree with what I’ve learned from these guys. We may have to agree to disagree

                    • Caitlin Spice []
                      24 July 2024 at 10:45 am

                      David, a red blood cell is essentially a bag of haemoglobin with no nucleus. It is impossible to sex a red blood cell.

                      Either you heard wrong, misinterpreted their statements, or they were wrong. There is literally no sexed material in a red blood cell.

                      Feel free to look it up. Or I can provide you links if your unable to.

                    • David []
                      24 July 2024 at 12:32 pm

                      Thanks for the offer Caitlin, I’ll go with the experts that I have worked with.
                      As much as I love NZ I doubt that we have the scientists here who have the knowledge these guys have.

                      I’m just an engineer, I specialised in manufacturing stuff, and I was just a small cog in the business. But one thing that I do is to understand the concept behind the equipment we manufactured.

                      My understanding, which btw was confirmed by the scientists, was that it is possible to determine the sex of the person, from any human cell from any given persons body.

                      What was not possible say 5, 10, 15 years ago is now becoming possible, or will be in the future.

                      These guys are scientists, involved in research, they are after knowledge and understanding. Political ideology doesn’t have any place in their world, unfortunately outside of the science, political ideology stands to apply to how we view things like gender and sex. So I guess words and the meaning change to reflect the current political ideologies

                    • weka []
                      24 July 2024 at 12:36 pm

                      do you have contact with them? I’d be interested to know if they consider some blood cells to be the exception? I did a quick google and there is the idea that mature red blood cells can’t identify sex.

                      However, the exceptions don’t disprove the rule. Nearly all human cells can be used to determine sex nearly all of the time. And that sex cannot be changed.

                    • Caitlin Spice []
                      24 July 2024 at 1:11 pm

                      Weka, the science is clearly defined. A mature red blood cell ejects the nucleus on maturity so it can maximise the haemoglobin load. There are no sex chromosomes.

                      This isn’t up for debate, it’s a medical fact.

                    • David []
                      24 July 2024 at 10:22 pm

                      Hi Weka, I’m working in a completely different field these days, as well as living back in NZ.
                      I think people may be looking at this the wrong way. Think about DNA evidence, the technology has advanced significantly. We will be able to identify any individual from human cells or sub cellular material, the sex of the individual is just one bit of information that will be extracted from the sample.

                      [Please fix the typo in your email address in your next comment, thanks – Incognito]

                    • Incognito []
                      24 July 2024 at 10:37 pm

                      Mod note

                    • Incognito []
                      24 July 2024 at 10:42 pm

                      At present, one needs a tissue sample that contains nuclear DNA to determine the sex.

                      So far, you’ve only alluded to anecdotal evidence but nothing substantial, which means you keep wasting our time on this.

                    • Caitlin Spice []
                      24 July 2024 at 1:13 pm

                      Honestly this just sounds like hogwash to me. The science of blood is one of the most studied fields in medicine. It’s literally our lifeblood.

                      You’re committing the logical fallacy of ‘appeal to authority’ when you cannot even prove this authority exists.

                      Here, read up on the subject:

                      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_blood_cell

              • Anker …
                22 July 2024 at 9:32 pm

                well correct me if I am wrong, but this is a first for the Standard where a commenter posts about their breast and asks another commentator to speculate on whether they produce ova or sperm. I have no idea whether you produce ova or sperm and humbly ask that you don't disclose this. A little too much information. But given you seem to want to engage people in talking about your anatomy, I would wager that maybe your a bit of an exhibitionist. But hey what would I know. I wouldn't know you from a bar of soap

        • Visubversa 4.1.1.2
          22 July 2024 at 12:32 pm

          Women spent their early days walking across the plains with their households on their backs, and a baby on their front. Even our female primate ancestors would have literally carried a child or two for most of their adult life. Women are built for endurance, men more for the explosive power needed for hunting and fighting.

          The hunter/gatherer groups still in existence show that about 80% of the food of the group is brought in by the gathering and small animal trapping of the women and children. The hunters are successful only 1 day in 4.

          • weka 4.1.1.2.1
            22 July 2024 at 2:01 pm

            Labour and childbirth are also endurance events

          • Karolyn_IS 4.1.1.2.2
            22 July 2024 at 4:10 pm

            Yes. it's an evolutionary thing that's developed over millions of years. There's research showing that in the Neolithic, Bronze, and Iron Ages in central Europe, women had much stronger upper body strength than elite women rowers today. The research involved examining bones.

            Faster speed and superior strength of males has to do with the different muscular-skeletal structures of males & females. Women have wider hips to enable child birth – as human brains got bigger women's pelvis's had to progressively widen.

