GreenM @ greenmarty @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

299

Joined

2 yr. ago

That is obvious yet it doesn't happened but i somehow don't see it would happened by e.g. closing the chocolate factories or something like that.

Nationality is beside the point of the post.

Where are you getting the forcing part all the time? read damn post top down before you react to what is not written there. Otherwise you will seem like the sociopath enforcing your standards upon others.

When i read title like this I can't help but wonder, are those kids going to better off without their income though ? My humble guess is that not every family have parents who can support their kids or have access to social care system that can prevent whole family to scrap by to be able to get by.

Then switch that in your mind as example that suits you.

I don't see why boss would be unhappy with that 👍 (no sarcasm)

So if you send email to the owner of the company and to your colleagues on same level you put boss at last spot if they come to your mind as last?
BTw read what i wrote, again. There is no mention of it being mandatory in my post . It's similar thing to as when we used to hold door to next person so they don't get smashed by it. edit> I don't get what's so enraging on voluntarily ordering recipient in the mail boss > colleagues > intern.

It's called respect. i guess, It used to be common thing. Some cultures have it even in their languages like Japanese "sempai"
edit : like this boss > colleagues > intern

Intersting so female taking testosterone and female not taking it have same level of testosterone. I guess trans people are taking hormones needlessly if that is the true.

What do you mean? I explained it in the posts above. So shortly It's basic biolgy. E.g. testosterone makes changes in the body.

I have never heard anyone being scolded for that but then again this is common sense from where i come from so everyone sorts recipients by importance. Edit: I don't get what is so outrageous e.g. this order boss > colleagues > intern

I can imagine that writing unit tests all day long 24/5 may not make you smile enough at first and after while it can make you smile in scary way.

It's military, it's part of the drill.

World got sick like that. Some people even say Bin Ladin was cool guy and it was good thing to do 9/11 so I'm not surprised by counter reactions to within this thread disproving hostages testimony if they are not with the terrorists.

The point i wanted to send across is that it gives athlete an advantage. So people will be incentivized to get it. And also those who do not get it will be at disadvantage. So if one form of chems advantage is allowed why others are not? Isn't that exactly the source of the issue here, fairness?

Oh i misunderstood i though you said that if someone is born one sex but get to transiaion by chems in puberty they are allowed.

Medication for sick people seems kinda different thing to me than being healthy and chumming chems to gain muscles.

So testosterone for female( born) athletes should be allowed until they reach avg male(born) level? Is that really a thing we want to introduce into sports ? Will steroids also count as getting to avg male upper muscle mass ? Where is the line? Won't that make female athletes either obsolete or force them to chems chumming which then can cause them health issues given that most of them propably don't plan to transition and might want start families etc?

I see so in other words keep it stricly male and female category and let female to enter male category by choice.
Then we are where se are with people lobbing for change.

In priciple i agree but ... i can imagine that it's pretty simple to just give weak performance on the test day then win every competition ever after but just sightly ahead of females.

I disagree because it doesn't lead anywhere , thus it doesn't consruct anything.