transsexuals

Ethics Villain Lance Armstrong Wants To Talk About Transgender Athletes And “Fairness in Sport”

/ Jack Marshall / 7 Comments

Ethics verdict, short version:

“Shut up, Lance.”

What in the world would make Lance Armstrong, who edges out Barry Bonds for the title of most infamous high-profile cheater in recent U.S. sports history (Barry had an advantage because he cheated in a far more popular (in this country) and lucrative sport, baseball, than cycling), think anyone wants to hear him expound on “fairness in sports”? It is the biological males and post-puberty transitioners clobbering female athletes that have Lance expounding. Observe his tweeted concerns:

Have we really come to a time and place where spirited debate is not only frowned upon, but feared? Where people’s greatest concern is being fired, shamed or cancelled? As someone all too familiar with this phenomenon, I feel I’m uniquely positioned to have these conversations. Of all the controversial and polarizing subjects out there today, I’m not sure there are any as heated as the topic of Trans athletes in sport.

Is there not a world in which one can be supportive of the transgender community and curious about the fairness of Trans athletes in sport yet not be labeled a transphobe or a bigot as we ask questions? Do we yet know the answers? And do we even want to know the answers?

I do. Hence these conversations… a special series of The Forward, beginning Monday, where I dive into this issue with an open mind in an attempt learn as much as possible from all sides of the debate. I truly hope you enjoy this series. And I hope that for those who have been reluctant to have this conversation, this somehow feels safe. Be fearless.’

Continue reading →

The Disastrous Crash Of Medical Ethics, In Two Videos [Link Fixed]

/ Jack Marshall / 13 Comments

Earlier this week, I discussed the frightening and discouraging phenomenon of American professions becoming so politicized that they no longer can be trusted to serve public interests objectively and competently. If a profession cannot be trusted, then it is no longer a profession. Laura Hollis’s point in “Death of the Professions” is worth repeating:

The landscape of professional America should be a stalwart bastion of standards and commitment to truth. Instead, it is increasingly pockmarked by the impact craters of contemporary culture: the erosion of standards, the denial of truth, the capitulation to political pressure, and ideological lockstep borne of fear.

The previous post discussed this phenomenon in the context of the legal profession and its legal ethics extension, but arguably the partisan pollution of the medical profession has been worse. It has become a full participant in the newly-recognized Transsexual Promotion Ethics Train Wreck even as it is running down children: so much for “Do no harm.”

Re-watching “The Silence of the Lambs” last week, I was reminded that once the few clinics performing sex-change surgeries would apply stringent standards to applicants. “Buffalo Bill,” the serial killer in the film (and novel) was turned down for such surgery multiple times. Today, apparently, the radical procedures are no longer considered potentially harmful because the medical profession has bought into the deceptive, benign sounding cover-phrase, “gender affirming treatment.”

In the video above, Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas) pressed expert witnesses yesterday about the scientific justification for sex-change treatments of children and the authority for claims of the potential long-term benefits of these usually irreversible procedures. His Subcommittee on Health has convened to take up a number of proposals concerning health care access and research support, and Crenshaw wants to ensure that taxpayer money is not used to fund sex-change surgery on kids. “This is taxpayer money, and when 70% of taxpayers opposed these barbaric treatments on minors, then taxpayers should not fund it,” he said.

Continue reading →

Res Ipsa Loquitur, But Here Are Some Ethics Observations Anyway

/ Jack Marshall / 24 Comments

TikTok influencer and transwoman Rose Montoya filmed herself topless in front of the White House during a Joe Biden’s pandering Pride event. Montoya was joined by two transmales who were also shirtless. Stay classy, trans activists! The White House was horrified, stating, “This behavior is inappropriate and disrespectful for any event at the White House. It is not reflective of the event we hosted to celebrate LGBTQI+ families or the other hundreds of guests who were in attendance… Individuals in the video will not be invited to future events.”

Awwww. The White House set itself up for this conduct, and got exactly what it deserved. Montoya responded by saying that she was not trying to be inappropriate but simply “living in joy.” “Why is my chest now deemed illegal when I show it off, however before I came out as trans, it was not,” she asked?

Yes, she is an idiot.

Further observations:

1. If the LGTBQ+ community wants to alienate a majority of the country, stunts like that will do the trick. It is astoundingly incompetent and irresponsible for the still vulnerable group to allow its most juvenile and narcissistic members to represent it in the news and in public forums.

2. The episode also demonstrates the kind of thing that will push the public to the Right. Whoever managed the President’s Pride Pander should be fired. Stupidly violating the flag-flying code was relatively trivial (though Republicans pounced), but allowing the White House to be used as a pro-trans exhibitionism prop was insane, especially in light of Biden’s posturing about bringing dignity back to the Presidency.

3. Now the White House is caught in the middle, like Bud Light and Target.

4. Good.

More Gallup: On The Transgender Fad, The Public Is Ethically, But Predictably, Confused, Mostly Because It Is Ignorant

/ Jack Marshall / 9 Comments

Gallup’s’ latest survey results are affirmatively strange, but then the topic is strange: American attitudes towards transgender issues. I believe the survey intersects with the one EA discussed yesterday, indicating that conservative self-identification was ticking up. It would have been stunning it it didn’t tick up, considering that the political and social Left has thrown all caution and moderation to the four winds and is openly advocating the most extreme and viscerally (as well as ethically) disgusting policies and beliefs imaginable, from 9 month abortions to legalizing theft. The unexpected Woke World obsession with transsexual “transitioning” is another example, though most Americans haven’t thought about it very carefully or thoroughly yet as Gallup’s polling makes clear.

The above survey, for example, is bizarre. I don’t see what morality has to do with an adult individual’s decision regarding transsexual surgery, non-surgical treatment, or “identification,” unless one is a Christian Scientist who opposes medical intervention, or someone who still subscribes to ancient religious taboos on all non-conforming sexuality and relationships. Obviously most American aren’t in either group. Those polled, and apparently those doing the polling, were seemingly using “moral” as a synonym for “ethical,” because most American are no longer taught what ethics is. They don’t know what “moral” means either.

Continue reading →

Comment Of The Day: “Wait! Is THIS Peak Stupid In The Age Of The Great Stupid?”

/ Jack Marshall / 1 Comment

Yesterday’s post about the theology PhD student telling a congregation that Jesus was transsexual based on artist renditions of him was calculated to trigger lively responses, and indeed it has. CD-VAPatriot is one of the Ethics Alarms readers who doesn’t comment often but is always sharp and provocative when she does, and this Comment of the Day is another example. (I have recently figured out that EA has a lot of female participants here. Good.)

Here is CD-VAPatriot‘s Comment of the Day on the post, “Wait! Is THIS Peak Stupid In The Age Of The Great Stupid?” …

* * *

I’m often left speechless by Woke World, but this one takes the cake. I’m physically sickened by this claim.

I have no problem with the LGBTQ crowd, although when their group constantly holds their needs/wants/ideals over the importance of everyone and everything else, it becomes an issue. As for the trans community, I feel very sorry for those adults who believe they were born the wrong gender. I feel that this conviction comes from the mind of someone who is mentally ill. Mutilating healthy body parts, removing healthy organs, using heavy duty medications one’s body doesn’t actually need is considered Xenomelia (Body Integrity Dysphoria)…which is classified as a mental illness. I consider transgenders in this category. My heart breaks for someone in that much pain. I believe that someone suffering from such a serious illness should be treated with complete compassion.

Continue reading →

That’s Nice: They “Considered” Taking A Stand For Ethics!

/ Jack Marshall / 23 Comments

(The relevant section of the SNL skit above begins at the 5:36 mark.)

Lia Thomas, a recently “transitioned” male collegiate swimmer at Penn, has been making a burlesque of female college swimming records as well as demonstrating what the future of women’s and girl’s sports will look like if post puberty males continue to be allowed to compete as women once they can legally switch genders. Her—just because she should be called a “she” doesn’t mean she should be competing against biological shes—team mates have anonymously expressed discomfort with what their matches have become, while Lia is just thrilled to be winning in her new, less competitive category, and Penn’s swimming coach doesn’t care about fairness, only winning.