            This means that the Q angel (at the hip & thigh), is different for males and females, enabling males to run faster. The muscular differences enable more flexibility in women (to allow for the expansion of the belly in pregnancy). This means females can be far more flexible than males around the hip area, and along with the Q angel, means males and females walk, dance and run slightly differently. Men's bones tend to be much stronger than women's.

            The increased muscle fibre flexibility in females, means they are more prone to ACL injuries and concussion than sportsmen – hence the absolute need to separate male and female divisions for contact and collision sports like rugby. When women's heads' are impacted, the flexible muscle attachments at the top of the spine result in women's brains bouncing around in their skulls more than men's.

    • Anker 4.2
      22 July 2024 at 8:40 pm

      https://www.rnz.co.nz/programmes/the-detail/story/2018757712/the-science-of-transgender-women-in-sport

      I think it would be a good idea to read this article by Dr Ross Tucker about the significant advantage men have over women in sports. The advantage is significant even when men take testostorone lowering drugs. The science is in Caitlin

      • Caitlin Spice 4.2.1
        22 July 2024 at 8:51 pm

        I’m sorry, but you don’t know what you’re talking about; I don’t take testosterone lowering drugs.

        You don’t appear to have good knowledge about medical transition, and certainly none about mine.

        • Anker 4.2.1.1
          23 July 2024 at 6:35 pm

          I will just leave it to Dr Ross Tucker to do the talking about ensuring womens sports remain for women only.

          • Caitlin Spice 4.2.1.1.1
            23 July 2024 at 6:43 pm

            Well fortunately he’s not in change of those decisions and neither are you 🙂

            I note that his research doesn’t cover someone who has zero testosterone for 15 years and who has been on high dose estrogen for longer. There’s clearly a huge gap in his ‘research’ there.

            • That_guy 4.2.1.1.1.1
              24 July 2024 at 8:29 am

              Thanks for your engagement, but it's been quite clear for some time that someone who has gone through male puberty retains a significant advantage and that no amount of hormone treatment removes that advantage.

              This is not a trivial issue. If men are allowed to compete as women in, for example, MMA, there will be deaths. There have already been two fractured skulls in a fight with a woman vs. a man who thinks he's a women (this person also expressed his desire to "***k up some TERFS on x/twitter).

              Everyone's entitled to their POV but the data is clear here.

              • Caitlin Spice …
                24 July 2024 at 9:16 am

                Hi That_guy,

                That's a very poor example, as women's MMA frequently has awful injuries due to the nature of the sport – it's a common occurrence due to the brutality of the fighting. You're talking about Fallon Fox (someone I know, oddly enough) and she won several fights, then lost a fight to a cis woman.

                Using a sport where women kick and punch each other in the head with the intent to knock each other out is really a very poor example of "Women will get greviously injured" and pretty disingenuous, in my opinion.

                • weka …
                  24 July 2024 at 10:05 am

                  some of us like to take male violence against women seriously.

                  The core of the issue that TG raises is that men, as a class, retain the advantage of male puberty, irrespective of what they do with their bodies after puberty. Lots of research and analysis on this in addition to Tucker. That means that generally adult men are faster, stronger, have longer reach, longer limbs and so on. Individual women sometimes beating individual men in a particular event doesn't make that not true. We have women's sport based on sex class not individual performance/events.

                  For women, the general sports issues in competing against males are around fairness, injury risk, safety and dignity. All of that is well documented, but in the end in it comes down to women saying no and who respects that or not.

                  As we are now seeing the general public support sports women and GCFs on this. But behind that is the fact that women said no, for very good reasons, and a bunch of people in power (sporting bodies) and a bunch of liberals ignored women, actively suppressed our voices and tied up our time/energy for a long time fighting to get women's issues taken seriously. It's still a hard fight and there is nothing progressive about women having been forced into this position.

                  • Karolyn_IS …
                    24 July 2024 at 10:29 am

                    Indeed. All that. And it's about (natal) females as a class.

                    There are teenage boys who are way better at rugby than some 30 year old men. Some young men get into the All Blacks in their late teens. That's not an argument for 30 year old men playing in the NZ under 21years rugby team, or in age grade rugby. It's never the case that people in a higher category can self-ID into the lower category for a lot of similar reasons that you mention, weka.

                    Women have struggles a long time to get female sports taken seriously (see author Rachel Hewitt's recent X thread). It's interesting that now that women's sports have gained some respect and visibility, not to mention prize money, some males want to self-ID into women's sports.

                    • Caitlin Spice …
                      24 July 2024 at 11:00 am

                      t's interesting that now that women's sports have gained some respect and visibility, not to mention prize money, some males want to self-ID into women's sports.

                      Hardly. Renée Richards competed in women's tennis in the 70s, and not for 'prize money'.

                      This is a fundamental misunderstanding of what trans women want. We just want to be able to live as women in all aspects of our lives. Ascribing motivations to our transitions like "You want prize money" is gross and frankly very prejudiced.

                      I competed in women's indoor netball. I did it because I enjoy the sport, the exercise, the camaraderie and the feeling of belonging. I wasn't there to 'win prize money' or even win at all. I was there to play the game and have fun – with my peers.

                  • Caitlin Spice …
                    24 July 2024 at 10:40 am

                    You're issue here is that you're conflating 'men' and 'male' with 'trans women'. They are not the same category, especially not in sporting events where we are required to meet strict criteria for eligibility (it varies somewhat from sport to sport).

                    Your 'violence against women' is an emotive misnomer. MMA is probably the most violent sport on the planet; they compete voluntarily in this violence and know the risks that come with MMA flighting. It's brutal, often horrific and leads to extremely bad injuries.

                    That's you're trying to infantilise these brutal, powerful fighters is quite weird and I'm pretty sure none of them would like you for it, or want you doing it. They are incredible women and can advocate for themselves, and chose who they fight.

                    And one of them beat Fallon Fox. Despite her supposed 'advantage'.

                    • weka …
                      24 July 2024 at 11:02 am

                      You're issue here is that you're conflating 'men' and 'male' with 'trans women'.

                      No, I'm not. All the way through I am talking about humans who are biologically male (whatever their body modification).

                      They are not the same category, especially not in sporting events where we are required to meet strict criteria for eligibility (it varies somewhat from sport to sport).

                      As I pointed out, women (adult human females) have been saying for a long time that males shouldn't be in women's sports ie they should be female only, and that some people in position of power eg sporting bodies, ignored this. We already know that the criteria of some sports allows males in women's sports, that's the problem. Fortunately that is now being reversed.

                      You appear to be saying that males who self ID as women and go through some body modification should be counted as female and thus allowed in women's sports. Women are saying no.

                      Your 'violence against women' is an emotive misnomer. MMA is probably the most violent sport on the planet; they compete voluntarily in this violence and know the risks that come with MMA flighting. It's brutal, often horrific and leads to extremely bad injuries.

                      You appear to be missing the point. Men as a class have a physical advantage over women as a class. It's what underpins rape and domestic violence. In any situation you can have a woman stronger than a man for instance. But that doesn't apply at the level of class.

                      That means that men doing MMA will always, as a class, have an advantage over women doing MMA. And because it is a violent sport, that is more dangerous than women fighting women.

                      Further, in this example given above, the male MMA fighter appears to like harming women. So in addition to the simple biological issues, there are misogyny issues. This plays out across gender/sex politics generally and I have zero doubt that some males have beating women as a motivator.

                    • Caitlin Spice []
                      24 July 2024 at 11:16 am

                      No, I'm not. All the way through I am talking about humans who are biologically male (whatever their body modification).

                      That’s precisely what I’m saying. You’re conflating cis men with trans women even though they are different categories.

                      What would happen if I did MMA against a cis man? I’m a post-op trans woman who medically transitioned almost 20 years ago. Do you truly believe that with equal training I would have a chance of equal footing?

                    • weka []
                      24 July 2024 at 11:44 am

                      That’s precisely what I’m saying. You’re conflating cis men with trans women even though they are different categories.

                      It’s not conflation. Men and TW are the same sex class. Society is willing to treat transitioned TW to some degree as women, but there are limits and many of those limits are around the conflict with women’s sex based rights.

                      What would happen if I did MMA against a cis man? I’m a post-op trans woman who medically transitioned almost 20 years ago. Do you truly believe that with equal training I would have a chance of equal footing?

                      Probably not, but that is a problem for TW to solve, just not at the expense of women. If someone’s gender dysphoria is to the extent that they need to use body modification, that’s no different than other kinds of disability. I can’t play sport due to disability, so I empathise. But it’s really not women’s problem to solve for this particular issue for TW.

                      I will also note that while you seem to understand perfectly well the disparity between medically transitioned TW and other males, you seem to ignore the disparity between TW and women.

                    • Caitlin Spice []
                      24 July 2024 at 11:54 am

                      However trans women and cis men are not the same sex class. I am never treated as a member of the ‘male sex class’ in my day-to-day life, so I don’t know where you’re getting that idea from. In my direct experience it is simply not true.

                      It’s possible you believe that I’m treated as a member of the ‘male sex class’ but I am not. If that’s true, your beliefs clash with the reality of the situation, sorry!

                      Lastly please don’t compare my being transgender with disability. That’s discriminatory and I don’t appreciate it.

                      As I said, women have welcomed me everywhere; I don’t have a problem that needs solving. It seems like you’re the one who wants things to change? I’m pretty happy with how things are, generally speaking.

                      But we’re not likely to meet on the netball court, are we? 🙂

                    • weka []
                      24 July 2024 at 12:34 pm

                      However trans women and cis men are not the same sex class

                      Yes, they are. Literally, biologically male in both cases. You appear to be talking about social expression, which is a different think.

                      Myself I think there is a strong case for TW to be treated differently from other males in some social and political contexts. Just not at the expense of women. I’m in favour of the idea of a third category of social grouping. But that’s different from biological sex, and women in particular have a strong interest in biological sex class and we have a right to our own politics around that.

                      Lastly please don’t compare my being transgender with disability. That’s discriminatory and I don’t appreciate it.

                      I didn’t compare being trans with disability. I consider transness to be a normal variation of human expression of gender non-conformity.

                      What I said was that gender dysphoria that necessitates serious body modification is a disability and like other disabilities it places restrictions on people’s lives. Society can address that by reducing barriers, and I’m a fan of social theories of disability (so I don’t consider disability to be a negative by comparison), but there are limits on this too. The one in question here is the clash with women’s rights.

                      As I said, women have welcomed me everywhere; I don’t have a problem that needs solving. It seems like you’re the one who wants things to change? I’m pretty happy with how things are, generally speaking.

                      In nearly all my comments I haven’t been talking about you. I’ve been talking about women’s sex based rights and gender identity ideology. Yes, women want things to change, including myself, across many areas of society and politics. We have our own politics.

                    • Caitlin Spice []
                      24 July 2024 at 12:46 pm

                      I’m sorry, but you’re wrong again. My biology isn’t male and hasn’t been for two decades. I (probably) have XY chromosomes but my biological expression has been female since I started HRT. In all primary and secondary sex expressions I’m female, albeit an infertile one.

                      What I said was that gender dysphoria that necessitates serious body modification is a disability and like other disabilities

                      Ah, so you’re saying that I **am** disabled then?

                      Wow.

                    • weka []
                      24 July 2024 at 12:52 pm

                      no Caitlin, I’m not actually talking about you. I’m talking about the politics of sex and gender.

                      If you don’t consider severe gender dysphoria a disability, I suggest you take it up with the psychiatric sector, health systems in many countries (esp the UK given GIDS), and detrans people who ended up with physical disabilities because their GD was misdiagnosed/mistreated.

                    • Caitlin Spice []
                      24 July 2024 at 12:57 pm

                      But you are talking about me. I’m a trans woman. I’m the demographic we are discussing here. I’m a real, actual person, not a vague academic abstraction.

                      You STATED categorically that I am disabled because I’ve undergone the recommended treatment for Gender Dysphoria.
                      I am not disabled. Frankly, it’s godawful that you’re saying that I am.

                      I am NOT disabled, ‘Weka’.

                      And kindly stop abbreviating my people just to ‘TW’. We are trans women, or transgender women.

                    • Caitlin Spice []
                      24 July 2024 at 11:24 am

                      Oh and only some women are saying ‘no’. Cis women have almost universally welcomed me into every women’s space or event or gathering I’ve been to

                      As proven my KJK ‘Posie Parker’s miserable poling in the UK and the miserable poling of the Women’s Party in NZ, your views are an extreme minority.

                      The majority of women said ‘yes’.

                    • weka []
                      24 July 2024 at 12:04 pm

                      yougov polling in the UK shows that most people support human rights for TW, but many draw a line at where it impacts on women eg toilets once the question includes TS who haven’t had gender reassignment surgery. Details and links here,

                      https://thestandard.org.nz/bene-bashing-6-0/#comment-1991276

                      Later polling supports that but there also seems to be increasing backlash against trans people, my impression is that the general support is waning. Probably because of really stupid policy like letting serial rapist TW Isla Bryson self ID into a women’s prison.

                      Gender activists and many liberals ran No Debate hard, so the public GC narratives are often now dominated by the right instead of progressive voices.

                      Dismissing Kellie Jay Keen as an extreme minority is dangerous. She is a RW populist with a very large following and is already pulling many women rightwards, not just on sex/gender issues. The point of her party in the UK was to put her version of GC issues in the public eye. Everytime they stood up at a public meeting and asked ‘what is a woman?’ they taught more people to not be afraid to speak out or think like her. If the UK tips towards fascism, she’s going to do very well, and is intentionally or unintentionally involved in helping that happen. She is also conservative on a range of issues that impact particularly on women. Nobody serious about progressive politics should be disregarding her.

                      Jill Ovens of the NZ Women’s Rights Party is solid left wing. They’re just getting on with the longer term projects of rebuilding women’s sex based rights.

                      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jill_Ovens

                    • weka …
                      24 July 2024 at 11:03 am

                      That's you're trying to infantilise these brutal, powerful fighters is quite weird…

                      I didn't infantilise those women. Please don't make shit up about my politics or arguments. Either you patently don't understand the argument here, or you are misleading in your replies and avoiding the central point.

