The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
Support for Transgenderism in Women's Sports
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Americans mostly oppose transgender athletes competing against members of the opposite biological sex:

For now, anyway. The pattern and distribution of these figures feel a lot like those on same-sex marriage in the aughts. It’s not difficult to imagine majority opposition to any sort of ban a decade from now.

On the other hand, this isn’t merely an ideological abstraction. There are real world consequences associated with it, namely the diminution of women’s sports. A generation ago, Hollywood recognized as much. The Ladybugs revolved around a coach trying to win a girl’s soccer league by sneaking a boy in drag onto the team. The plan works and the movie ends with a “girls” softball team comprised entirely of boys in disguise set to ruin softball for the ladies. Men competing against women felt like cheating. The underlying reality was so self-evident it needn’t be explained to anyone at the time.

On the other other hand, support for the ban primarily comes from men. Maybe women know best about how to manage women’s sports and men should allow them to run them how they’d prefer to run them. For better or worse, it might redound to the benefit of the patriarchs in the end.

Black Rednecks and White Liberals makes yet another appearance, as blacks are marginally on net the most supportive of transgender bans in women’s sports. That’s inconvenient for the preferred corporate media narrative though, so don’t expect to hear about it anywhere else.

 
• Category: Culture/Society, Ideology, Science • Tags: Polling, Sex, Sports 
Hide 75 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Maybe women know best about how to manage women’s sports and men should allow them to run them how they’d prefer to run them.

    Women who care about sports should run women’s sports.

    https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2021/02/04/martina-navratilova-trans-transgender-athletes-elite-sport-joe-biden/

    • Agree: Realist
    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @Rosie

    Martina is an awesome woman. My wife, who plays tennis, grew up admiring her in Communist Europe and watching the rivalry with the American, Chris Evert -- which became a friendship.

    Navratilova, from Wikipedia:


    ... her unstinting opposition to Communism, and unrelenting opposition to the former Eastern Bloc power structure that compelled her to flee her native Czechoslovakia. She has denounced the Soviet Union's control over Czechoslovakia, maintaining that she refuses to speak Russian to this day because of the Soviet Union's former hegemony over Eastern Europe.

    "Whenever people go into politics and they try to say that Communism was a good thing, I say, 'Go ahead and live in a Communist country then, if you think it's so great.' "
     

    We don't agree with Martina on everything, but we agree with her on this and the tranny sports issue.
  2. There’s a huge gulf between Zoomers and everybody else. That’s very very ominous. Zoomers seem to have already cut themselves loose from oppressive systems such as so-called “reality”.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    @dfordoom

    Why are "millennials" the most "transphobic" age group in this poll? Seems like the sample size must be much smaller than 1,990

    Replies: @dfordoom, @Some Guy, @A123

    , @Alfa158
    @dfordoom

    The good news is, sooner or later reality intrudes on fantasy.
    The bad news is, sooner or later reality intrudes on fantasy.
    In the meantime as they plummet earthward they can keep telling themselves, “OK so far, so good, I really CAN fly by flapping my arms”.

    , @Eugene Norman
    @dfordoom

    On the other hand look at the millennials. More hostile to this than boomers or gen x. As zoomers age they will change.

    Anyway plenty of people still think you have to transition for a few years to play against the opposite sex. It’s actually biological men who just need to self declare in most cases (or that is the suggested law). When that’s understood the hostility will increase.

    If it doesn’t - popcorn. We men shouldn’t really care or try and defend women’s turf as AE says. If they want to discriminate against themselves and disappear as a sex class then so be it.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @V. K. Ovelund, @Paperback Writer

  3. anon[825] • Disclaimer says:

    All we really need to know about any issue that involves strange sexual issues should be obvious from the fate of Proposition 8 in California. Black people were culturally conservative there, too. It didn’t matter to the elite judge who overruled millions of voters. What a handful of rich, bizarre elites want they will try very hard to get, and the rest of us don’t really get a vote.

    Trans is perhaps the ultimate in blank-slatism, therefore it’s a logical extension of all the blank slatism that has preceded it. There’s enough people in socially elite circles who want trans men to be accepted as women that this bizarre idea can be jammed into custom and law. In a way, it’s also a logical extension of Title IX as reinterpreted by the 90’s DNCe.

    If only there was a way for both the trans and the lesbian feminists to lose out.

    Of course, I dunno what real change it will make in some areas: suppose that WNBA teams start running trans point guards, would anyone notice much of a difference?

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @anon


    ... suppose that WNBA teams start running trans point guards, would anyone notice much of a difference?
     
    They would notice, and there would be a real difference.

    Steve Sailer has done a good job of pointing out the glaring differences between male and female athletic abilities. Without searching and documenting, all I can tell you is that something like high school boys' teams routinely beat the very best women's teams in the world, olympic, professional, etc., when the two are matched up. This has happened at exhibition games and events of various kinds.

    The fact is, most people are not aware of how far apart the abilities are.

    As for the whole tranny thing, I wonder how many people have actually met one. I have met more than one, even once in a business/political situation. They are obviously men, and they are very, very strange. One's perception, common sense cannot be denied. It is ridiculous. These people are crazy weirdos who just dress up like women, maybe have some unconscionable medical procedures performed on themselves, and want us to pretend it isn't funny and/or sick.

    Tranny men who can actually fool normal people into thinking they are female must be very rare. This is all a weird fantasy.

    Replies: @Truth, @anon, @nebulafox

  4. A generation ago, Hollywood recognized as much. The Ladybugs revolved around a coach trying to win a girl’s soccer league by sneaking a boy in drag onto the team.

    Even then, they lifted the story from Plutarch’s life of Theseus, who volunteered to go to Crete and challenge Maze & Minotaur… on the condition he could take with him a couple strong but small-sized young fellows dressed as girls to take advantage of their superior male upper body strength. This helped Theseus when things got rough. Well, Ariadne helped too.

    Even a generation ago nobody could imagine anything as goofy as tranny rights. But I wasn’t surprised when Biden put this issue on the top of his agenda. Can’t have pesky things like the economy and foreign wars getting in the way of what’s Really Important.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    @Franz

    The military attacking a member of the media is great. A military junta is fine as long as it it's Woke!

    Replies: @A123

  5. Some of us remember when communist bloc countries were caught putting men on their “women’s” olympic teams. It was a scandal then and evidence that they would do anything to win. The “East German Male Olympian on the Women’s Team” was something of a stereotype and a joke.

    We never hear about those days now – neither as they pertain to current transgender nonsense nor with regard to the bad behavior of communists, probably because both groups are now held above reproach by the powers that be.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Indeed:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NqF5TyvhjZY

  6. like i said, when some ‘woman’ starts winning tennis majors and taking million dollar paychecks away from real women, we’ll see what the actual state of reactions is.

    for now, the state of reactions is based on sports that don’t matter, and people know it. who cares about field hockey? that could disappear, or become all ‘women’, or stay the same, and nobody would know the difference.

    but if the WNBA allowed a ‘woman’ to become the MVP and highest paid player in the league, that will be something completely different.

    i chuckle at the thought of some hairy 30 year old Slobovic eastern european guy in a dress dunking on black women and blocking their shots and scoring 40 points a game in the WNBA. talk about the race and gender issues coming together in a train wreck.

    • Agree: Some Guy
    • Replies: @Paperback Writer
    @prime noticer

    No, there are lawsuits about this, in school districts. People don't care about millionaire athletes as much as they care about their own daughters getting squished on the court or the track. That's how this differs from gay marriage.

    , @MattinLA
    @prime noticer

    Agreed. And I hope it happens!

  7. Well, maybe this is good in the end. It means that eventually only trannies, butch lesbians, hermaphrodites and genetically modified Chinese teens will compete in any “female sport”, and no one will watch it, and most women will go back to dedicate themselves to other more feminine activities.

    • Agree: JohnPlywood
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    @Dumbo

    Yeah I never saw the problem with this. Women shouldn't be doing competitive sports at all unless they can really hang with the boys.

    , @Morton's toes
    @Dumbo

    Nobody watches women sports. The closest thing is women's gymnastics and figure skating which are scored by judges and not really a human versus human competition.

    Women's tennis had a good run for a while but with all the screaming and the grunting it is now unwatchable, notwithstanding you can watch better players for free at the male events at your local college; that was always the case even when women's tennis was interesting.

    Trannies or no trannies it doesn't add up to a plate of beans. When a tranny gets the women's figure skating gold medal it will merely be an oddity. (Also the uneven parallel bars event looks immune.)

  8. @dfordoom
    There's a huge gulf between Zoomers and everybody else. That's very very ominous. Zoomers seem to have already cut themselves loose from oppressive systems such as so-called "reality".

    Replies: @AndrewR, @Alfa158, @Eugene Norman

    Why are “millennials” the most “transphobic” age group in this poll? Seems like the sample size must be much smaller than 1,990

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @AndrewR


    Why are “millennials” the most “transphobic” age group in this poll?
     
    That is interesting isn't it?

    These survey results might be more useful if they distinguished between birth decade rather than using the very artificial generational divides. The very real differences between Early Boomers and Late Boomers, and Early GenXers and Late GenXers, would then become more apparent. Maybe there are also major differences between Early Millennials and Late Millennials?

    The 90s was the decade in which Political Correctness started to become the state religion so Late Millennials and Zoomers are the ones who have been marinaded in Political Correctness more or less from the time they first started school.

    I have noticed that Early Millennials seem very similar to GenXers.

    The generational divides are arbitrary and essentially meaningless. Birth decade might provide more useful and objective measures of exactly how and when social attitudes have changed.

    Replies: @AndrewR

    , @Some Guy
    @AndrewR

    Maybe because Millenials are the oldest generation that has actually had to deal with this new wave of trans?
    https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1364618178916200455/photo/1

    Replies: @El Dato

    , @A123
    @AndrewR


    Why are “millennials” the most “transphobic” age group in this poll? Seems like the sample size must be much smaller than 1,990
     
    What group is most likely to have real, biological daughters involved in organized High School sports?

    For every non-female competitor, multiple genuine girls are disadvantaged. It is not just the one girl pushed to Silver instead of Gold. The individual who should have gotten the Silver is demoted to Bronze. And, the Bronze winner doesn't get a medal at all.

    Looking at the cost of University, athletic scholarships placed at risk by this phenomenon can bring real long-term damage to teenagers denied what they have earned.

    As a compromise I propose three categories. Male, Female, and Non-Biologic Other. That would let the unnatural compete with their bioengineered, hormone receiving peers. Let that which takes the most steroids win!

