4 ms·

The examples @piokoch made are very good. Seats in planes were designed for average people. It means that myself, as an average person, have the right to be re

The examples @piokoch made are very good. Seats in planes were designed for average people. It means that myself, as an average person, have the right to be relatively comfortable in that chair. If an obese person sits next to me, I have nothing against them on a human level - but the fact that they use my space. They are not comfortable either (certainly physically and probably psychologically) so if we accept obese people in our society (which is the case), they should have special chairs in planes, similar to the situation for disabled people. They should not, objectively, pay more for them even if I think that in the vast majority of cases obesity is a choice (I am somehow overweight and do not think that this is anybody's else fault than mine). This is akin (at least in France where I live) to the fact that they will be medically treated with my money (same as the ones that smoke cigarettes will be treated for heart issues or pulmonary cancer). Now, should someone who horribly stinks be allowed on the seat next to mine? No, because we do not accept stinkiness, as a society. It is completely arbitrarily, but this is how life is. The example in sports is a good one too. I think that we should not test anybody for anything because a sportman today is not a normal being anyway. They are bred to be excellent in what they do. A volleyball player will not be able to participate in a 100 m sprint and have the slightest chance. So any idea of "natural" in sports is long gone (except for purely amateur). In that light I have no idea how to deal with the women/men separation we have today. There probably not be any because a top woman volleyball player will be eons better than the amateur man volleyball player I am now. On the other hand they have no chance against a men team. Sports at pro level is such a commercial entity that I even wonder if we should care.

rm_-rf_slash 6y ago
Your last sentence contains the kernel of a reality that much of the internet would rather we don’t notice: that we don’t have to care about most of the stupid shit we see on our screens every day. We don’t need to engage in flame wars or virtue signaling or any of these asinine debates. People got along with their lives just fine for thousands of years without feeling compelled to debate a stranger from hundreds of miles away for 10 minutes about theoreticals that scarcely affect their daily lives. But the social media and advertising companies can’t have that. No, we as a society need to be juiced up on fear and hate 24/7 to keep the eyeballs moving and the profits flowing. Fact is the world is full of shitty people and ya gotta pick your battles. In most cases, the winning move is not to play.
- Someone 6y ago
  “People got along with their lives just fine for thousands of years without feeling compelled to debate a stranger from hundreds of miles away for 10 minutes about theoreticals that scarcely affect their daily lives.” That’s debatable (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missionary https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missionary). They even went out and tried to kill strangers hundreds of miles away (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_war https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_war) Many of those were in times when it took a serious commitment to even travel that far, let alone to wage war. It probably helped that staying put didn’t guarantee a quiet life, either.
  - TheRealDunkirk 6y ago
    You just made the GP's point, perfectly.
tpxl 6y ago
> The example in sports is a good one too. I think that we should not test anybody for anything because a sportman today is not a normal being anyway. This would lead to a large number of injuries and overdoses because of the drug use. IIRC this was happening in soccer with heart attacks happening because of drugs. The distinction between men and women teams is arbitrary but fairly sensible. If you didn't separate them then you'd have men at the top and women at the bottom, which does not fun make. That said, I have no clue how to solve the transperson distinction in sports.
- BrandoElFollito 6y ago
  > This would lead to a large number of injuries and overdoses because of the drug use. IIRC this was happening in soccer with heart attacks happening because of drugs. Yes, but this is a choice. We still like to imagine that sports must be "natural". There is nothing natural in how the top performers are bred (my wife was a national junior champion and in the very top of Europe and did not continue despite being invited to the national team - all the fun of sports is gone). Since we accept that we breed people that do competitive sport I see no reason why not to give them all the opportunities. This includes taking risk with their health and life. The only problem is that sport starts at 4 years old and there is a risk of parents who would be ready for anything for their children to be sport heroes. My children did al lot of sports and they stopped after their black belt in karate because it was not fun anymore. They were not really interested by the competition so it did not matter. They love sport. I play volleyball in an amateur team that almost always loses. But the fun is incredible. > The distinction between men and women teams is arbitrary but fairly sensible. If you didn't separate them then you'd have men at the top and women at the bottom, which does not fun make. I know but since it looks like the gender is becoming a mater of choice, I do not know how this will be deal with. I was thinking the same thing when I read somewhere that the "appartenance to a racial group" in the US is by choice as well. I wonder why some, say, white people do not assess themselves as "Afro-American" to make use of the positive discrimination for admission at universities (or whatever this is called in the US)
  - tpxl 6y ago
    > Yes, but this is a choice. When _some_ make this choice to be at the top, _all_ must make this choice to be at the top. At that point it's a roulette of who will dare take the most drugs and live to win. > I see no reason why not to give them all the opportunities. Some are way more harmful than others, and we should take that into account. EDIT: > I know but since it looks like the gender is becoming a mater of choice, I do not know how this will be deal with. Apart from some radical groups thinking so, gender is not really becoming a choice.
rswail 6y ago
Regarding the plane seats, the solution is that airlines provide larger seats for all passengers. The problem of obese passengers encroaching on fellow passengers "space" is because airlines have consistently reduced that "space" over the last 2 decades or more. However, either obesity is a disability, in which case, perhaps the ADA or equivalent could be used to force airlines to provide accomodation, or it is not a protected class, in which case, airlines should force them to purchase two seats. In sports, there are leagues and classes of competition that attempt to provide a "minimum platform" for teams to compete. That's why teams move up and down from the soccer premier leagues etc. The problem/issue of trans-gendered individuals being on teams they don't "belong" to is going to be changed over the next decades given that genetic modifications and enhancements are likely to be available via CRISPR etc. Drugs are banned in sport to avoid people using "artifical" enhancements to their innate trained abilities. If someone gets genetic modification to enhance, say, their muscles abilities to use energy, how are you going to police that? Have everyone playing submit their genome for examination?
- IG_Semmelweiss 6y ago
  that's a great example we currently ban steroids and most performance-enhancing substances in elite sports Trans is the same thing, but on a genetic level. It alters the state of competition to give advantage to the new entrant. It follows that it would be banned on the same grounds under current rules. Either we accept all modification in sports, or we dont
- bitxbitxbitcoin 6y ago
  Having everyone submit their genome for examination is absolutely where professional sports is ending up.
- BrandoElFollito 6y ago
  > Drugs are banned in sport to avoid people using "artifical" enhancements to their innate trained abilities. If someone gets genetic modification to enhance, say, their muscles abilities to use energy, how are you going to police that? > Have everyone playing submit their genome for examination? My point is is that it does not matter. What is current top competition sport is not natural anymore so I do not really care about whether they take drugs (illegal today, maybe legal tomorrow) or not. Or modify they genome. Wasn't there a case of a (South African?) athlete who was asked for a sample of their DNA to check weather they were a man or a woman? (it was not that long time ago I think)

rm_-rf_slash 6y ago

Your last sentence contains the kernel of a reality that much of the internet would rather we don’t notice: that we don’t have to care about most of the stupid shit we see on our screens every day. We don’t need to engage in flame wars or virtue signaling or any of these asinine debates. People got along with their lives just fine for thousands of years without feeling compelled to debate a stranger from hundreds of miles away for 10 minutes about theoreticals that scarcely affect their daily lives. But the social media and advertising companies can’t have that. No, we as a society need to be juiced up on fear and hate 24/7 to keep the eyeballs moving and the profits flowing. Fact is the world is full of shitty people and ya gotta pick your battles. In most cases, the winning move is not to play.

Someone 6y ago
“People got along with their lives just fine for thousands of years without feeling compelled to debate a stranger from hundreds of miles away for 10 minutes about theoreticals that scarcely affect their daily lives.” That’s debatable (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missionary https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missionary). They even went out and tried to kill strangers hundreds of miles away (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_war https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_war) Many of those were in times when it took a serious commitment to even travel that far, let alone to wage war. It probably helped that staying put didn’t guarantee a quiet life, either.
- TheRealDunkirk 6y ago
  You just made the GP's point, perfectly.

tpxl 6y ago

> The example in sports is a good one too. I think that we should not test anybody for anything because a sportman today is not a normal being anyway. This would lead to a large number of injuries and overdoses because of the drug use. IIRC this was happening in soccer with heart attacks happening because of drugs. The distinction between men and women teams is arbitrary but fairly sensible. If you didn't separate them then you'd have men at the top and women at the bottom, which does not fun make. That said, I have no clue how to solve the transperson distinction in sports.

BrandoElFollito 6y ago
> This would lead to a large number of injuries and overdoses because of the drug use. IIRC this was happening in soccer with heart attacks happening because of drugs. Yes, but this is a choice. We still like to imagine that sports must be "natural". There is nothing natural in how the top performers are bred (my wife was a national junior champion and in the very top of Europe and did not continue despite being invited to the national team - all the fun of sports is gone). Since we accept that we breed people that do competitive sport I see no reason why not to give them all the opportunities. This includes taking risk with their health and life. The only problem is that sport starts at 4 years old and there is a risk of parents who would be ready for anything for their children to be sport heroes. My children did al lot of sports and they stopped after their black belt in karate because it was not fun anymore. They were not really interested by the competition so it did not matter. They love sport. I play volleyball in an amateur team that almost always loses. But the fun is incredible. > The distinction between men and women teams is arbitrary but fairly sensible. If you didn't separate them then you'd have men at the top and women at the bottom, which does not fun make. I know but since it looks like the gender is becoming a mater of choice, I do not know how this will be deal with. I was thinking the same thing when I read somewhere that the "appartenance to a racial group" in the US is by choice as well. I wonder why some, say, white people do not assess themselves as "Afro-American" to make use of the positive discrimination for admission at universities (or whatever this is called in the US)
- tpxl 6y ago
  > Yes, but this is a choice. When _some_ make this choice to be at the top, _all_ must make this choice to be at the top. At that point it's a roulette of who will dare take the most drugs and live to win. > I see no reason why not to give them all the opportunities. Some are way more harmful than others, and we should take that into account. EDIT: > I know but since it looks like the gender is becoming a mater of choice, I do not know how this will be deal with. Apart from some radical groups thinking so, gender is not really becoming a choice.

rswail 6y ago

Regarding the plane seats, the solution is that airlines provide larger seats for all passengers. The problem of obese passengers encroaching on fellow passengers "space" is because airlines have consistently reduced that "space" over the last 2 decades or more. However, either obesity is a disability, in which case, perhaps the ADA or equivalent could be used to force airlines to provide accomodation, or it is not a protected class, in which case, airlines should force them to purchase two seats. In sports, there are leagues and classes of competition that attempt to provide a "minimum platform" for teams to compete. That's why teams move up and down from the soccer premier leagues etc. The problem/issue of trans-gendered individuals being on teams they don't "belong" to is going to be changed over the next decades given that genetic modifications and enhancements are likely to be available via CRISPR etc. Drugs are banned in sport to avoid people using "artifical" enhancements to their innate trained abilities. If someone gets genetic modification to enhance, say, their muscles abilities to use energy, how are you going to police that? Have everyone playing submit their genome for examination?

IG_Semmelweiss 6y ago
that's a great example we currently ban steroids and most performance-enhancing substances in elite sports Trans is the same thing, but on a genetic level. It alters the state of competition to give advantage to the new entrant. It follows that it would be banned on the same grounds under current rules. Either we accept all modification in sports, or we dont
bitxbitxbitcoin 6y ago
Having everyone submit their genome for examination is absolutely where professional sports is ending up.
BrandoElFollito 6y ago
> Drugs are banned in sport to avoid people using "artifical" enhancements to their innate trained abilities. If someone gets genetic modification to enhance, say, their muscles abilities to use energy, how are you going to police that? > Have everyone playing submit their genome for examination? My point is is that it does not matter. What is current top competition sport is not natural anymore so I do not really care about whether they take drugs (illegal today, maybe legal tomorrow) or not. Or modify they genome. Wasn't there a case of a (South African?) athlete who was asked for a sample of their DNA to check weather they were a man or a woman? (it was not that long time ago I think)