                      You've done this a number of times in the past week, so know that it's not tolerated here, and I in particular, as a feminist author, have almost no tolerance for people misrepresenting what I say. Anyone is free to ask for clarification, but you cannot take what I or other authors/mods say and change it to suit your own politics. We have enough work to do here without having to spent time pushing back on that kind of trolling.

                    • Caitlin Spice []
                      24 July 2024 at 11:13 am

                      Weka, you badgered me in another thread for ‘evidence’ that another mod then came and removed – all while refusing to provide evidence that I asked for in relation to a couple of discussions we had.

                      In short, you’re being incredibly inconsistent in your interpretation of the posting guidelines here and displaying, in my opinion, an implicit bias where I’m involved.

                      Also other people have also put words in my mouth and called me a misogynist and this was not considered an issue. Just as you implied I don’t take violence against women seriously. I am a woman who has been a victim of violence many times – I suspect more than anyone here.
                      Please be consistent.

                      Also I don’t mind if I’m gagged or blocked from posting; this place isn’t that important to me. I’d rather speak my mind fairly and equitably and be censored for it than worry about Weka’s interpretation of my posts.

                      [it’s up to you whether you comment here or not, and there are indeed plenty of places where saying what one wants takes precedent over robust debate, but this isn’t one of them. If you step over the bounds you will be moderated and the commenting ability may be removed. Just like anyone else.

                      Many people who get moderated and don’t like it, allege bias, but if you follow moderations you will see that I have often pulled people up on making shit up about an author’s views/politics. I don’t do it every single time because that would be tedious, but where it becomes a pattern, I will intervene.

                      I suspect the reason you don’t understand how things work here is because you’re not listening and accepting what is being said.

                      The issue around being called a misogynist was explained to you at the time by two different mods (who have very different politics on trans issues). You appear to either not have understood, or you are bringing it up here out of context as some general complaint about my moderation.

                      Thread starts here: https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-17-07-2024/#comment-2005049

                      Incognito had good reasons for removing your comment and they explained them at the time.

                      https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-17-07-2024/#comment-2005209

                      If you didn’t understand that mod note, you could have asked for clarification. Instead you carried on and now bring it up out of context as if it is some unfairness on you.

                      In my comment above, I’ve set a clear boundary and instead of learning from that you’ve come back to argue.

                      The biggest reason people get bans here is from arguing with mods and telling us what to do. Next biggest reason is people thinking the rules don’t apply to them. And we are always looking at patterns of behaviour. You’ve had three mods taking time to explain things to you, sometimes in detail. – weka]

                    • weka []
                      24 July 2024 at 11:35 am

                      mod note

              • Anker …
                24 July 2024 at 10:11 am

                100% That guy

  5. SPC 5
    22 July 2024 at 7:50 am

    Half of the primary care medical practices are not taking new patients. This has impact on job mobility and also the children of parents moving to new areas after being evicted from their rentals.

    This sector of health care is short hundreds of doctors with the government co-funding payment declining relative to practice costs for some time.

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/programmes/the-detail/story/2018947564/the-doctor-won-t-see-you-now

  6. Ad 6
    22 July 2024 at 8:33 am

    Well a black female US President will be some kind of miracle.

    Best of luck Kamala Harris.

    • Caitlin Spice 6.1
      22 July 2024 at 9:27 am

      I'd love to see it, but I'm not hopeful 🙁

      • Mountain Tui 6.1.1
        24 July 2024 at 11:38 am

        Hey catespice. I haven't been following your conversations but saw the latest and hope you're OK.

        • Caitlin Spice 6.1.1.1
          24 July 2024 at 11:47 am

          Hey Mountain Tui!

          I'm fine; just having discussions as normal? I do find it interesting when someone badgers me fore evidence (not you) and then refuses to provide it in turn – even when asked multiple times. That lack of consistent application of the 'policy' here is, shall we say, noteworthy.

          I'm seeing a fairly clear bias – and one that could easily be addressed.

          • Mountain Tui 6.1.1.1.1
            24 July 2024 at 12:06 pm

            I don't follow these conversations because I lack knowledge in this area, as well as any technical terms, but I appreciate you putting forth your views and helping others learn along the way. Just wanted to say hi.

          • Incognito 6.1.1.1.2
            24 July 2024 at 1:12 pm

            In my opinion, you are sealioning (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning) and bogging people down with your ‘close combat’ style of ‘debating’. In addition, as weka has mentioned in her Mod note this morning (https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-22-07-2024/#comment-2005755), you don’t like to listen to and accept things. In other words, you don’t acknowledge your own strong biases and display a surprising (!) lack of self-awareness and reflection on your own comments.