    PEACE 😇
  9. @Dumbo
    Well, maybe this is good in the end. It means that eventually only trannies, butch lesbians, hermaphrodites and genetically modified Chinese teens will compete in any "female sport", and no one will watch it, and most women will go back to dedicate themselves to other more feminine activities.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @Morton's toes

    Yeah I never saw the problem with this. Women shouldn’t be doing competitive sports at all unless they can really hang with the boys.

    • Agree: JohnPlywood
    • Troll: Chris Mallory
  10. I wonder how many poll respondents assumed that included within “competing on” were using the locker room and using the shower room. I don’t see how you get meaningful results without making explicit how the exposed-dong factor would be treated.

    • Agree: El Dato
  11. The main problem is the vast gulf in ability between male and female sportspeople, which has been obscured by ‘Girl Power!’ feminism. Some examples:

    *Karsten Braasch versus the Williams sisters

    **A game between the Australian women’s soccer team and a team of schoolboys, which the schoolboys won something like 6-1.

  12. @AndrewR
    @dfordoom

    Why are "millennials" the most "transphobic" age group in this poll? Seems like the sample size must be much smaller than 1,990

    Replies: @dfordoom, @Some Guy, @A123

    Why are “millennials” the most “transphobic” age group in this poll?

    That is interesting isn’t it?

    These survey results might be more useful if they distinguished between birth decade rather than using the very artificial generational divides. The very real differences between Early Boomers and Late Boomers, and Early GenXers and Late GenXers, would then become more apparent. Maybe there are also major differences between Early Millennials and Late Millennials?

    The 90s was the decade in which Political Correctness started to become the state religion so Late Millennials and Zoomers are the ones who have been marinaded in Political Correctness more or less from the time they first started school.

    I have noticed that Early Millennials seem very similar to GenXers.

    The generational divides are arbitrary and essentially meaningless. Birth decade might provide more useful and objective measures of exactly how and when social attitudes have changed.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    @dfordoom

    There are many factors involved. None of the changes of the last [insert arbitrary length of time here] have happened overnight.

    I think social media has been a major factor. I'm 36 so it really didn't exist when I was in high school, let alone middle school (thank God). But by 2005/2006, MySpace had become very popular, followed by Facebook, Snapchat, IG, etc. I can't even imagine what someone born in the late 1990s went through growing up, let alone the kids growing up now.

    And growing up I didn't know any trans or "non-binary" people. Now they're a dime a dozen, including my nephews' cousin, a number of my nephews' good friends, my brother's best friend's daughter, a good friend of my gym's manager, etc.

    The saddest thing about this era is that holding opinions that almost everyone had 100, 50 or even 10 years ago doesn't just make you dumb or old fashioned in the eyes of tens of millions of Americans, but evil. This is not going to end well.

  13. @AndrewR
    @dfordoom

    Why are "millennials" the most "transphobic" age group in this poll? Seems like the sample size must be much smaller than 1,990

    Replies: @dfordoom, @Some Guy, @A123

    Maybe because Millenials are the oldest generation that has actually had to deal with this new wave of trans?
    https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1364618178916200455/photo/1

    • Replies: @El Dato
    @Some Guy

    I'm so tired of all this bullshit.

    DeTrans might be the next Big Thing. The rah-rah / self-celebration mentality and pumping fists iconography is already there.

    https://twitter.com/KLBfax/status/1370289544659136517

    Does it fall under medicare?

  14. @dfordoom
    @AndrewR


    Why are “millennials” the most “transphobic” age group in this poll?
     
    That is interesting isn't it?

    These survey results might be more useful if they distinguished between birth decade rather than using the very artificial generational divides. The very real differences between Early Boomers and Late Boomers, and Early GenXers and Late GenXers, would then become more apparent. Maybe there are also major differences between Early Millennials and Late Millennials?

    The 90s was the decade in which Political Correctness started to become the state religion so Late Millennials and Zoomers are the ones who have been marinaded in Political Correctness more or less from the time they first started school.

    I have noticed that Early Millennials seem very similar to GenXers.

    The generational divides are arbitrary and essentially meaningless. Birth decade might provide more useful and objective measures of exactly how and when social attitudes have changed.

    Replies: @AndrewR

    There are many factors involved. None of the changes of the last [insert arbitrary length of time here] have happened overnight.

    I think social media has been a major factor. I’m 36 so it really didn’t exist when I was in high school, let alone middle school (thank God). But by 2005/2006, MySpace had become very popular, followed by Facebook, Snapchat, IG, etc. I can’t even imagine what someone born in the late 1990s went through growing up, let alone the kids growing up now.

    And growing up I didn’t know any trans or “non-binary” people. Now they’re a dime a dozen, including my nephews’ cousin, a number of my nephews’ good friends, my brother’s best friend’s daughter, a good friend of my gym’s manager, etc.

    The saddest thing about this era is that holding opinions that almost everyone had 100, 50 or even 10 years ago doesn’t just make you dumb or old fashioned in the eyes of tens of millions of Americans, but evil. This is not going to end well.

    • Agree: dfordoom
  15. @anon
    All we really need to know about any issue that involves strange sexual issues should be obvious from the fate of Proposition 8 in California. Black people were culturally conservative there, too. It didn't matter to the elite judge who overruled millions of voters. What a handful of rich, bizarre elites want they will try very hard to get, and the rest of us don't really get a vote.

    Trans is perhaps the ultimate in blank-slatism, therefore it's a logical extension of all the blank slatism that has preceded it. There's enough people in socially elite circles who want trans men to be accepted as women that this bizarre idea can be jammed into custom and law. In a way, it's also a logical extension of Title IX as reinterpreted by the 90's DNCe.

    If only there was a way for both the trans and the lesbian feminists to lose out.

    Of course, I dunno what real change it will make in some areas: suppose that WNBA teams start running trans point guards, would anyone notice much of a difference?

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

    … suppose that WNBA teams start running trans point guards, would anyone notice much of a difference?

    They would notice, and there would be a real difference.

    Steve Sailer has done a good job of pointing out the glaring differences between male and female athletic abilities. Without searching and documenting, all I can tell you is that something like high school boys’ teams routinely beat the very best women’s teams in the world, olympic, professional, etc., when the two are matched up. This has happened at exhibition games and events of various kinds.

    The fact is, most people are not aware of how far apart the abilities are.

    As for the whole tranny thing, I wonder how many people have actually met one. I have met more than one, even once in a business/political situation. They are obviously men, and they are very, very strange. One’s perception, common sense cannot be denied. It is ridiculous. These people are crazy weirdos who just dress up like women, maybe have some unconscionable medical procedures performed on themselves, and want us to pretend it isn’t funny and/or sick.

    Tranny men who can actually fool normal people into thinking they are female must be very rare. This is all a weird fantasy.

    • Agree: dfordoom
    • Replies: @Truth
    @Buzz Mohawk


    Tranny men who can actually fool normal people into thinking they are female must be very rare.
     
    No they aren't. Practically every woman you wanked to growing up, whom you did not know, is a tranny.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4kTFQ-HNsc

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RoNd7D9fTDA

    Replies: @Hapalong Cassidy, @Alfa158, @Buzz Mohawk

    , @anon
    @Buzz Mohawk

    They would notice, and there would be a real difference.

    Have you ever seen a WNBA game?

    , @nebulafox
    @Buzz Mohawk

    >As for the whole tranny thing, I wonder how many people have actually met one.

    Thailand. They did not fool me. And Thais are a lot more likely to pull it off than Americans.

  16. “Womens’ sports” shouldn’t exist, basically.

    In junior high school, etc, maybe they can help women build physical conditioning and pleasing forms, but basically, the concept of women’s sports is mistaken.

    • Agree: JohnPlywood
    • Disagree: Buzz Mohawk
  17. @Rosie

    Maybe women know best about how to manage women’s sports and men should allow them to run them how they’d prefer to run them.
     
    Women who care about sports should run women's sports.

    https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2021/02/04/martina-navratilova-trans-transgender-athletes-elite-sport-joe-biden/

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

    Martina is an awesome woman. My wife, who plays tennis, grew up admiring her in Communist Europe and watching the rivalry with the American, Chris Evert — which became a friendship.

    Navratilova, from Wikipedia:

    … her unstinting opposition to Communism, and unrelenting opposition to the former Eastern Bloc power structure that compelled her to flee her native Czechoslovakia. She has denounced the Soviet Union’s control over Czechoslovakia, maintaining that she refuses to speak Russian to this day because of the Soviet Union’s former hegemony over Eastern Europe.

    “Whenever people go into politics and they try to say that Communism was a good thing, I say, ‘Go ahead and live in a Communist country then, if you think it’s so great.’ “

    We don’t agree with Martina on everything, but we agree with her on this and the tranny sports issue.

  18. This Tranny nonsense is a smokescreen to give cover to the JEW/WASP Ruling Class of the American Empire to steal everything that hasn’t already been stolen yet.

    I wrote this in 2017:

    The corrupt corporate propaganda apparatus distracts the American people with nonsense issues like gay marriage and World War Tranny to cover up the corrupt shenanigans of the ruling class. Mass immigration, globalization, financialization, foreign policy fiascos and more are downplayed while the bullshit stuff is endlessly talked about.

    Local papers do the same thing when they never cover the harmful consequences of refugee resettlement. The local newspapers only cover the fluff that don’t mean a damn thing.

    Sam Francis, or somebody else, said it was a matter of the corporate media “selling the public a fake America, so the shady goons can steal the real one.” That sounds like what Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, Bill Gates and Carlos Slim are doing.

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/sailer-in-takis-the-emperors-new-ads/#comment-2060806

    • Agree: Rahan
  19. @Buzz Mohawk
    @anon


    ... suppose that WNBA teams start running trans point guards, would anyone notice much of a difference?
     
    They would notice, and there would be a real difference.

    Steve Sailer has done a good job of pointing out the glaring differences between male and female athletic abilities. Without searching and documenting, all I can tell you is that something like high school boys' teams routinely beat the very best women's teams in the world, olympic, professional, etc., when the two are matched up. This has happened at exhibition games and events of various kinds.

    The fact is, most people are not aware of how far apart the abilities are.

    As for the whole tranny thing, I wonder how many people have actually met one. I have met more than one, even once in a business/political situation. They are obviously men, and they are very, very strange. One's perception, common sense cannot be denied. It is ridiculous. These people are crazy weirdos who just dress up like women, maybe have some unconscionable medical procedures performed on themselves, and want us to pretend it isn't funny and/or sick.

    Tranny men who can actually fool normal people into thinking they are female must be very rare. This is all a weird fantasy.

    Replies: @Truth, @anon, @nebulafox

    Tranny men who can actually fool normal people into thinking they are female must be very rare.

    No they aren’t. Practically every woman you wanked to growing up, whom you did not know, is a tranny.

