Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: AMuzi Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.tech Subject: Re: DOGE report Date: Sat, 10 May 2025 13:32:23 -0500 Organization: Yellow Jersey, Ltd. Lines: 92 Message-ID: References: <60gp1kpcevdn8clgplinge3o2jt179sja4@4ax.com> <5oqr1kl10n2sm35id1f0tq6nd2bf5rdraf@4ax.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Sat, 10 May 2025 20:32:25 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="1c2a6bb9b7491fd4398e557a3b9da822"; logging-data="3854165"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+sazU8Ey722F2WZesUE9Da" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:b8gC2chd//cLQbmTyEt1eOasUK8= In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US On 5/10/2025 11:56 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote: > On 5/10/2025 9:04 AM, AMuzi wrote: >> On 5/9/2025 11:27 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote: >>> On 5/9/2025 10:18 AM, AMuzi wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> What could go wrong? >>>> >>>> https://wlos.com/news/local/volleyball-player-injured- >>>> after- transgender- opponent-spiked-ball-at-her-speaks-out >>> >>> Oooh, look! An anecdote!  ;-) >>> >>> >> >> I thought about this on my refreshingly pleasant ride this >> morning. It's just a joy in warm sunlight finally. >> >> One might say, and I will, that Torah, English Common Law, >> the huge body of US case law and much of western culture >> generally are comprised of outlier anomalous anecdotes to >> establish various limiting principles. >> >> This is not to say that every instance ought to set a new >> standard; far from it!  But it's very human to reason from >> exceptional incidents to define limits, that is, 'to here, >> but no further'. >> >> For us, Dred Scott, Kelo, Koramatsu/Kabayashi/Yasui and >> Dobbs have import.  They are important because they are >> outlier incidents and establish limits. Those limits, >> being considered correct or not by one person or another >> at various times and contexts, are crucial. >> >> For example, Mr Eisenhower, Mr Kennedy and Mr Johnson read >> Brown v Board and reflected, "My, that certainly is nice." >> Mr Nixon however enforced it, vigorously and thoroughly at >> great political, social and financial cost.  The >> particulars of Brown did not change. The decision by >> SCOTUS did no change. The application, however, was a >> tumultuous and revolutionary change. >> >> Due to a gruesome and well publicized hanging in the >> Wisconsin Territory, the State of Wisconsin has never >> allowed capital punishment, even in the exceptional case >> of Jeffrey Dahmer. His fellow inmates, however, saw the >> case differently and acted accordingly. >> >> So you may make your own decision in your own way by your >> own standards but one ought to consider what is the >> limiting factor, where are the limits and why by >> reflecting on the outliers. >> >> >> p.s. Think about The War of Jenkins' Ear versus the USS >> Pueblo incident. > > I may not finish this now. Vacation activities are calling. > But: > > It may be very human to "reason" from exceptional incidents, > but I take most of that to be a sign of human imperfection. > Humans are easily duped, misled, deluded. When I hear of an > exceptional incident, I frequently begin to wonder "Is that > likely to recur?" and "How much of a problem is it?" I don't > automatically think it's a critical issue. > > The case you cited above is regrettable, but: There are > certainly (true) female volleyball players who are large, > tough and muscular. If one of them had done this spike, what > would have been the reaction? How often do injuries like > this happen anyway? Is it simply something that happens in > the sport at that level? > > Understand, I'm not generally sympathetic to trans "women" > competing against normal women. I do think the "former" men > have continuing physical advantages. But I think the amount > of political attention being given to this issue is grossly > excessive, and I do think it's being purposely done to > distract from many issues that are much more critical. > It's not an anomaly of humans. It's a critical point of reason to establish limiting principles. Those limits are continually refined by exceptional examples. I was not being flippant when I wrote, 'To here, and no farther.' Else we would not have law (or rules), merely platitudes. -- Andrew Muzi am@yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1 April, 1971