            • Caitlin Spice 6.1.1.1.2.1
              24 July 2024 at 1:20 pm

              I don't agree. I asked Weka to back up a very basic claim as part of a standard debate – this was after Weka had badgered me for 'evidence' that I didn't want to give, that a mod later deleted (I assume because it was wrong to ask it from me, as it had personal info).

              Feel free to point me to a debating guide of your choice, and I'll stick to it as much as possible. I note that other people are getting away with behaviours that I am not, so all I'm asking for is consistency in the moderation.

              It was mentioned that both mods share similar views on trans issues. Is this correct?

              • Caitlin Spice …
                24 July 2024 at 1:23 pm

                Correction, it was stated that the mods had very different views on trans politics. is this correct?

                • weka …
                  24 July 2024 at 1:38 pm
                  1. I said two mods who have very different views on trans issues both gave you guidance on moderation and the issue of calling people names without putting up a political argument. That was in reference to myself and Lprent, and I linked to that conversation in my mod note today here,

                    https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-22-07-2024/#comment-2005750

                  2. No author here is under any obligation to jump to the demands of a commenter.
                  3. the consistency you seem to be arguing for doesn't exist. We have a set of guidelines, in the form of the Policy, and in the form of the ongoing moderations. The only way to understand how things work here is to 1) read the Policy (you've already been directed to a it a few times) and 2) listen to what mods say to you and others about moderation.
                  4. Moderation is context specific. How we deal with someone's behaviour depends on their behaviour, not the behaviour of other people. We do in fact take notice of what commenters say about moderation, but if you argue with your own moderation and tell us what to do, we tend to look at the behaviour in the moment.
                  5. Most mods eventually just shorten moderation process when we reach the point of being sick of saying the same things over and over again. This is to stop our time being sucked up. In the end mods and authors are protected more than commenters.
                  6. That you consider moderation to be badgering is a big part of the problem here imo.
                  7. I will address the issue of the removed comment separately.
                  • Caitlin Spice …
                    24 July 2024 at 1:47 pm

                    Your badgering was the insistence I provide the exact date of the screenshot about Katrina Biggs. I had already provided you the information you needed, but you made it appear to be an imperative that I comply, as you are a mod.

                    The point is moot, as I no longer want to contribute to a forum where the (apparently) most active moderator considers me ‘disabled’ because I’m a transgender woman.

                    Have a great rest of your Wednesday.

                    • weka …
                      24 July 2024 at 2:09 pm

                      The point is moot, as I no longer want to contribute to a forum where the (apparently) most active moderator considers me ‘disabled’ because I’m a transgender woman.

                      and here you are making shit up again.

                      I didn't say you are disabled because you are a TW, I didn't say you are disabled at all. And, I already clarified that here, my actual beliefs about disability, and transness,

                      I didn’t compare being trans with disability. I consider transness to be a normal variation of human expression of gender non-conformity.

                      What I said was that gender dysphoria that necessitates serious body modification is a disability and like other disabilities it places restrictions on people’s lives. Society can address that by reducing barriers, and I’m a fan of social theories of disability (so I don’t consider disability to be a negative by comparison), but there are limits on this too. The one in question here is the clash with women’s rights.

                      …

                      In nearly all my comments I haven’t been talking about you. I’ve been talking about women’s sex based rights and gender identity ideology. Yes, women want things to change, including myself, across many areas of society and politics. We have our own politics.

                      https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-22-07-2024/#comment-2005769

                    • Caitlin Spice []
                      24 July 2024 at 2:20 pm

                      “I didn’t say you were disabled I just said all people just like you are disabled, which includes you, because you’re in that group”

                      🙄

                      And stop calling us ‘TW’ for fucksakes. We’re human beings, and the term is ‘trans women’ or ‘transgender women’. You wouldn’t call black women ‘BW’ so don’t do it to us.

                      Bye Weka.

                    • Incognito …
                      24 July 2024 at 2:22 pm

                      In only one week here on TS you burned & crashed yourself.

                      Now, there’s no point in responding to your comments https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-22-07-2024/#comment-2005782 and https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-22-07-2024/#comment-2005783.

    • SPC 6.2
      22 July 2024 at 9:41 am

      Like Barack Obama, she has the advantage of having no ancestry from black slaves.

      She has a lot in common with many students of colour at elite colleges, a first generation American born to parents who worked in such institutions.

      Her father came to the USA in 1963

      to earn a PhD from University of California, Berkeley which he completed in 1966.

      Throughout his career, Harris has worked on economic analysis and policy regarding the economy of Jamaica, his native country. He served there, at various times, as economic policy consultant to the Government of Jamaica and as economic adviser to successive prime ministers. On October 18, 2021, he was honored with appointment to the Order of Merit, Jamaica's National Honor award, "for his outstanding contribution to national development".