    • Troll: El Dato
    • Replies: @Hapalong Cassidy
    @Truth

    The fact that she’s married and has children aside, I remember Kathy Ireland as having an extremely high-pitched, almost childish voice. She starred in a horrible B-movie called “Alien from LA” which got the MSTK3000 treatment, and her voice was the most made fun of thing in that episode. Anyway, I doubt if any degree of hormone therapy or castration could get a man’s voice to sound like that.

    Replies: @Truth, @Audacious Epigone

    , @Alfa158
    @Truth

    “Come on man!”
    You left out your favorite tyrannie you like to fap to:
    https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=jaRTQ0sd&id=4E1BD5D0C27E7EB05D997E11BF4319E29EB66AC5&thid=OIP.jaRTQ0sdvIQ70zzpBqfC6wHaD6&mediaurl=https%3a%2f%2fi0.wp.com%2fobamawatcher.com%2fwp-content%2fuploads%2f2019%2f11%2fMichelle-has-more-class-than-you-ever-will.jpg%3ffit%3d1200%252C633%26ssl%3d1&exph=633&expw=1200&q=Michelle+Obama+Born&simid=608014171990001250&ck=BC9AE5D9F565B7752C0DD0A28A2D8D4F&selectedIndex=223&FORM=IRPRST&ajaxhist=0

    Replies: @Truth

    , @Buzz Mohawk
    @Truth


    Practically every woman you wanked to growing up, whom you did not know, is a tranny.
     
    I'm glad to hear that at least the girls I knew who were cool enough to let me wank to them were real.

    Take your meds.

  20. Tulsi Gabbard is good on this Tranny nonsense of allowing male born brutes to bash the living Hell out of women in sports and to outrun them as well.

    Rousey the lady fighter was also a truth teller when she pointed out the biological differences of women and men.

    Navratilova’s name is hard to spell but she tells the truth about there being differences between women and men.

    David Byrne is a baby boomer Scottish guy who wrote a catchy tune about this Tranny stuff.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    @Charles Pewitt

    Ms. Gabbard was a martial arts instructor and active duty military. She's had a front row seat when it comes to biological differences between men and women.

    Replies: @Charles Pewitt

  21. Tranny types must not be allowed to steal opera jobs from women and I strongly believe that all VALKYRIES must be ladies.

    Attention all Trannies: I’m aware men played some of the parts of females in Shakespeare’s time but still!

    I wrote this about Valkyries and globalizer gals in October of 2018:

    It has certainly been a boon to Steve Sailer’s imaginative mind to make fun of the female ululating swoon emanating from the globalizer gal Democrat Party writers and squawkers.

    The gal’s asinine swoons make it easy for guys like Sailer to portray these distaff dingbats as ridiculous buffoons.

    I must remind you people that these mentally deranged broads are extremely dangerous, and it might not do to merely make fun of them.

    The corporate propaganda apparatus has saturated the public airwaves and newspapers with female wackos who are a clear and present threat to the safety and security of the United States of America.

    Richard Wagner, while drinking milk, wrote a bit about these kinds of grotesque female ghouls who rob the recently departed corpses of warriors fallen in battle. They are a fearsome force of supernatural destruction and grief and wanton thievery.

    God help Us All!

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/for-the-children/#comment-2579979

  22. @AndrewR
    @dfordoom

    Why are "millennials" the most "transphobic" age group in this poll? Seems like the sample size must be much smaller than 1,990

    Replies: @dfordoom, @Some Guy, @A123

    Why are “millennials” the most “transphobic” age group in this poll? Seems like the sample size must be much smaller than 1,990

    What group is most likely to have real, biological daughters involved in organized High School sports?

    For every non-female competitor, multiple genuine girls are disadvantaged. It is not just the one girl pushed to Silver instead of Gold. The individual who should have gotten the Silver is demoted to Bronze. And, the Bronze winner doesn’t get a medal at all.

    Looking at the cost of University, athletic scholarships placed at risk by this phenomenon can bring real long-term damage to teenagers denied what they have earned.

    As a compromise I propose three categories. Male, Female, and Non-Biologic Other. That would let the unnatural compete with their bioengineered, hormone receiving peers. Let that which takes the most steroids win!

    PEACE 😇

  23. @Buzz Mohawk
    @anon


    ... suppose that WNBA teams start running trans point guards, would anyone notice much of a difference?
     
    They would notice, and there would be a real difference.

    Steve Sailer has done a good job of pointing out the glaring differences between male and female athletic abilities. Without searching and documenting, all I can tell you is that something like high school boys' teams routinely beat the very best women's teams in the world, olympic, professional, etc., when the two are matched up. This has happened at exhibition games and events of various kinds.

    The fact is, most people are not aware of how far apart the abilities are.

    As for the whole tranny thing, I wonder how many people have actually met one. I have met more than one, even once in a business/political situation. They are obviously men, and they are very, very strange. One's perception, common sense cannot be denied. It is ridiculous. These people are crazy weirdos who just dress up like women, maybe have some unconscionable medical procedures performed on themselves, and want us to pretend it isn't funny and/or sick.

    Tranny men who can actually fool normal people into thinking they are female must be very rare. This is all a weird fantasy.

    Replies: @Truth, @anon, @nebulafox

    They would notice, and there would be a real difference.

    Have you ever seen a WNBA game?

  24. We’re getting pretty far away from the original purposes of sports.

    Used to be a lot of localism in sports. The pride of your village vs. the pride of the neighboring village, with both communities cheering on their own man. Obviously, if it is trannies vs. women, bigger countries that can draw on more freaks of nature will have the advantage, and small countries will have the disadvantage. It is a win for globalists.

    There is also a great distortion involving race in sports. The Olympics was originally open only to people with a Greek pedigree. Now, we’ve moved to a laundry basis of loyalty – people whatever ethnicity they may be wearing the right color uniforms. Obviously, this undermines the nationalist spirit Olympics, when they were revived in 1896, and puts the focus on internationalism.

    In ancient times, sport often had some intersection with military training. If France’s modern military looks like its international team, then Frenchmen are in existential danger, and it staggers belief that Frenchmen are supposed to cheer for that.

    • Replies: @Wency
    @songbird

    Good observations. I was thinking the irony of the whole tranny in women's sports issue is that it only bothers conservatives because they don't care too much about winning in women's sports. If we discovered a race of 8-foot-tall, ultra-athletic extraterrestrials that reproduce asexually and are technically a fungus, sports-loving normie-cons would be dying to see them play for their national team, or enrolled as students of their favorite football/basketball school.

  25. There is another angle to the transgenders in sports that will make it acceptable to the public. People like a freak show. P.T. Barnum knew it. Lincoln was fascinated by freaks and invited Tom Thumb to the White House. It’s why championship wrestling has an audience.
    And with the fascination, people are on the side of the freaks. We want to believe they are “just like us”, that they’ve suffered due to their freakishness, and that now that they are stars in the freak show their lives will turn out okay. It’s reassuring to all the normal people who have doubts and worries about themselves.

  26. Black Rednecks and White Liberals makes yet another appearance, as blacks are marginally on net the most supportive of transgender bans in women’s sports. That’s inconvenient for the preferred corporate media narrative though, so don’t expect to hear about it anywhere else.

    Trying to make sense of black preferences is largely a waste of time. Unless heavily pressured to behave reasonably, most blacks are incoherent.

    Americans used to understand this about blacks.

    (Whites, of course, are incoherent in their own way, but observing this fact about whites will not help us to make sense of black responses in polls like this.)

    • Replies: @songbird
    @V. K. Ovelund


    Trying to make sense of black preferences is largely a waste of time.
     
    I agree, in a political sense. Obviously, there's been a lot of outreach to blacks, which seems to only be a waste of effort. There's no re-flipping blacks. Reformists cannot engage in a bidding war. And Sowell is a blank-slatist on race, so his observations about race have limited utility.

    Still, it is interesting to consider in a purely sociological sense. Probably it is related to IQ. But one can still think of alternative explanations. Sports are very important to blacks because it is one of the few areas they excel. This also includes female ones, who often gain college scholarships through sports.
  27. @V. K. Ovelund

    Black Rednecks and White Liberals makes yet another appearance, as blacks are marginally on net the most supportive of transgender bans in women’s sports. That’s inconvenient for the preferred corporate media narrative though, so don’t expect to hear about it anywhere else.
     
    Trying to make sense of black preferences is largely a waste of time. Unless heavily pressured to behave reasonably, most blacks are incoherent.

    Americans used to understand this about blacks.

    (Whites, of course, are incoherent in their own way, but observing this fact about whites will not help us to make sense of black responses in polls like this.)

    Replies: @songbird

    Trying to make sense of black preferences is largely a waste of time.

    I agree, in a political sense. Obviously, there’s been a lot of outreach to blacks, which seems to only be a waste of effort. There’s no re-flipping blacks. Reformists cannot engage in a bidding war. And Sowell is a blank-slatist on race, so his observations about race have limited utility.

    Still, it is interesting to consider in a purely sociological sense. Probably it is related to IQ. But one can still think of alternative explanations. Sports are very important to blacks because it is one of the few areas they excel. This also includes female ones, who often gain college scholarships through sports.

    • Thanks: V. K. Ovelund
  28. @dfordoom
    There's a huge gulf between Zoomers and everybody else. That's very very ominous. Zoomers seem to have already cut themselves loose from oppressive systems such as so-called "reality".

    Replies: @AndrewR, @Alfa158, @Eugene Norman

    The good news is, sooner or later reality intrudes on fantasy.
    The bad news is, sooner or later reality intrudes on fantasy.
    In the meantime as they plummet earthward they can keep telling themselves, “OK so far, so good, I really CAN fly by flapping my arms”.

  29. @Truth
    @Buzz Mohawk


    Tranny men who can actually fool normal people into thinking they are female must be very rare.
     
    No they aren't. Practically every woman you wanked to growing up, whom you did not know, is a tranny.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4kTFQ-HNsc

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RoNd7D9fTDA

    Replies: @Hapalong Cassidy, @Alfa158, @Buzz Mohawk

    The fact that she’s married and has children aside, I remember Kathy Ireland as having an extremely high-pitched, almost childish voice. She starred in a horrible B-movie called “Alien from LA” which got the MSTK3000 treatment, and her voice was the most made fun of thing in that episode. Anyway, I doubt if any degree of hormone therapy or castration could get a man’s voice to sound like that.

    • Replies: @Truth
    @Hapalong Cassidy


    The fact that she’s married and has children aside
     
    Oh, you were her midwife?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HFe-O-WmR4
    , @Audacious Epigone
    @Hapalong Cassidy

    Never heard of the movie but watching the trailer, despite her being the star of the film, the only thing she says is "from out of town". Several other characters are shown saying more:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-SclSgWSa4

    That her voice naturally sounds like that strains credulity, but there it is. Good thing God made her pretty!