In such obvious situations of injustice, the sole road to remedy is courage and confrontation. This is true not only for the ethics debacle of trans athletes crushing original women in sports, but other situations as well. Philosopher Hannah Arendt (1906-1975) made her legacy a series of quotes about what happens when those who are aware of wrongdoing—Hannah’s short-hand was “evil”—duck their societal obligation to take action. Here’s a few of them:

Continue reading →

Ethics Alarms Officially Designates Trangender Activism An Ethics Train Wreck [Updated And Expanded]

/ Jack Marshall / 22 Comments

dc-dave-chappelle-closer

An ethics train wreck is an ethics-fraught situation or event that manages to make virtually everyone involved, on all sides of the issues, behave unethically or express unethical positions. I should have identified the Transgender Activism Ethics Train Wreck much earlier, of course: I was asleep at the switch.

The tipping point that prompted this is the Dave Chappelle Netflix special, “The Closer,” the latest in a series of stand-up concerts by the talented, often perceptive and intentionally politically incorrect comedian. (I haven’t watched it yet, but I will, possibly tonight.) The show is under attack by LGTBQ activists because Chappelle jokes at the expense of transgender individuals, and this is, they say, hate speech. As I said, I haven’t seen this concert, but I have seen others, and Chappelle has targeted trans people before. I can’t say his anti-trans material isn’t sometimes funny: a lot of his jokes provoke the dual “I can’t believe he said that!”/ “Ha! Oh, no, I hate myself for laughing!” response. This is because he is good at what he does. Nevertheless, I regard such jokes as punching down. Chappelle should be better than that.

I also have two transsexual friends, one a former neighbor, the other a young man I have known since he was a child. I find nothing funny or ridiculous about either of them.

Continue reading →

Comment Of The Day: “Comment Of The Day: ‘Monday Ethics Final, 3/8/2021: A Bad Day In The Revolution'(Item #5)”

/ Jack Marshall / 9 Comments

Some might think I’m making this gem by Mrs. Q a Comment of the Day for an ulterior motive. She’s a undisputed star commenter, and she’s been MIA for a more than a month now. This was her most recent comment, but I’m not honoring it as an enticement, though I desperately want to see her unique perception and wit back on Ethics Alarms. This was supposed to be a Comment of the Day a month ago, but stuff happened: it’s my fault.

Commenters come and go, then come back sometimes. I always take it personally, which is foolish, but that’s me. When ever I go back and review essays from a few years back, I am struck and depressed by the voices we have lost. Whither wyogranny? Shelly Stow? Steven Mark Pilling? Extradimensional Cephalopod? There are so many.

I also worry about those who disappear, and often send emails to inquire after their health and welfare. Sometimes the responses are reassuring. Sometimes I get no response. Sometimes I forget to send the note. Most bloggers don’t do this, and I’m not sure it’s rational for me to do it.

Here is Mrs. Q’s Comment of the Day on the post, Monday Ethics Final, 3/8/2021: A Bad Day In The Revolution'(Item #5):

Continue reading →

April Fools Ethics Warm-Up, 4/1/2021: I Am Not Fooled Nor Fooling

/ Jack Marshall / 21 Comments

april-fools-day-banner

I have come to detest April Fool’s Day, and cultural developments have shown me that, as William Saroyan liked to say, “I’m right and everyone else is wrong.” Early in the history of Ethics Alarms, more than ten years ago, I dared to criticize—indeed, called unethical—a blogging criminal defense lawyer who falsely announced that he had taken on a new prestigious job (as I recall: it’s not worth checking what his exact lie was), and it was then reported as fact by the New York Times’ crack reporters. The announcement was an April Fool’s joke, you see, so my assertion that lawyers shouldn’t deliberately misrepresent facts, even on blogs, even in jest, even unrelated to cases and even on April First was set upon by the lawyer’s angry defense lawyer allies, who pummeled me here from all sides. I had, in fact, over-stated my complaint (Can you imagine ME doing THAT?), and I duly apologized to the lawyer. But his pals remained insulting and vicious, and I wasn’t wrong in the principle I was asserting. Professionals shouldn’t lie, ever. Even on April Fool’s Day.

1. Hart concedes. The rest of the story: Iowa Democrat Rita Hart announced late yesterday that she is withdrawing her demand that her loss in Iowa’s 2nd congressional district be overturned, so the House Committee on Administration will no longer be seeking a justification to do so. I wrote about the Democratic Party’s attempt to de-certify an election result after it proclaimed Republican efforts to decertify the Presidential election as “an insurrection” here. Apparently internal polls were showing that there are still some levels of perceived hypocrisy that the Democratic faithful won’t cheer on. That’s encouraging…

2. The concept at play here is “deceit.” I guess after having three straight Republican Presidents who couldn’t speak clearly, it shouldn’t be a shock that the GOP has allowed Democrats to get away with flagrantly dishonest language games. Still, the transformation of the term “voting restrictions” into something sinister is quite an accomplishment for the Blue team, as well as cynical and dishonest. Unless a nation is going to allow anyone alive on the planet to cast votes in its elections, “voting restrictions” are natural, logical and necessary. It’s the “restrictions” part that the pro-voting manipulation side has weaponized. “Restrictions” are baaaad. But the right, informative and descriptive word is voting qualifications. You have to be alive and living in the district where you vote: this is why voter rolls have to be purged of dead people and those who have moved away. You have to be a citizen, and who you say you are, which is why voting IDs are necessary. You have to register before elections, because otherwise vote harvesters will just pay large groups of poor, confused, bored or drunk passive citizens to the polls to vote as they have been instructed. You should have to vote in person, because all mail-in ballots, including early voting and absentee voting, create verification problems, and increase the chances of fraud.

I have neither the time nor functioning brain cells to delve into this issue competently here and now, but I would not find the imposition of other voting qualifications odious or unethical, including requirements of the minimal civic literacy we would expect of, say, a 12-year-old.

Continue reading →

If A Saturday Ethics Warm-Up Posts And Nobody Reads It….3/27/2021

/ Jack Marshall / 43 Comments

Tree falls

Ah, Saturday! When about 12 people seem to be interested in ethics….when traffic falls off to a trickle here after noon…when it’s even more discouraging posting now than before the post 2020 election crash…when I get to read websites with hordes of visitors post about issues I posted on here days ago….when writing the blog seems even more futile and pointless that it usually does.

1 Here’s some good news…at least one Hollywood star knows her limitations. Aging sex-symbol and “Avengers” star Scarlett Johansson is apparently secure enough, brave enough or dumb enough to tell her colleagues, as they need to be told, “Shut up and act.” She said in interview with “The Gentlewoman,” a British magazine,

“I don’t think actors have obligations to have a public role in society Some people want to, but the idea that you’re obligated to because you’re in the public eye is unfair. You didn’t choose to be a politician, you’re an actor. Your job is to reflect our experience to ourselves; your job is to be a mirror for an audience, to be able to have an empathetic experience through art. That is what your job is. Whatever my political views are, all that stuff, I feel most successful when people can sit in a theater or at home and disappear into a story or a performance and see pieces of themselves, or are able to connect with themselves through this experience of watching this performance or story or interaction between actors or whatever it is. And they’re affected by it and they’re thinking about it, and they feel something. You know? They have an emotional reaction to it – good, bad, uncomfortable, validating, whatever.That’s my job. The other stuff is not my job.”

Thank-you. What she neglected to say was that shooting off their generally under-informed mouths about political matters actively undermines their jobs, thanks to the power of cognitive dissonance. For example, I literally cannot stand watching any film with Alec Baldwin or Robert De Niro in it at at this point. Their characterizations, no matter how well performed, are drowned out by their obnoxious public declarations.

2. As the Star-Tribune attempts to intimidate the Chauvin trial jurors.…the home town paper for the trial published this detailed set of profiles of the jurors, leaving all the cues necessary to doxx them. This just creates one more obstacle to a fair trial. The judge was asleep at the switch in handing out gag orders: with at least one potential juror dismissed because she was afraid of community reaction to a “not guilty” verdict, it was reversible error to allows this much information about the jury to get to the news media, which we know is both rooting for a guilty verdict and doing all it can think of to facilitate one.

The most recent Associated Press report on the case, like most mainstream media stories relating to Floyd, never mentions Floyd’s drugged-out condition, nor his Wuhan virus infection. He was killed by the knee of a racist white cop, and the only question in the trial is whether that racist cop will get the conviction he deserves. This is how most Americans understand the case.

Does the news media want riots?

Continue reading →