      (A dual national – Jamaican-American – of black African and Irish ancestry he was later professor emeritus at Stanford University)

      He met his future wife, Shyamala Gopalan through the civil rights movement.

      In 1958, aged 19, Shyamala unexpectedly applied for a masters program at the University of California, Berkeley; she eventually earned a PhD in nutrition and endocrinology at UC Berkeley in 1964.

      She served as a peer reviewer for the National Institutes of Health and as a site visit team member for the Federal Advisory Committee

      After the October 1964 birth of Kamala and January 1967 birth of Maya, Shyamala became a permanent resident of the United States in April 1968.

      Her story is about legal migration to America – and about those born there living in a meritocracy, where anyone can rise to the highest office. It is not about born into wealth and privilege.

      Her story is about an American melting pot, not critical race theory.

      • Psych Nurse 6.2.1
        22 July 2024 at 12:39 pm

        What makes you think Jamacians wern't slaves once.

        • SPC 6.2.1.1
          22 July 2024 at 12:44 pm

          I'll rephrase it, no ancestry from black American slaves – the issue being critical race theory in their (American) politics.

          • tWig 6.2.1.1.1
            22 July 2024 at 4:16 pm

            "Critical race theory is an academic concept that is more than 40 years old. The core idea is that race is a social construct, and that racism is not merely the product of individual bias or prejudice, but also something embedded in legal systems and policies."

            With Black Americans overrepresented in US prisons, more likely to get a jail term for the equivalent crime than white Americans, just for starters. Throw in State and Federal electoral boundaries gerrymandered to invalidate Black voters in their own cities. Critical race theory still sounds completely valid, even if you are middle-class and only half Black, like Harris.

            In fact, post the Civil War reconstruction period, electoral and legal rights gained for Black people were steadily eroded into the 20th century. Critical race has nothing to nothing to do with slavery.

  7. SPC 7
    22 July 2024 at 9:09 am

    One of the last Arab Jews looks at the legacy of the “colonialist Zionist” settlement project.

    • bwaghorn 9.1
      22 July 2024 at 4:36 pm

      I wonder if willis can manage to get a couple of 2nd hand carrollas by then?

  10. tWig 10
    22 July 2024 at 4:33 pm

    The UK anti-protest legislation introduced under Rishi Sunak was drafted by oil-funded think tank.

    Very similar to much of the recently-introduced legislation here. I bet you it wasn't lovingly handcrafted by National Policy wonks, but rather came almost fully-written from their funders.

  11. SPC 11
    22 July 2024 at 5:01 pm

    The government has sacked the board of Health New Zealand, because it would have been in deficit by over $1B next year.

    A person they appointed to the board recently is now sole Commissar.

    https://www.1news.co.nz/2024/07/22/turnaround-job-health-nz-board-sacked-commissioner-appointed/

    • tc 11.1
      22 July 2024 at 5:08 pm

      A board than included amy adams where the chair now becomes sole commissioner.

      Lipstick on the pig from minister cigareti IMO

      • Barfly 11.1.1
        22 July 2024 at 6:30 pm

        From Google

        "Simply put, medical inflation is the rising cost of medical care. In New Zealand, in recent times, this has been in the region of around 9 – 11% each year. That means the rate is significantly higher than the country's inflation rate."

        The Coalition of Clowns seem to be challenged in understanding that medical inflation runs far higher than the standard variety but will attempt a King Canute type solution with additional (human) sacrifices.

        • Anker 11.1.1.1
          22 July 2024 at 8:47 pm

          However there has been an increase of staff from health boards to New Zealand health of 2500+. And there are apparently 14 levels of management at NZ Health between the CEO and clinicians.

          I guess the proof of the pudding will be in the eating. How will NZ Health and the front line health service be looking in 12 months, 18 months? Watch this space.

          • aj 11.1.1.1.1
            22 July 2024 at 9:08 pm

            And there are apparently 14 levels of management at NZ Health between the CEO and clinicians.

            Can you cite a link to this, other than the Luxon/Reti press conference?

            We know Luxon lies is prone to gross exaggeration

            • Anker 11.1.1.1.1.1
              22 July 2024 at 9:44 pm

              No link. I will wait to see what happens with health. There certainly have been a number of articles in the msm lately with health workers stating that vacancies are being filled and NZ Health disputing that, so I don't think things have been going well.

              I will wait to see what happens to the Health system over the next couple of years or so. I am looking for concrete improvements. I am not out to prove anything here. I was always against the health restructure as I think the. health dollar really counts at the coal face. I remember discussing this quite a lot of the Standard. I know of Lester Levy and think he is pretty competent. I hope for all NZders sakes things improve. Have had a lot of people needing hospital care around me of late. What they all say is a hell of a wait to be seen, but the health professionals are amazing. This is what I have always thought.

              BTW I am really pleased with Seymour and the restructuring of Pharmac, his direction to work with health advocacy groups and the 54 new drugs they are funding. I will also keep an open mind about how the re set of Pharmac goes. Patient advocacy groups are pleased about it. If need be I can provide a link for that.

            • Mountain Tui 11.1.1.1.1.2
              24 July 2024 at 2:50 pm

              I asked Anker for evidence on this and he/she ran away but I see it has not stopped them from continuing to spread this lie on these boards.

              Anker again after being asked for evidence and having none – the same as Reti.

              Anker says 23 July 2024 at 6:38 pm

              Actually we are employing 2500 more bureacrats since the re-structure than under the DHBs. What a waste of money

        • Anker 11.1.1.2
          23 July 2024 at 6:38 pm

          Actually we are employing 2500 more bureacrats since the re-structure than under the DHBs. What a waste of money

          • Mountain Tui 11.1.1.2.1
            24 July 2024 at 2:51 pm

            Repeating a lie over and over again is poor practice, especially when multiple people have asked for evidence of your statements, and each time you have merely run away.

            Do you have any evidence for this statement? Or do you just like spreading it?

          • weka 11.1.1.2.2
            24 July 2024 at 5:57 pm

            I agree with MT on this. If you want to keep repeating this assertion, please provide some evidence.

          • weka 11.1.1.2.3
            24 July 2024 at 6:31 pm

            popping you in premod, so I can catch up with this next time you are on site.

            • Anker 11.1.1.2.3.1
              24 July 2024 at 10:54 pm

              Iam back. Will find a link.

              Are you both saying that it is incorrect there has been an increase of 2500 bureacrats since the DHBs were folded?

              • weka …
                25 July 2024 at 10:17 am

                I had a quick google yesterday and couldn’t find anything, so am curious what your source is.

                • Anker …
                  25 July 2024 at 4:16 pm

                  My source is what Luxon, Reti and I think Levy said. That is probably not an acceptable source on this site. I have had a look and can't find it elsewhere.

                  It does make sense though, given the Labour Govt increased the bureacracy by one third over their time in office. I have never seen this figure refruted.

                  You may well be able to excuse me. Having worked in front line services in the health services in the 1990s I have very little time for health bureaucrats. We saw very little of what they did aiding us in our work and when they turned up with clip boards, we had very little time for them, especially as we knew they will be earning far more money than we did, doing what we thought of as "the real work". There is no health system without health professionals.

                  I also would highlight Mike Kings time when he was invited to attend the Ministry of Health meetings re developing a workforce for people with mild to moderate mental health problems. He resigned in disgust and then went off and set up Gum Boot Friday, which has been enormously successful. Also I would cite from the Ministry of Health (I know its not Health NZ) and their review of Puberty Blockers. This review has taken well over a year, with many extensions. There is no way this review should have taken this long. As Emeritous Professor, Charlotte Paul said, after the Cass report came out, there was no need for such a review. The Cass Review gave us the information we need.

                  • weka …
                    25 July 2024 at 5:09 pm

                    My source is what Luxon, Reti and I think Levy said. That is probably not an acceptable source on this site. I have had a look and can’t find it elsewhere.

                    The problem isn’t who you are referencing, it’s that you’ve not provided a link. You know better than this Anker. Please provide a link now so we can see what you are talking about.

    • Graeme 11.2
      22 July 2024 at 9:09 pm

      Not really sacked, most of them packed it in,

      https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/acting-pm-hints-at-imminent-change-to-health-nz-board-after-just-two-of-seven-members-remain/INXZTE2WAJGYFJZYHJQORJGQQU/

      Former National minister Amy Adams left the board, noting how she was unable to achieve the change she wanted

      The only one who was "sacked" was Roger Jarrold.

      More like they had to diss-establish the board because they couldn't find any replacements willing to have 'trashed the Health system' on their CV

  12. SPC 12
    22 July 2024 at 5:26 pm

    The C of C is facing a potential revolt over its planned replacement of the Te Pūkenga mega-institute – with many industries happy with the current training set-up.

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/522801/workplace-training-shake-up-employers-could-go-elsewhere-to-train-staff

  13. lprent 13
    23 July 2024 at 5:16 pm

    Umm there look like having been some weird problem on this server / site while I was away.

    Definitely something wrong on the comment editor.

    • weka 13.1
      23 July 2024 at 5:27 pm

      interesting colours

      • lprent 13.1.1
        23 July 2024 at 8:14 pm

        Yes indeed. I'd have changed the site to use them, except I have no idea how there were generated.

        Flushing the CDN cache at the provider and forcing it to all reload fixed all of the issues related to this outage. The question is what in the hell caused the CDN cache to get munged.

        I can't see anything in logs. Just finished a scan for malware at my server without a result. Now looking at the comms system.