  30. @Truth
    @Buzz Mohawk


    Tranny men who can actually fool normal people into thinking they are female must be very rare.
     
    No they aren't. Practically every woman you wanked to growing up, whom you did not know, is a tranny.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4kTFQ-HNsc

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RoNd7D9fTDA

    Replies: @Hapalong Cassidy, @Alfa158, @Buzz Mohawk

    • Replies: @Truth
    @Alfa158

    No, Old Sport, I don't fap to any trannies, white or black, you have a preference for white trannies, and hey, it's (sorta) still a free country.

  31. @Some Guy
    @AndrewR

    Maybe because Millenials are the oldest generation that has actually had to deal with this new wave of trans?
    https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1364618178916200455/photo/1

    Replies: @El Dato

    I’m so tired of all this bullshit.

    DeTrans might be the next Big Thing. The rah-rah / self-celebration mentality and pumping fists iconography is already there.

    Does it fall under medicare?

  32. @Hapalong Cassidy
    @Truth

    The fact that she’s married and has children aside, I remember Kathy Ireland as having an extremely high-pitched, almost childish voice. She starred in a horrible B-movie called “Alien from LA” which got the MSTK3000 treatment, and her voice was the most made fun of thing in that episode. Anyway, I doubt if any degree of hormone therapy or castration could get a man’s voice to sound like that.

    Replies: @Truth, @Audacious Epigone

    The fact that she’s married and has children aside

    Oh, you were her midwife?

  33. @Alfa158
    @Truth

    “Come on man!”
    You left out your favorite tyrannie you like to fap to:
    https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=jaRTQ0sd&id=4E1BD5D0C27E7EB05D997E11BF4319E29EB66AC5&thid=OIP.jaRTQ0sdvIQ70zzpBqfC6wHaD6&mediaurl=https%3a%2f%2fi0.wp.com%2fobamawatcher.com%2fwp-content%2fuploads%2f2019%2f11%2fMichelle-has-more-class-than-you-ever-will.jpg%3ffit%3d1200%252C633%26ssl%3d1&exph=633&expw=1200&q=Michelle+Obama+Born&simid=608014171990001250&ck=BC9AE5D9F565B7752C0DD0A28A2D8D4F&selectedIndex=223&FORM=IRPRST&ajaxhist=0

    Replies: @Truth

    No, Old Sport, I don’t fap to any trannies, white or black, you have a preference for white trannies, and hey, it’s (sorta) still a free country.

  34. I didn’t make the video.

    I don’t know the guy who did.

  35. @Truth
    @Buzz Mohawk


    Tranny men who can actually fool normal people into thinking they are female must be very rare.
     
    No they aren't. Practically every woman you wanked to growing up, whom you did not know, is a tranny.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4kTFQ-HNsc

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RoNd7D9fTDA

    Replies: @Hapalong Cassidy, @Alfa158, @Buzz Mohawk

    Practically every woman you wanked to growing up, whom you did not know, is a tranny.

    I’m glad to hear that at least the girls I knew who were cool enough to let me wank to them were real.

    Take your meds.

  36. @Buzz Mohawk
    @anon


    ... suppose that WNBA teams start running trans point guards, would anyone notice much of a difference?
     
    They would notice, and there would be a real difference.

    Steve Sailer has done a good job of pointing out the glaring differences between male and female athletic abilities. Without searching and documenting, all I can tell you is that something like high school boys' teams routinely beat the very best women's teams in the world, olympic, professional, etc., when the two are matched up. This has happened at exhibition games and events of various kinds.

    The fact is, most people are not aware of how far apart the abilities are.

    As for the whole tranny thing, I wonder how many people have actually met one. I have met more than one, even once in a business/political situation. They are obviously men, and they are very, very strange. One's perception, common sense cannot be denied. It is ridiculous. These people are crazy weirdos who just dress up like women, maybe have some unconscionable medical procedures performed on themselves, and want us to pretend it isn't funny and/or sick.

    Tranny men who can actually fool normal people into thinking they are female must be very rare. This is all a weird fantasy.

    Replies: @Truth, @anon, @nebulafox

    >As for the whole tranny thing, I wonder how many people have actually met one.

    Thailand. They did not fool me. And Thais are a lot more likely to pull it off than Americans.

  37. Am I the only one who finds that bar chart hard to understand? It looks to me like 62% of Republicans disapprove of rules banning transgenders in women’s sports, and I know that can’t be right.

    Help.

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @Paperback Writer

    You're not the only one, and it's not 62%.

    The "net" is 62%, which means when you subtract the percentage who disapprove of a ban from the percentage that approve, you get 62. That means, in the case of conservatives, 19% disapprove and 81% approve of rules banning transgender athletes from competing on women's sports teams. The total is 100, and the difference is 62.

    The number you are looking for there is 81%

    Let's now take the example of men: "Net" approval of rules banning is 30%. This means 35% disapprove and 65% approve of rules banning transgender athletes from competing on women's sports teams.

    Note the notation running vertically along the left margin, "% approve - % disapprove."

    This way of showing this information is needlessly opaque. It would be better to just show bars representing the percentages who approve of such bans and be done with it. That would make it easier to visualize the real differences.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Paperback Writer, @dfordoom, @Audacious Epigone

  38. @prime noticer
    like i said, when some 'woman' starts winning tennis majors and taking million dollar paychecks away from real women, we'll see what the actual state of reactions is.

    for now, the state of reactions is based on sports that don't matter, and people know it. who cares about field hockey? that could disappear, or become all 'women', or stay the same, and nobody would know the difference.

    but if the WNBA allowed a 'woman' to become the MVP and highest paid player in the league, that will be something completely different.

    i chuckle at the thought of some hairy 30 year old Slobovic eastern european guy in a dress dunking on black women and blocking their shots and scoring 40 points a game in the WNBA. talk about the race and gender issues coming together in a train wreck.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer, @MattinLA

    No, there are lawsuits about this, in school districts. People don’t care about millionaire athletes as much as they care about their own daughters getting squished on the court or the track. That’s how this differs from gay marriage.

  39. @Paperback Writer
    Am I the only one who finds that bar chart hard to understand? It looks to me like 62% of Republicans disapprove of rules banning transgenders in women's sports, and I know that can't be right.

    Help.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

    You’re not the only one, and it’s not 62%.

    The “net” is 62%, which means when you subtract the percentage who disapprove of a ban from the percentage that approve, you get 62. That means, in the case of conservatives, 19% disapprove and 81% approve of rules banning transgender athletes from competing on women’s sports teams. The total is 100, and the difference is 62.

    The number you are looking for there is 81%

    Let’s now take the example of men: “Net” approval of rules banning is 30%. This means 35% disapprove and 65% approve of rules banning transgender athletes from competing on women’s sports teams.

    Note the notation running vertically along the left margin, “% approve – % disapprove.”

    This way of showing this information is needlessly opaque. It would be better to just show bars representing the percentages who approve of such bans and be done with it. That would make it easier to visualize the real differences.

    • Disagree: V. K. Ovelund
    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Well, it didn't take very long for "V. K. Overlund" to disagree.

    To be more specific, it would be better to map the bars for approval percentages on a scale of 100. Then the whole picture would be obvious, and if anyone like Mr. Overlund wants to, they can calculate their own "nets" if it makes them happy. The rest of us will be able to see the whole picture plainly in front of our eyes.

    Again, this chart is needlessly opaque, as proved by the commenter's question and the necessity of my calculations.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @A123

    , @Paperback Writer
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Thank you -

    You made the whole thing clear and yes, there are better ways of showing the info. (Sorry V.K. Ovelund)

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Buzz Mohawk

    , @dfordoom
    @Buzz Mohawk


    This way of showing this information is needlessly opaque.
     
    You also have to bear in mind the very low response rates to surveys and the fact that response rates might well vary from generation to generation. Plus people lie through their teeth when responding to such surveys.

    So there may not be any meaningful data there at all.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

    , @Audacious Epigone
    @Buzz Mohawk

    The problem are the respondents who answer "not sure" or "don't know", etc. Sometimes we present them like political polls do, simply throwing out the uncommitted responses (ie when a poll says Biden 51%, Trump 45% it's actually more like Biden 30%, Trump 27% with the rest not planning on voting or voting for someone else--however, when the response is neither support nor oppose, that's different than not voting, etc). That can be misleading too though. In this poll, 21% of moderates have "no opinion/don't know" compared to just 9% of conservatives, and throwing out those portions obscures the stronger feelings conservatives have about the issue than moderates do.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

  40. @Buzz Mohawk
    @Paperback Writer

    You're not the only one, and it's not 62%.

    The "net" is 62%, which means when you subtract the percentage who disapprove of a ban from the percentage that approve, you get 62. That means, in the case of conservatives, 19% disapprove and 81% approve of rules banning transgender athletes from competing on women's sports teams. The total is 100, and the difference is 62.

    The number you are looking for there is 81%

    Let's now take the example of men: "Net" approval of rules banning is 30%. This means 35% disapprove and 65% approve of rules banning transgender athletes from competing on women's sports teams.

    Note the notation running vertically along the left margin, "% approve - % disapprove."

    This way of showing this information is needlessly opaque. It would be better to just show bars representing the percentages who approve of such bans and be done with it. That would make it easier to visualize the real differences.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Paperback Writer, @dfordoom, @Audacious Epigone

    Well, it didn’t take very long for “V. K. Overlund” to disagree.

    To be more specific, it would be better to map the bars for approval percentages on a scale of 100. Then the whole picture would be obvious, and if anyone like Mr. Overlund wants to, they can calculate their own “nets” if it makes them happy. The rest of us will be able to see the whole picture plainly in front of our eyes.

    Again, this chart is needlessly opaque, as proved by the commenter’s question and the necessity of my calculations.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Sorry, I should have explained. I prefer net charts because they properly treat respondents who answer neither yea nor nay. Like, “Do you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of potential New York gubernatorial candidate Tom Suozzi?” Favorable 15 percent, unfavorable 10 percent, never heard of him 75 percent. That's a net of +5.

    I understand your point, but I like the net charts.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

    , @A123
    @Buzz Mohawk

    There is no "one right answer":

    • People visualize data differently.
    • Some data sets process badly with certain techniques.

    An advantage of AE's approach is it handles Strong and Standard intensity well:
      2x Strongly Approve
      1x Approve
      0x No Opinion
    -1x Disapprove
    -2x Strongly Disapprove

    Anyone who wants to do the math to generate a different visualization is free to do so. AE usually links the source document, so you can go all the way back to the survey/poll results if you want.

    PEACE 😇

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

  41. @Buzz Mohawk
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Well, it didn't take very long for "V. K. Overlund" to disagree.

    To be more specific, it would be better to map the bars for approval percentages on a scale of 100. Then the whole picture would be obvious, and if anyone like Mr. Overlund wants to, they can calculate their own "nets" if it makes them happy. The rest of us will be able to see the whole picture plainly in front of our eyes.

    Again, this chart is needlessly opaque, as proved by the commenter's question and the necessity of my calculations.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @A123

    Sorry, I should have explained. I prefer net charts because they properly treat respondents who answer neither yea nor nay. Like, “Do you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of potential New York gubernatorial candidate Tom Suozzi?” Favorable 15 percent, unfavorable 10 percent, never heard of him 75 percent. That’s a net of +5.

    I understand your point, but I like the net charts.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @V. K. Ovelund

    I'm wrong on this one anyway. One look at AE's source material makes it obvious, but thanks.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

  42. @Buzz Mohawk
    @Paperback Writer

    You're not the only one, and it's not 62%.

    The "net" is 62%, which means when you subtract the percentage who disapprove of a ban from the percentage that approve, you get 62. That means, in the case of conservatives, 19% disapprove and 81% approve of rules banning transgender athletes from competing on women's sports teams. The total is 100, and the difference is 62.

    The number you are looking for there is 81%

    Let's now take the example of men: "Net" approval of rules banning is 30%. This means 35% disapprove and 65% approve of rules banning transgender athletes from competing on women's sports teams.

    Note the notation running vertically along the left margin, "% approve - % disapprove."

    This way of showing this information is needlessly opaque. It would be better to just show bars representing the percentages who approve of such bans and be done with it. That would make it easier to visualize the real differences.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Paperback Writer, @dfordoom, @Audacious Epigone

    Thank you –

    You made the whole thing clear and yes, there are better ways of showing the info. (Sorry V.K. Ovelund)

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @Paperback Writer

    Sorry, but I was wrong. The survey results are more detailed than that, and it appears that AE is using his own interpretive methods to derive his graph from those results.

    There were 5 choices, and there were many categories of participants, so he crunched it down for us into net values.

    My number for conservative "approve" is probably wrong. In fact, looking at all the data, I have no idea what it would be, since there isn't even a "conservative" category. I think AE derived one.

    We just have to go with his visualization -- or look at the survey results ourselves, via the link.

    , @Buzz Mohawk
    @Paperback Writer

    Another correction/mea culpa: There is a conservative row in the survey results, titled "Ideo: Conservative (5-7)." I missed it. A123 describes it in his comment.

  43. @Dumbo
    Well, maybe this is good in the end. It means that eventually only trannies, butch lesbians, hermaphrodites and genetically modified Chinese teens will compete in any "female sport", and no one will watch it, and most women will go back to dedicate themselves to other more feminine activities.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @Morton's toes

    Nobody watches women sports. The closest thing is women’s gymnastics and figure skating which are scored by judges and not really a human versus human competition.

    Women’s tennis had a good run for a while but with all the screaming and the grunting it is now unwatchable, notwithstanding you can watch better players for free at the male events at your local college; that was always the case even when women’s tennis was interesting.

    Trannies or no trannies it doesn’t add up to a plate of beans. When a tranny gets the women’s figure skating gold medal it will merely be an oddity. (Also the uneven parallel bars event looks immune.)

  44. @Buzz Mohawk
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Well, it didn't take very long for "V. K. Overlund" to disagree.

    To be more specific, it would be better to map the bars for approval percentages on a scale of 100. Then the whole picture would be obvious, and if anyone like Mr. Overlund wants to, they can calculate their own "nets" if it makes them happy. The rest of us will be able to see the whole picture plainly in front of our eyes.

    Again, this chart is needlessly opaque, as proved by the commenter's question and the necessity of my calculations.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @A123

    There is no “one right answer”:

    • People visualize data differently.
    • Some data sets process badly with certain techniques.

    An advantage of AE’s approach is it handles Strong and Standard intensity well:
      2x Strongly Approve
      1x Approve
      0x No Opinion
    -1x Disapprove
    -2x Strongly Disapprove

    Anyone who wants to do the math to generate a different visualization is free to do so. AE usually links the source document, so you can go all the way back to the survey/poll results if you want.

    PEACE 😇

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @A123

    Thanks. I'm looking at the survey results right now, and I see what you mean: those 5 choices. My assumption of just two was wrong.

    Replies: @A123

  45. @A123
    @Buzz Mohawk

    There is no "one right answer":

    • People visualize data differently.
    • Some data sets process badly with certain techniques.

    An advantage of AE's approach is it handles Strong and Standard intensity well:
      2x Strongly Approve
      1x Approve
      0x No Opinion
    -1x Disapprove
    -2x Strongly Disapprove

    Anyone who wants to do the math to generate a different visualization is free to do so. AE usually links the source document, so you can go all the way back to the survey/poll results if you want.

    PEACE 😇

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

    Thanks. I’m looking at the survey results right now, and I see what you mean: those 5 choices. My assumption of just two was wrong.

    • Replies: @A123
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Hmmm....

    I am also incorrect on the methodology for this visualization. AE directly added Strong and Somewhat with no "leverage".

    For question POL20, there is a "Ideo: Conservative (5-7)" row:

    62 Strongly Support
    14 Somewhat Support
      9 No Opinion
      6 Somewhat Oppose
      8 Strongly Oppose

    62+14-6-8 = 62 Conservative, which is what shows on the chart.
    ____

    AE has used a "leverage" multiplier for Strong versus Standard/Somewhat in other visualizations, but not this one.

    PEACE 😇

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Audacious Epigone

  46. @Paperback Writer
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Thank you -

    You made the whole thing clear and yes, there are better ways of showing the info. (Sorry V.K. Ovelund)

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Buzz Mohawk

    Sorry, but I was wrong. The survey results are more detailed than that, and it appears that AE is using his own interpretive methods to derive his graph from those results.

    There were 5 choices, and there were many categories of participants, so he crunched it down for us into net values.

    My number for conservative “approve” is probably wrong. In fact, looking at all the data, I have no idea what it would be, since there isn’t even a “conservative” category. I think AE derived one.

    We just have to go with his visualization — or look at the survey results ourselves, via the link.

  47. @V. K. Ovelund
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Sorry, I should have explained. I prefer net charts because they properly treat respondents who answer neither yea nor nay. Like, “Do you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of potential New York gubernatorial candidate Tom Suozzi?” Favorable 15 percent, unfavorable 10 percent, never heard of him 75 percent. That's a net of +5.

    I understand your point, but I like the net charts.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

    I’m wrong on this one anyway. One look at AE’s source material makes it obvious, but thanks.

    • Replies: @Paperback Writer
    @Buzz Mohawk

    But the rough concept you outlined is right, isn't it? Also you pointed out that the bars don't rep percentages, as I'd erroneously put it, but a net value, so that clarified, so still, thanks.

    I should probably admit now that I was confused as to how you had derived the numbers from the net. (82 and 19, for example, in the Republican.)

    Is there an algebraic formula for how you figured this out? Just curious.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

  48. @dfordoom
    There's a huge gulf between Zoomers and everybody else. That's very very ominous. Zoomers seem to have already cut themselves loose from oppressive systems such as so-called "reality".

    Replies: @AndrewR, @Alfa158, @Eugene Norman

    On the other hand look at the millennials. More hostile to this than boomers or gen x. As zoomers age they will change.

    Anyway plenty of people still think you have to transition for a few years to play against the opposite sex. It’s actually biological men who just need to self declare in most cases (or that is the suggested law). When that’s understood the hostility will increase.

    If it doesn’t – popcorn. We men shouldn’t really care or try and defend women’s turf as AE says. If they want to discriminate against themselves and disappear as a sex class then so be it.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @Eugene Norman


    We men shouldn’t really care or try and defend women’s turf as AE says.
     
    Who needs allies anyway? Men, social conservatives and the dissident right have managed to lose every battle all on their own. They certainly don't need allies.

    And why would any group want to take advantage of a situation that could cause a major split in the ranks of their enemies?

    For manosphere types, social conservatives and the dissident right it's not about winning. It's about whining.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    , @V. K. Ovelund
    @Eugene Norman


    We men shouldn’t really care or try and defend women’s turf as AE says.
     
    Women in the aggregate have no turf.
    , @Paperback Writer
    @Eugene Norman


    We men shouldn’t really care or try and defend women’s turf as AE says.

     

    What if it's your daughter?

    Unzmen are strange. They consider themselves to be superior "noticers" (to use a Sailerism) but they don't notice some basic facts. Men don't care about "women" - they care about their wives, daughters, and sisters.

    And stop using the word "should" -- you don't run anything, and you certainly don't run the way Mr. Average Joe lives his life. When trannies come for his daughter, he'll get very primally aroused, and not in a good way.

  49. @Buzz Mohawk
    @A123

    Thanks. I'm looking at the survey results right now, and I see what you mean: those 5 choices. My assumption of just two was wrong.

    Replies: @A123

    Hmmm….

    I am also incorrect on the methodology for this visualization. AE directly added Strong and Somewhat with no “leverage”.

    For question POL20, there is a “Ideo: Conservative (5-7)” row:

    62 Strongly Support
    14 Somewhat Support
      9 No Opinion
      6 Somewhat Oppose
      8 Strongly Oppose

    62+14-6-8 = 62 Conservative, which is what shows on the chart.
    ____

    AE has used a “leverage” multiplier for Strong versus Standard/Somewhat in other visualizations, but not this one.

    PEACE 😇

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @A123

    Thanks, and now that you mention it, I see the "Ideo: Conservative" row, which I missed before.

    Okay, so he is sort of breaking things in half, as I first thought, but leaving out the "No Opinion." My way of visualizing would be to just show the 76% of conservatives that show support, do the same for the other rows, and call it a day.

    Another option would be bar graphing all 5 choices in 5 colors on the same bar, making the actual portions visible.

    Anyway, we thank AE for doing all this work. We do appreciate it, and it's one of the reasons we read his blog.

    , @Audacious Epigone
    @A123

    The formula is always along the y-axis (vertical). If it's approve or disapprove, I generally will lump somewhat and strong, etc. If it is more quantitative in nature, ie should immigration be increased "a little" vs "a lot", I'll use a multiplier. The source material is always linked to as well with the exception of the GSS which is an SDA database people can easily find on their own but that I don't want to be too negatively effective by so many incoming links from a "controversial" site like this one.

  50. @Buzz Mohawk
    @Paperback Writer

    You're not the only one, and it's not 62%.

