The Irony of "The Progressive" | Daniel Oakes The Irony of "The Progressive" | Daniel Oakes - Page 2

starting strength gym
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22

Thread: The Irony of "The Progressive" | Daniel Oakes

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    46,615

    Default

    • starting strength seminar december 2021
    • starting strength seminar february 2022
    • starting strength seminar april 2022
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt James View Post
    Hubble?
    Hubbard. Whatever.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    805

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Manowar2010 View Post
    Personally, while I don't understand trans identity or body dysmorphia, I think transitioning between sexes is too extreme a change for anyone to undergo for athletic dominance
    Why not, people will do anything for money. I even believe the transgender thing in sports will specifically entice people to transition between sexes. Haven't there been numerous examples in history where they would get like a 25 year old dude from some African country and pass him on as an 18 year old woman?

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dalton Rankin View Post
    An elite athlete wants to win.
    Yeah, I'm familiar with that premise.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dalton Rankin View Post
    Laurel Hubbard's feelings don't change his biology.
    What makes you think someone's inner subjective world is separate from their biology? The desire to transition is a biological desire as much as the desire to find a partner or have kids or whatever.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dalton Rankin View Post
    we aren't going to eradicate truth at the expense of identity and experience
    identity and experience are forms of truth. If you worry about ciswomen's experience being erased, you obviously recognize that. Truth is staring you right in the face.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dalton Rankin View Post
    that occurs in less than one percent of the American population
    What percentage would make you care? 5%? 20%?

    Quote Originally Posted by Manowar2010 View Post
    I think (and this is one of the issues with having discussions like this on forums versus in person) he was using 'transition' in a very broad sense.
    I don't think it was that ambiguous.

    Quote Originally Posted by Manowar2010 View Post
    Personally, while I don't understand trans identity or body dysmorphia, I think transitioning between sexes is too extreme a change for anyone to undergo for athletic dominance (the changes of elite bodybuilders and some other athletes may come close, but the extreme changes are usually much slower and without the difficulties a trans person may face.
    Yeah. Being a bodybuilder or taking steroids doesn't put you at a higher risk of getting assaulted, ostracized from public space, having your genitals inspected, etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by Manowar2010 View Post
    Do you have a link for the 2nd part of the video.
    A Lie Agreed Upon Part 2 with Beth Stelzer | Starting Strength Radio #102 - YouTube

    Some highlights:

    22:20 "I don't know why a guy wants to win that bad"
    Even Rip is aware on some level that what he's saying is idiotic.

    31:10
    "trans women are men and most have their penises, let's be honest... they never have intentions of having surgery"
    She says that like it's supposed to be shocking or something? Like it's very troubling to her? She's very concerned about other peoples genitals. And what in the world does this have to do with women's rights?

    "these are intact males invading women's spaces"
    The narrative that trans people are predators. "Intact" is such a weird word choice.

    40:10
    "most [trans people] are male bodies"
    not sure how true this is anymore.

    "we are training our young girls to feel comfortable with male bodies who could possibly be predators"
    The only reason to be worried about this, more so than about predatory cis men, is if you think that trans women are more likely to be predators.

    41:35
    talking about Rachel Levine:
    "and you can find pictures of him dressing up in little doll clothes like a little... GIRL... like a total fetish thing--it's disgusting"
    The way she gets so animated when talking about this--and people's penises earlier--gives away the real motivation here.

    13:40 "Mark Rippetoe, 65 year-old male, cock and balls"

    Has anyone actually seen them? I'll need to see some proof if Rip wants me to believe that they are a man.

    Quote Originally Posted by DanielAcorn View Post
    It doesn't matter what SS thinks of whoever.
    Why did you write the article then? "Trigger" was your word to begin with, not mine; I think you just don't like what I'm saying and you'd rather ridicule me than deal with it. That would be consistent with the level of discussion on this site.

    Quote Originally Posted by DanielAcorn View Post
    Just because millions of people partake in something, it doesn't make that something correct (slavery for example).
    These are the traditions I had in mind:

    India
    "["third-gender" people] were generally attributed a semi-divine status. Their participation in religious ceremonies, especially as crossdressing dancers and devotees of certain temple gods/goddesses, is considered auspicious in traditional Hinduism"

    Burma
    Trans women acting as spirit mediums in ceremony.

    Not particularly evil, I think. The point I wanted to make is that, what ever you think about the discourse in America in 2020, the existence (and agency) of trans people is a historical fact.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2021
    Posts
    9

    Default

    The real issue here is language and labels. I don't deny Hubbard's existence, I merely suggest he/she/whatever needn't have to chop off their penis and take medication if there was no barriers in sport/life/whatever. My article is actually super liberal. I talk about 'humans' and the best 'human' winning. I make note that it's progressives who do not want a super progressive world. They'd rather barriers be erected and new labels be imposed (to later be challenged).

    Incidentally, I actually, funnily enough, don't really know what I'm talking about. All of this is intuitive - it was just a fun article to write, off the cuff. I could be wrong about everything. I do know, though, that 'progressives' are ironic (title of the article) for the reason stated above.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Posts
    430

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DanielAcorn View Post
    The real issue here is language and labels. I don't deny Hubbard's existence, I merely suggest he/she/whatever needn't have to chop off their penis and take medication if there was no barriers in sport/life/whatever. My article is actually super liberal. I talk about 'humans' and the best 'human' winning. I make note that it's progressives who do not want a super progressive world. They'd rather barriers be erected and new labels be imposed (to later be challenged).

    Incidentally, I actually, funnily enough, don't really know what I'm talking about. All of this is intuitive - it was just a fun article to write, off the cuff. I could be wrong about everything. I do know, though, that 'progressives' are ironic (title of the article) for the reason stated above.
    I think this is an interesting theory on male 'progressives'

    Jordan Peterson & Gad Saad?sneaky fucker - YouTube

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2021
    Posts
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sib View Post
    I think this is an interesting theory on male 'progressives'

    Jordan Peterson & Gad Saad?sneaky fucker - YouTube
    Peterson also talks about the really strong leader chimp getting torn apart by a gang lesser chimps, except, incidentally, in this video he looks upon the leader chimp less favourably here.

    Chimpanzees and Dominance Hierarchies | Jordan B Peterson - YouTube

    My question is this: why does the 'progressive' male think he gets better access to females by being 'progressive'. Why is it 'cool?'

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Posts
    430

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DanielAcorn View Post
    Peterson also talks about the really strong leader chimp getting torn apart by a gang lesser chimps, except, incidentally, in this video he looks upon the leader chimp less favourably here.

    Chimpanzees and Dominance Hierarchies | Jordan B Peterson - YouTube

    My question is this: why does the 'progressive' male think he gets better access to females by being 'progressive'. Why is it 'cool?'
    The progressive male isnít trying to be cool, heís a cuckoo in the nest trying to blend in

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,078

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DanielAcorn View Post
    The real issue here is language and labels. I don't deny Hubbard's existence, I merely suggest he/she/whatever needn't have to chop off their penis and take medication if there was no barriers in sport/life/whatever. My article is actually super liberal. I talk about 'humans' and the best 'human' winning. I make note that it's progressives who do not want a super progressive world. They'd rather barriers be erected and new labels be imposed (to later be challenged).

    Incidentally, I actually, funnily enough, don't really know what I'm talking about. All of this is intuitive - it was just a fun article to write, off the cuff. I could be wrong about everything. I do know, though, that 'progressives' are ironic (title of the article) for the reason stated above.
    I think I feel the exact same way as you expressed in the article, but I think the article has a real problem with tone and smarminess and could come across as incendiary or...something....It's going to put off anyone who is probably riding the fence, which my intuition suggests is the majority of people on this storm in a teacup issue.
    I would have liked to be able to share this around, but didn't think it would do any good beyond preaching to the choir and pissing off people who weren't already in that choir. Big Peterson fan here also, but seeing a YouTube of him was the final nail where I bet lot's of people would just shutdown their mind. Sad, but I think realistic about human nature. Citing the actual study would have been more compelling.

    Me and some of my college friends have been into 'Street Epistemology', which is all about developing skills for changing peoples minds using non confrontational logic. Not that I particularly have the energy or motivation these days to go around debating with people online, but if maybe you do in the future, it could be worth checking out.

    I get that it was just a one page, stream of consciousness article for fun - that's just my feedback - not that you asked for it.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2021
    Posts
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Frankie View Post
    that's just my feedback - not that you asked for it.
    I'll reflect upon the tone thing - good point!

    And 'cuckoo in the nest' - I love it!

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Posts
    430

    Default

    starting strength coach development program
    Quote Originally Posted by DanielAcorn View Post
    I'll reflect upon the tone thing - good point!

    And 'cuckoo in the nest' - I love it!
    These people are empty vessels that will say whatever the Guardian or New York Times tells them to so that they can blend in.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •