Plan B Forum

So the interviewee gave a lesson in interacting with someone respectfully, even when he is an asshat.

Did Walsh think he was scoring some points by posting this when his goading failed and the interviewee refused to take the bait?

If I heard correctly, the last words on this clip are: "I am not woman so I can't really answer that." I wish the post had not stopped at that point. I note the person on the left side of view, who identifies in the beginning as a family therapist, very carefully does not self-describe as any gender. The reply
is NOT 'I am not A woman.' Grammatically and rhetorically a very important datum. Is the You Tube post as presented, continuous with no editing?
In my own interpretation the therapist is saying in effect "I am me. I am not the Platonic Ideal Woman. Each person must find their own answer."

snailgate.

Check your lugholes, BP. She/he/they/it clearly says "I am not a woman, so I can't really answer that".

Maj Genl, sir. I admit my error. Changing the battery in the hearing aid in my left ear, and reducing the volume control slightly on my computer which also reduced distortion, I could clearly hear "I am not a woman."

snailgate.

Yet I did not hear an answer to the general question in the title of this clip. unless it was in the introduction were it is sort of stated that 'a woman' is what ever the current general culture says it is. For many that is an unsatisfactory answer. I strongly hold that that IS the answer about race -- What is a black man, a white man. I also strongly support any effort to stop some person, group, organization that wishes to define me in ANY parameter. I am an honest 5 feet 3 inches tall. I will not even accept the declaration that I am short.

snailgate.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

Good on yer, Snail. You and me, Napoleons-in-waiting

Just as most of us have accepted that Black people are humans too with rights - which certainly was not the prevailing wisdom two or four or six generations ago - I foresee that gender fluidity will be a (mostly) accepted worldview in 20 or 40 years time. My daughter's generation seems to have no problem with it although of course there will be holdouts just as there now are on the subject of race.

A sticking point which needs sorting out is sport. Women's sports whether high profile one like tennis and track or lower profile such as football/soccer (at least in the US) have come a very long way since my younger days, and we have grown accustomed to the assumption that the very best women cannot compete with the very best men. Whether that is due to upper body strength or hormonal or even neurological differences or some combination thereof is a question best left to scientists and in the end is of little consequence. It just is.

The fact is that for almost all the sport in the world - I am going to guess 99.9% - it matters little what sex the players are. My regular squash partner for years was a young woman - sometimes she beat me and sometimes I beat her. We were well matched; and for every Serena and Roger there are a thousand Carol and Andy pairs. But at world class levels with $$$ or scholarships or world records are at stake, it matters. Paralympics seem to have sorted this out so that championships are held for 10 classes of disability (Special Olympics which is for mentally challenged athletes has a similar number of classes depending on the nature and degree of mental impairment) and it may be that for women's elite sport similar classes will develop. If, as seems likely based on the limited evidence so far, women who were once men have an advantage over women who were never men, then that may have to be figured out based on some sort of classification system.

If she cannot say what a woman is she cannot say she is not one.



( That’s logic logic! Tweedledum)