    The "net" is 62%, which means when you subtract the percentage who disapprove of a ban from the percentage that approve, you get 62. That means, in the case of conservatives, 19% disapprove and 81% approve of rules banning transgender athletes from competing on women's sports teams. The total is 100, and the difference is 62.

    The number you are looking for there is 81%

    Let's now take the example of men: "Net" approval of rules banning is 30%. This means 35% disapprove and 65% approve of rules banning transgender athletes from competing on women's sports teams.

    Note the notation running vertically along the left margin, "% approve - % disapprove."

    This way of showing this information is needlessly opaque. It would be better to just show bars representing the percentages who approve of such bans and be done with it. That would make it easier to visualize the real differences.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Paperback Writer, @dfordoom, @Audacious Epigone

    This way of showing this information is needlessly opaque.

    You also have to bear in mind the very low response rates to surveys and the fact that response rates might well vary from generation to generation. Plus people lie through their teeth when responding to such surveys.

    So there may not be any meaningful data there at all.

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @dfordoom

    Well, that's true too.

  51. @A123
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Hmmm....

    I am also incorrect on the methodology for this visualization. AE directly added Strong and Somewhat with no "leverage".

    For question POL20, there is a "Ideo: Conservative (5-7)" row:

    62 Strongly Support
    14 Somewhat Support
      9 No Opinion
      6 Somewhat Oppose
      8 Strongly Oppose

    62+14-6-8 = 62 Conservative, which is what shows on the chart.
    ____

    AE has used a "leverage" multiplier for Strong versus Standard/Somewhat in other visualizations, but not this one.

    PEACE 😇

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Audacious Epigone

    Thanks, and now that you mention it, I see the “Ideo: Conservative” row, which I missed before.

    Okay, so he is sort of breaking things in half, as I first thought, but leaving out the “No Opinion.” My way of visualizing would be to just show the 76% of conservatives that show support, do the same for the other rows, and call it a day.

    Another option would be bar graphing all 5 choices in 5 colors on the same bar, making the actual portions visible.

    Anyway, we thank AE for doing all this work. We do appreciate it, and it’s one of the reasons we read his blog.

  52. @Paperback Writer
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Thank you -

    You made the whole thing clear and yes, there are better ways of showing the info. (Sorry V.K. Ovelund)

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Buzz Mohawk

    Another correction/mea culpa: There is a conservative row in the survey results, titled “Ideo: Conservative (5-7).” I missed it. A123 describes it in his comment.

  53. @Eugene Norman
    @dfordoom

    On the other hand look at the millennials. More hostile to this than boomers or gen x. As zoomers age they will change.

    Anyway plenty of people still think you have to transition for a few years to play against the opposite sex. It’s actually biological men who just need to self declare in most cases (or that is the suggested law). When that’s understood the hostility will increase.

    If it doesn’t - popcorn. We men shouldn’t really care or try and defend women’s turf as AE says. If they want to discriminate against themselves and disappear as a sex class then so be it.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @V. K. Ovelund, @Paperback Writer

    We men shouldn’t really care or try and defend women’s turf as AE says.

    Who needs allies anyway? Men, social conservatives and the dissident right have managed to lose every battle all on their own. They certainly don’t need allies.

    And why would any group want to take advantage of a situation that could cause a major split in the ranks of their enemies?

    For manosphere types, social conservatives and the dissident right it’s not about winning. It’s about whining.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @dfordoom


    Who needs allies anyway?...For manosphere types, social conservatives and the dissident right it’s not about winning. It’s about whining.
     
    I've noticed this, too. These sorts drive away any and all potential allies, guaranteeing their irrelevance.
    They particularly hate white women -- Steve Sailer's blog is a festering nest of misogynists, for example, but Gregory Hood's column at AmRen and John Derbyshire's at VDare, reprinted on this website with comments, are also hostile to white women.
    The righties also hate the military and constantly denigrate those who serve.
    They hate American Indians, some of the most patriotic people around, apparently terrified that at any time a Comanche will leap out of the lilacs and tomahawk them.
    They do not acknowledge that there are blacks, Hispanics, Asians and assorted mixed race people who are as appalled as they are by current events and could be strong allies.
    Ditto for Jews, whom they seem to be both terrified of as all-powerful masterminds and hate as the source of all evil in the world.
    They constant rant on about STEM and IQ while most seem to be cubicle drones with unimportant jobs that leave them plenty of time to cruise the internet and post comment after comment.
    One thing the Unz Review has done for me, and very likely many others, is allow the righties to reveal in their own words what nasty individuals they are. I'm a naturally conservative old stock American who wants to defeat the totalitarian left and restore at least some semblance of the America that was, but I see nothing that I want to be successful in the rantings of the right.
    I'm glad they don't want allies. Let them sulk in their little corner of the internet. They have not and never will have significance or consequence.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @anon, @dfordoom

  54. @Eugene Norman
    @dfordoom

    On the other hand look at the millennials. More hostile to this than boomers or gen x. As zoomers age they will change.

    Anyway plenty of people still think you have to transition for a few years to play against the opposite sex. It’s actually biological men who just need to self declare in most cases (or that is the suggested law). When that’s understood the hostility will increase.

    If it doesn’t - popcorn. We men shouldn’t really care or try and defend women’s turf as AE says. If they want to discriminate against themselves and disappear as a sex class then so be it.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @V. K. Ovelund, @Paperback Writer

    We men shouldn’t really care or try and defend women’s turf as AE says.

    Women in the aggregate have no turf.

  55. @dfordoom
    @Buzz Mohawk


    This way of showing this information is needlessly opaque.
     
    You also have to bear in mind the very low response rates to surveys and the fact that response rates might well vary from generation to generation. Plus people lie through their teeth when responding to such surveys.

    So there may not be any meaningful data there at all.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

    Well, that’s true too.

  56. @prime noticer
    like i said, when some 'woman' starts winning tennis majors and taking million dollar paychecks away from real women, we'll see what the actual state of reactions is.

    for now, the state of reactions is based on sports that don't matter, and people know it. who cares about field hockey? that could disappear, or become all 'women', or stay the same, and nobody would know the difference.

    but if the WNBA allowed a 'woman' to become the MVP and highest paid player in the league, that will be something completely different.

    i chuckle at the thought of some hairy 30 year old Slobovic eastern european guy in a dress dunking on black women and blocking their shots and scoring 40 points a game in the WNBA. talk about the race and gender issues coming together in a train wreck.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer, @MattinLA

    Agreed. And I hope it happens!

  57. @Buzz Mohawk
    @V. K. Ovelund

    I'm wrong on this one anyway. One look at AE's source material makes it obvious, but thanks.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

    But the rough concept you outlined is right, isn’t it? Also you pointed out that the bars don’t rep percentages, as I’d erroneously put it, but a net value, so that clarified, so still, thanks.

    I should probably admit now that I was confused as to how you had derived the numbers from the net. (82 and 19, for example, in the Republican.)

    Is there an algebraic formula for how you figured this out? Just curious.

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @Paperback Writer

    Thank you.

    To figure it out, I reasoned that if there are two numbers, a and b, and their difference is, say, 62 (for conservatives) and their sum is 100 (the total percentage of people surveyed) then somehow a - b must equal 62, while a + b must equal 100. I did the rest in my head. Only one pair of numbers satisfies this: 81 and 19.

    I'm sure there are a few algebraic ways to approach this, but they really aren't necessary.

    The following, after the MORE tag, is my attempt to translate my thinking into algebra:

    a - b = 62

    a + b = 100

    a = 62 + b

    b = 100 - a

    a = 62 + 100 - a

    2a = 162

    a = 81

    b = 100 - 81

    b = 19

    81 = 19 = 100 check

    81 - 19 = 62 check

    This is a reasonable algebraic approximation of what went on in my head.

    Now, if only my assumptions about what AE was doing, and the data he was given, had been correct, I wouldn't be so embarrassed about my postings here. Thank you for your interest!

  58. @Eugene Norman
    @dfordoom

    On the other hand look at the millennials. More hostile to this than boomers or gen x. As zoomers age they will change.

    Anyway plenty of people still think you have to transition for a few years to play against the opposite sex. It’s actually biological men who just need to self declare in most cases (or that is the suggested law). When that’s understood the hostility will increase.

    If it doesn’t - popcorn. We men shouldn’t really care or try and defend women’s turf as AE says. If they want to discriminate against themselves and disappear as a sex class then so be it.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @V. K. Ovelund, @Paperback Writer

    We men shouldn’t really care or try and defend women’s turf as AE says.

    What if it’s your daughter?

    Unzmen are strange. They consider themselves to be superior “noticers” (to use a Sailerism) but they don’t notice some basic facts. Men don’t care about “women” – they care about their wives, daughters, and sisters.

    And stop using the word “should” — you don’t run anything, and you certainly don’t run the way Mr. Average Joe lives his life. When trannies come for his daughter, he’ll get very primally aroused, and not in a good way.

  59. @Paperback Writer
    @Buzz Mohawk

    But the rough concept you outlined is right, isn't it? Also you pointed out that the bars don't rep percentages, as I'd erroneously put it, but a net value, so that clarified, so still, thanks.

    I should probably admit now that I was confused as to how you had derived the numbers from the net. (82 and 19, for example, in the Republican.)

    Is there an algebraic formula for how you figured this out? Just curious.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

    Thank you.

    To figure it out, I reasoned that if there are two numbers, a and b, and their difference is, say, 62 (for conservatives) and their sum is 100 (the total percentage of people surveyed) then somehow a – b must equal 62, while a + b must equal 100. I did the rest in my head. Only one pair of numbers satisfies this: 81 and 19.

    I’m sure there are a few algebraic ways to approach this, but they really aren’t necessary.

    The following, after the MORE tag, is my attempt to translate my thinking into algebra:

    [MORE]

    a – b = 62

    a + b = 100

    a = 62 + b

    b = 100 – a

    a = 62 + 100 – a

    2a = 162

    a = 81

    b = 100 – 81

    b = 19

    81 = 19 = 100 check

    81 – 19 = 62 check

    This is a reasonable algebraic approximation of what went on in my head.

    Now, if only my assumptions about what AE was doing, and the data he was given, had been correct, I wouldn’t be so embarrassed about my postings here. Thank you for your interest!

  60. “based” gen z…

  61. @Buzz Mohawk
    @Paperback Writer

    You're not the only one, and it's not 62%.

    The "net" is 62%, which means when you subtract the percentage who disapprove of a ban from the percentage that approve, you get 62. That means, in the case of conservatives, 19% disapprove and 81% approve of rules banning transgender athletes from competing on women's sports teams. The total is 100, and the difference is 62.

    The number you are looking for there is 81%

    Let's now take the example of men: "Net" approval of rules banning is 30%. This means 35% disapprove and 65% approve of rules banning transgender athletes from competing on women's sports teams.

    Note the notation running vertically along the left margin, "% approve - % disapprove."

    This way of showing this information is needlessly opaque. It would be better to just show bars representing the percentages who approve of such bans and be done with it. That would make it easier to visualize the real differences.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Paperback Writer, @dfordoom, @Audacious Epigone

    The problem are the respondents who answer “not sure” or “don’t know”, etc. Sometimes we present them like political polls do, simply throwing out the uncommitted responses (ie when a poll says Biden 51%, Trump 45% it’s actually more like Biden 30%, Trump 27% with the rest not planning on voting or voting for someone else–however, when the response is neither support nor oppose, that’s different than not voting, etc). That can be misleading too though. In this poll, 21% of moderates have “no opinion/don’t know” compared to just 9% of conservatives, and throwing out those portions obscures the stronger feelings conservatives have about the issue than moderates do.

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @Audacious Epigone

    I understand. Thank you for your reply. I am an enthusiastic reader of your blog, and I respect the work you are doing. This is all very interesting, and even though a commenter like me might be wrong or embarrassed sometimes, it is a worthwhile learning experience to just jump in and write about it.

    Now, if only the powers that be would heel to the obvious that we here understand... But apparently they have another agenda. (Waiting things out until opinions, manipulated by them and examined by you here, come around fully?) Your work makes that clear, and we thank you. You are a highlight of the Unz Review.

  62. @Audacious Epigone
    @Buzz Mohawk

    The problem are the respondents who answer "not sure" or "don't know", etc. Sometimes we present them like political polls do, simply throwing out the uncommitted responses (ie when a poll says Biden 51%, Trump 45% it's actually more like Biden 30%, Trump 27% with the rest not planning on voting or voting for someone else--however, when the response is neither support nor oppose, that's different than not voting, etc). That can be misleading too though. In this poll, 21% of moderates have "no opinion/don't know" compared to just 9% of conservatives, and throwing out those portions obscures the stronger feelings conservatives have about the issue than moderates do.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

    I understand. Thank you for your reply. I am an enthusiastic reader of your blog, and I respect the work you are doing. This is all very interesting, and even though a commenter like me might be wrong or embarrassed sometimes, it is a worthwhile learning experience to just jump in and write about it.

    Now, if only the powers that be would heel to the obvious that we here understand… But apparently they have another agenda. (Waiting things out until opinions, manipulated by them and examined by you here, come around fully?) Your work makes that clear, and we thank you. You are a highlight of the Unz Review.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  63. Anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:
    @dfordoom
    @Eugene Norman


    We men shouldn’t really care or try and defend women’s turf as AE says.
     
    Who needs allies anyway? Men, social conservatives and the dissident right have managed to lose every battle all on their own. They certainly don't need allies.

    And why would any group want to take advantage of a situation that could cause a major split in the ranks of their enemies?

    For manosphere types, social conservatives and the dissident right it's not about winning. It's about whining.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    Who needs allies anyway?…For manosphere types, social conservatives and the dissident right it’s not about winning. It’s about whining.

    I’ve noticed this, too. These sorts drive away any and all potential allies, guaranteeing their irrelevance.
    They particularly hate white women — Steve Sailer’s blog is a festering nest of misogynists, for example, but Gregory Hood’s column at AmRen and John Derbyshire’s at VDare, reprinted on this website with comments, are also hostile to white women.
    The righties also hate the military and constantly denigrate those who serve.
    They hate American Indians, some of the most patriotic people around, apparently terrified that at any time a Comanche will leap out of the lilacs and tomahawk them.
    They do not acknowledge that there are blacks, Hispanics, Asians and assorted mixed race people who are as appalled as they are by current events and could be strong allies.
    Ditto for Jews, whom they seem to be both terrified of as all-powerful masterminds and hate as the source of all evil in the world.
    They constant rant on about STEM and IQ while most seem to be cubicle drones with unimportant jobs that leave them plenty of time to cruise the internet and post comment after comment.
    One thing the Unz Review has done for me, and very likely many others, is allow the righties to reveal in their own words what nasty individuals they are. I’m a naturally conservative old stock American who wants to defeat the totalitarian left and restore at least some semblance of the America that was, but I see nothing that I want to be successful in the rantings of the right.
    I’m glad they don’t want allies. Let them sulk in their little corner of the internet. They have not and never will have significance or consequence.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @Anonymous


    Gregory Hood’s column at AmRen and John Derbyshire’s at VDare, reprinted on this website with comments, are also hostile to white women.
     
    What do you mean?
    , @anon
    @Anonymous

    I’m a naturally conservative old stock American who wants to defeat the totalitarian left and restore at least some semblance of the America that was,

    Sure you are. Complete with bow tie, of course. Autographed by George Will!

    , @dfordoom
    @Anonymous


    One thing the Unz Review has done for me, and very likely many others, is allow the righties to reveal in their own words what nasty individuals they are.
     
    Yes, I agree with that. Not just nasty but also irrational and entirely emotion-driven.

    There are a lot of white men who are angry because they feel that they've lost their dominant position in society. They yearn for the days when women did what they were told and they yearn for the days when non-whites grovelled to white men. The anti-China hysteria is almost entirely the result of the frustration of these white men that the Chinese are no longer subservient coolies and polite house-boys.

    It is amusing that so many of these far right white men are convinced that they are really the intellectual elite. It's amusing because their comments so often reveal that even in the days when white men ruled they would still have been on the bottom of the heap.

    I’m a naturally conservative old stock American who wants to defeat the totalitarian left and restore at least some semblance of the America that was
     
    I'm what you might call an old stock Australian and by today's standards I'm a social conservative. I still believe that men and women are fundamentally different and I don't believe that children should be subjected to LGBT propaganda so that's enough to make me a social conservative in today's world. I differ from some of the social conservatives here at UR in the sense that I think social conservatism is generally sound but I don't want the government acting as a Moral Policeman.

    but I see nothing that I want to be successful in the rantings of the right.
     
    I mostly agree. The far right is correct on a few issues but I think they're dead wrong on many other issues. I was sympathetic to the alt-right five years ago but the more I've been exposed to the far right the more convinced I've become that they do not have the answers and that they probably aren't going to achieve anything.
  64. @Anonymous
    @dfordoom


    Who needs allies anyway?...For manosphere types, social conservatives and the dissident right it’s not about winning. It’s about whining.
     
    I've noticed this, too. These sorts drive away any and all potential allies, guaranteeing their irrelevance.
    They particularly hate white women -- Steve Sailer's blog is a festering nest of misogynists, for example, but Gregory Hood's column at AmRen and John Derbyshire's at VDare, reprinted on this website with comments, are also hostile to white women.
    The righties also hate the military and constantly denigrate those who serve.
    They hate American Indians, some of the most patriotic people around, apparently terrified that at any time a Comanche will leap out of the lilacs and tomahawk them.
    They do not acknowledge that there are blacks, Hispanics, Asians and assorted mixed race people who are as appalled as they are by current events and could be strong allies.
    Ditto for Jews, whom they seem to be both terrified of as all-powerful masterminds and hate as the source of all evil in the world.
    They constant rant on about STEM and IQ while most seem to be cubicle drones with unimportant jobs that leave them plenty of time to cruise the internet and post comment after comment.
    One thing the Unz Review has done for me, and very likely many others, is allow the righties to reveal in their own words what nasty individuals they are. I'm a naturally conservative old stock American who wants to defeat the totalitarian left and restore at least some semblance of the America that was, but I see nothing that I want to be successful in the rantings of the right.
    I'm glad they don't want allies. Let them sulk in their little corner of the internet. They have not and never will have significance or consequence.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @anon, @dfordoom

    Gregory Hood’s column at AmRen and John Derbyshire’s at VDare, reprinted on this website with comments, are also hostile to white women.

    What do you mean?

  65. @Anonymous
    @dfordoom


    Who needs allies anyway?...For manosphere types, social conservatives and the dissident right it’s not about winning. It’s about whining.
     
    I've noticed this, too. These sorts drive away any and all potential allies, guaranteeing their irrelevance.
    They particularly hate white women -- Steve Sailer's blog is a festering nest of misogynists, for example, but Gregory Hood's column at AmRen and John Derbyshire's at VDare, reprinted on this website with comments, are also hostile to white women.
    The righties also hate the military and constantly denigrate those who serve.
    They hate American Indians, some of the most patriotic people around, apparently terrified that at any time a Comanche will leap out of the lilacs and tomahawk them.
    They do not acknowledge that there are blacks, Hispanics, Asians and assorted mixed race people who are as appalled as they are by current events and could be strong allies.
    Ditto for Jews, whom they seem to be both terrified of as all-powerful masterminds and hate as the source of all evil in the world.
    They constant rant on about STEM and IQ while most seem to be cubicle drones with unimportant jobs that leave them plenty of time to cruise the internet and post comment after comment.
    One thing the Unz Review has done for me, and very likely many others, is allow the righties to reveal in their own words what nasty individuals they are. I'm a naturally conservative old stock American who wants to defeat the totalitarian left and restore at least some semblance of the America that was, but I see nothing that I want to be successful in the rantings of the right.
    I'm glad they don't want allies. Let them sulk in their little corner of the internet. They have not and never will have significance or consequence.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @anon, @dfordoom

    I’m a naturally conservative old stock American who wants to defeat the totalitarian left and restore at least some semblance of the America that was,

    Sure you are. Complete with bow tie, of course. Autographed by George Will!

  66. @Anonymous
    @dfordoom


    Who needs allies anyway?...For manosphere types, social conservatives and the dissident right it’s not about winning. It’s about whining.
     
    I've noticed this, too. These sorts drive away any and all potential allies, guaranteeing their irrelevance.
    They particularly hate white women -- Steve Sailer's blog is a festering nest of misogynists, for example, but Gregory Hood's column at AmRen and John Derbyshire's at VDare, reprinted on this website with comments, are also hostile to white women.
    The righties also hate the military and constantly denigrate those who serve.
    They hate American Indians, some of the most patriotic people around, apparently terrified that at any time a Comanche will leap out of the lilacs and tomahawk them.
    They do not acknowledge that there are blacks, Hispanics, Asians and assorted mixed race people who are as appalled as they are by current events and could be strong allies.
    Ditto for Jews, whom they seem to be both terrified of as all-powerful masterminds and hate as the source of all evil in the world.
    They constant rant on about STEM and IQ while most seem to be cubicle drones with unimportant jobs that leave them plenty of time to cruise the internet and post comment after comment.
    One thing the Unz Review has done for me, and very likely many others, is allow the righties to reveal in their own words what nasty individuals they are. I'm a naturally conservative old stock American who wants to defeat the totalitarian left and restore at least some semblance of the America that was, but I see nothing that I want to be successful in the rantings of the right.
    I'm glad they don't want allies. Let them sulk in their little corner of the internet. They have not and never will have significance or consequence.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @anon, @dfordoom

    One thing the Unz Review has done for me, and very likely many others, is allow the righties to reveal in their own words what nasty individuals they are.

    Yes, I agree with that. Not just nasty but also irrational and entirely emotion-driven.

    There are a lot of white men who are angry because they feel that they’ve lost their dominant position in society. They yearn for the days when women did what they were told and they yearn for the days when non-whites grovelled to white men. The anti-China hysteria is almost entirely the result of the frustration of these white men that the Chinese are no longer subservient coolies and polite house-boys.

    It is amusing that so many of these far right white men are convinced that they are really the intellectual elite. It’s amusing because their comments so often reveal that even in the days when white men ruled they would still have been on the bottom of the heap.

    I’m a naturally conservative old stock American who wants to defeat the totalitarian left and restore at least some semblance of the America that was

    I’m what you might call an old stock Australian and by today’s standards I’m a social conservative. I still believe that men and women are fundamentally different and I don’t believe that children should be subjected to LGBT propaganda so that’s enough to make me a social conservative in today’s world. I differ from some of the social conservatives here at UR in the sense that I think social conservatism is generally sound but I don’t want the government acting as a Moral Policeman.

    but I see nothing that I want to be successful in the rantings of the right.

    I mostly agree. The far right is correct on a few issues but I think they’re dead wrong on many other issues. I was sympathetic to the alt-right five years ago but the more I’ve been exposed to the far right the more convinced I’ve become that they do not have the answers and that they probably aren’t going to achieve anything.

  67. @songbird
    We're getting pretty far away from the original purposes of sports.

    Used to be a lot of localism in sports. The pride of your village vs. the pride of the neighboring village, with both communities cheering on their own man. Obviously, if it is trannies vs. women, bigger countries that can draw on more freaks of nature will have the advantage, and small countries will have the disadvantage. It is a win for globalists.

    There is also a great distortion involving race in sports. The Olympics was originally open only to people with a Greek pedigree. Now, we've moved to a laundry basis of loyalty - people whatever ethnicity they may be wearing the right color uniforms. Obviously, this undermines the nationalist spirit Olympics, when they were revived in 1896, and puts the focus on internationalism.

    In ancient times, sport often had some intersection with military training. If France's modern military looks like its international team, then Frenchmen are in existential danger, and it staggers belief that Frenchmen are supposed to cheer for that.

    Replies: @Wency

    Good observations. I was thinking the irony of the whole tranny in women’s sports issue is that it only bothers conservatives because they don’t care too much about winning in women’s sports. If we discovered a race of 8-foot-tall, ultra-athletic extraterrestrials that reproduce asexually and are technically a fungus, sports-loving normie-cons would be dying to see them play for their national team, or enrolled as students of their favorite football/basketball school.

  68. @Franz

    A generation ago, Hollywood recognized as much. The Ladybugs revolved around a coach trying to win a girl’s soccer league by sneaking a boy in drag onto the team.
     
    Even then, they lifted the story from Plutarch's life of Theseus, who volunteered to go to Crete and challenge Maze & Minotaur... on the condition he could take with him a couple strong but small-sized young fellows dressed as girls to take advantage of their superior male upper body strength. This helped Theseus when things got rough. Well, Ariadne helped too.

    Even a generation ago nobody could imagine anything as goofy as tranny rights. But I wasn't surprised when Biden put this issue on the top of his agenda. Can't have pesky things like the economy and foreign wars getting in the way of what's Really Important.

    Replies: @Audacious Epigone

    The military attacking a member of the media is great. A military junta is fine as long as it it’s Woke!

    • Agree: Franz
    • Replies: @A123
    @Audacious Epigone

    It has changed how I visualize Senior Officers who willingly went along (see below).

    The Harris Regime recruitment plan must be tanking the civilian economy so badly, qualified individuals will have no other choice.

    PEACE 😇
     

    https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-_JUDiJrGRPk/YE-64pwpPjI/AAAAAAACrQQ/NRAfOeklIvsrW_JDJ5U_roUVbeAdsLfaQCLcBGAsYHQ/s548/1%2B1%2Bkjsahfksjadhskldf.jpg

  69. @Buzz Mohawk
    Some of us remember when communist bloc countries were caught putting men on their "women's" olympic teams. It was a scandal then and evidence that they would do anything to win. The "East German Male Olympian on the Women's Team" was something of a stereotype and a joke.

    We never hear about those days now - neither as they pertain to current transgender nonsense nor with regard to the bad behavior of communists, probably because both groups are now held above reproach by the powers that be.

    Replies: @Audacious Epigone

    Indeed:

  70. @Charles Pewitt
    Tulsi Gabbard is good on this Tranny nonsense of allowing male born brutes to bash the living Hell out of women in sports and to outrun them as well.

    Rousey the lady fighter was also a truth teller when she pointed out the biological differences of women and men.

    Navratilova's name is hard to spell but she tells the truth about there being differences between women and men.

    David Byrne is a baby boomer Scottish guy who wrote a catchy tune about this Tranny stuff.

    https://twitter.com/IWV/status/1337406608826044416?s=20

    https://twitter.com/TulsiGabbard/status/1338205576170516482?s=20

    https://youtu.be/JLDnQhVhfdM

    Replies: @Audacious Epigone

    Ms. Gabbard was a martial arts instructor and active duty military. She’s had a front row seat when it comes to biological differences between men and women.

    • Replies: @Charles Pewitt
    @Audacious Epigone

    I met Tulsi Gabbard at a presidential primary town hall event and she is a nice lady of forthright bearing and calm demeanor.

    Tulsi Gabbard has a sister and they made a good comedy team on the campaign trail and Tulsi and her sister looked like they were having good fun together on the campaign trail.

    It made my blood boil when the horrible slobs at Comcast NBC mistreated Tulsi Gabbard. The Comcast NBC globalizer goons are just propaganda agents of the JEW/WASP Ruling Class of the American Empire and it's clear to me that the Comcast NBC propaganda agents put the interests of Israel ahead of the interests of the USA and that Gabbard puts the interests of the USA first.

    FREE SPEECH ARMY IS ON THE MARCH!

    We need a militia-type old stocker aware military command structure to protect and advance free speech and the Comcast NBC globalizer goons are in the way of free speech.

    Initial funding for the FREE SPEECH ARMY could be provided by the Pewitt Conjured Loot Portion(PCLP).

    Pewitt Conjured Loot Portion(PCLP) further explained:

    The Pewitt Conjured Loot Portion(PCLP) will pay each American who has all blood ancestry born in colonial America or the USA before 1924 a cool ten thousand dollars a month. The US Treasury and the Federal Reserve Bank shall work together to conjure up the cash out of thin air, just like the ruling class is doing now.

    Nigel Farage got a big reaction out of his People's Army rhetoric and the FREE SPEECH ARMY might have polemical legs in the USA.

  71. @Hapalong Cassidy
    @Truth

    The fact that she’s married and has children aside, I remember Kathy Ireland as having an extremely high-pitched, almost childish voice. She starred in a horrible B-movie called “Alien from LA” which got the MSTK3000 treatment, and her voice was the most made fun of thing in that episode. Anyway, I doubt if any degree of hormone therapy or castration could get a man’s voice to sound like that.

    Replies: @Truth, @Audacious Epigone

    Never heard of the movie but watching the trailer, despite her being the star of the film, the only thing she says is “from out of town”. Several other characters are shown saying more:

    That her voice naturally sounds like that strains credulity, but there it is. Good thing God made her pretty!

  72. @Audacious Epigone
    @Franz

    The military attacking a member of the media is great. A military junta is fine as long as it it's Woke!

    Replies: @A123

    It has changed how I visualize Senior Officers who willingly went along (see below).

    The Harris Regime recruitment plan must be tanking the civilian economy so badly, qualified individuals will have no other choice.

    PEACE 😇
     

    • LOL: Charles Pewitt
  73. @A123
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Hmmm....

    I am also incorrect on the methodology for this visualization. AE directly added Strong and Somewhat with no "leverage".

    For question POL20, there is a "Ideo: Conservative (5-7)" row:

    62 Strongly Support
    14 Somewhat Support
      9 No Opinion
      6 Somewhat Oppose
      8 Strongly Oppose

    62+14-6-8 = 62 Conservative, which is what shows on the chart.
    ____

    AE has used a "leverage" multiplier for Strong versus Standard/Somewhat in other visualizations, but not this one.

    PEACE 😇

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Audacious Epigone

    The formula is always along the y-axis (vertical). If it’s approve or disapprove, I generally will lump somewhat and strong, etc. If it is more quantitative in nature, ie should immigration be increased “a little” vs “a lot”, I’ll use a multiplier. The source material is always linked to as well with the exception of the GSS which is an SDA database people can easily find on their own but that I don’t want to be too negatively effective by so many incoming links from a “controversial” site like this one.

    • Thanks: A123
  74. @Audacious Epigone
    @Charles Pewitt

    Ms. Gabbard was a martial arts instructor and active duty military. She's had a front row seat when it comes to biological differences between men and women.

    Replies: @Charles Pewitt

    I met Tulsi Gabbard at a presidential primary town hall event and she is a nice lady of forthright bearing and calm demeanor.

    Tulsi Gabbard has a sister and they made a good comedy team on the campaign trail and Tulsi and her sister looked like they were having good fun together on the campaign trail.

    It made my blood boil when the horrible slobs at Comcast NBC mistreated Tulsi Gabbard. The Comcast NBC globalizer goons are just propaganda agents of the JEW/WASP Ruling Class of the American Empire and it’s clear to me that the Comcast NBC propaganda agents put the interests of Israel ahead of the interests of the USA and that Gabbard puts the interests of the USA first.

    FREE SPEECH ARMY IS ON THE MARCH!

    We need a militia-type old stocker aware military command structure to protect and advance free speech and the Comcast NBC globalizer goons are in the way of free speech.

    Initial funding for the FREE SPEECH ARMY could be provided by the Pewitt Conjured Loot Portion(PCLP).

    Pewitt Conjured Loot Portion(PCLP) further explained:

    The Pewitt Conjured Loot Portion(PCLP) will pay each American who has all blood ancestry born in colonial America or the USA before 1924 a cool ten thousand dollars a month. The US Treasury and the Federal Reserve Bank shall work together to conjure up the cash out of thin air, just like the ruling class is doing now.

    Nigel Farage got a big reaction out of his People’s Army rhetoric and the FREE SPEECH ARMY might have polemical legs in the USA.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS