Looking forward to more conversations from a briliant group of people. I think the 'groupthink' referred to by others will decrease as the members get used to the format and each other. It's so nice to see polite disagreement, a great way to stay out of the bubbles we increasingly live in.
Loved the discussion and the ability to listen and push back on areas of disagreement and also then affirm the truth and facts. Great reporting and discussion. Wonderful presenters and can't wait for the next edition.
Good independent analysis of the issues. Only quibble was a bit of groupthink on the dangers of face recognition and on free speech. Both are nuanced and culture specific. Facial recognition and other forms of surveillance can promote safer less crime-ridden societies if done right.
I liked this a lot while I also agree with Hank’s comment about a love fest. We all learn more (and it’s usually also more fun) when there is disagreement and good reasoning in support of all sides. But I am sure you guys in the FP will figure out the best format learning on the way.
And big thanks for good additional info from people commenting like Hillary and Diana.
Respect to all the speakers, but this seemed a bit like a love fest. I prefer intellectual joisting or the point counterpoint approach. That said I'm a Big fan of TFP. I've been waiting for this for a long time.
Very nice to see you guys in conversation! I have one critique - about the business of Walz retirement, it would be better to inform yourselves about the rules and conventions that govern retirement, before commenting. No fan of Walz here, but there's no evidence at all that i can see of lying or impropriety in his military career or his statements about it.
I thought this experiment very interesting, I love good well moderated debate and discourse, but it is very different from print journalism which has more boundaries and there has been more opportunity to research and reflect before releasing material or weighing in on hot button topics. So I took some notes as I listened. First, there seems to be an acknowledgement that there is misinformation vs. disinformation, (and my I add, fake news). It seems to be one of intent, inadvertant (misinformation) vs. disinformation (deliberate). I am a great supporter of the First Amendment Right to Free Speech. I agree that hateful speech is usually protected (while hate crimes are clearly not). But not all speech is protected. None of our "fundamental" rights in the US are absolute and have no limitation. Misinformation seems to fall within protected margins, but disinformation which is designed to deliberately mislead with intent to harm might not be. I think it becomes part of that slippery slope and gray area. I don't have the answer, I just raise it. Second, "Vibes" is a terrible measure for a voter to rely upon to elect the most powerful and life-changing politicians in our country, Pres/VP/Sen/Rep., but that is precisely what we do because we are too lazy to look beyond TikTok/X/FB/Insta. Nobody can seem to manage to focus on anything for more than a minute. Mr. Hughes has that dead to rights. Third, the boxing horribilus - "anguish" of anybody is not the equalizer here. Again, Mr. Hughes is correct in my opinion. It is not the exterior that determines your gender, it is the interior. I can cut my hair, remove my breasts, ovaries and uterus, even take male hormones and estrogen suppressors. That does not make me a "male". It may make me look and sound like a man, but I will never by fully male without a Y choromosome. I would always be a "man-in-transition". I will never have testes, I will never produce sperm, I will never be able to impregnate a female. The opposite scenario is IMO also true. I can become a woman in sound and appearance, but I cannot become "female", requiring XX.) Yes, there most certainly appears that nature has created a third gender, those who we unfortunately refer to as having DSD. It is not the outside that is the determinant, it is how the inside has acted upon the physiological development that separates the brawn between all 3 sexes. Another class of boxing must be created to permit all to compete fairly, including trans-athletes. Lastly, the riots in the UK. I beg to differ that we are not seeing the same kinds of violence here. We are. Our American campuses and cities have been a perfect picture of this. We have similar racial divisions here and also widespread anti-Semitism that needs to be called out, just like everywhere else around the globe. I think that the issue we are also dancing around is that immigration in previous generations in the US have been largely Judeo-Christian based immigration, and those who seek to adopt Western values. What we do not wish to tackle is that issue. We, like the UK, are now dealing with not just religious differences as we have faced in the past, but religions that are more than that, they are ideologies (more along the lines of how we think of Socialism/Communism/Capitalism as ideologies), that may be or are incompatible with Western value systems. It is very much in issue of integration into a country which someone or someone's family chose to move into. Ms. Sumbramanya says Brits are Brits second while Americans are American first, that I think is in flux when dealing with anti-Western value systems being advocated here. Add "wokeism" that has raised individualism to a fever pitch, and we insist on having others "accept" everything we bring with us. I would suggest that this is backwards. When you choose another country, you then have entered into the social compact of that country and that country's underlying values. You must respect its laws and customs and be a participating citizen. You must to a pretty significant degree, work to assimilate and integrate. You can still value your heritage, follow your customs at home, but you do not have the right to foist your "wants" on anyone else and insist that somehow you must be treated differently than any other citizen of this country. (Even guests are required to abide by the rules of their hosts homes). Immigrants are important to every country. In the US we are all from immigrant stock. But here, we are a plurality not multicultural. "Out of many, One" is on our Great Seal. We are in the midst of one of the greatest periods of turmoil I have ever seen in my life. Again, I have no answers, and am open to discourse and debate.
If you are going to attempt to discuss the IOC’s policy on women’s sports it would look a whole lot better if any one of you had done a little bit of research. Many former Olympians and elite athletes have been speaking out about this for years. In 1999, the OIC washed its hands of sex testing (a cheek swab) and instructed the different international sports federations to make their own determinations for fairness and safety in their respective sports. In June 2022 World Aquatics (the governing body for international swimming) determined that any male who had experienced puberty retained an unfair advantage and would be ineligible to compete in the women’s category. In March 2023 they published their POLICY ON ELIGIBILITY FOR THE MEN’S AND WOMEN’S COMPETITION CATEGORIES (BOTH APPROVED BY THE FINA BUREAU AND RATIFIED BY THE FINA CONGRESS ON 19 JUNE 2022). This is why Lia Thomas could not compete in the Olympics. He challenged the guidelines in the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) and his claim was dismissed in June of this year.
Boxing is arguably one of the most dangerous contact sports. The International Boxing Association ruled that Khelif and Yu-Ting were found to be male (XY) after being tested. They were both afforded the opportunity to appeal the decision which they declined. The IOC has chosen to disregard the ruling of IBA (hinting at Russian disinformation) and are basing both boxers’ eligibility on their passports. The IBA gave a press conference in Paris on August 5th which you can watch on youtube and compare with the reporting.
Today, IOC President Thomas Bach gave a press conference where he makes the deranged assertion that science can no longer determine a person’s sex. On Sunday he casually mentioned that no one wants to bring back sex testing making it sound as if women would have to climb into stirrups for an intrusive and humiliating internal exam when in actuality a cheek swab had been the method prior to 1999 and a majority of elite female athletes want a return of this test.
Looking forward to more conversations from a briliant group of people. I think the 'groupthink' referred to by others will decrease as the members get used to the format and each other. It's so nice to see polite disagreement, a great way to stay out of the bubbles we increasingly live in.
Loved the discussion and the ability to listen and push back on areas of disagreement and also then affirm the truth and facts. Great reporting and discussion. Wonderful presenters and can't wait for the next edition.
Good independent analysis of the issues. Only quibble was a bit of groupthink on the dangers of face recognition and on free speech. Both are nuanced and culture specific. Facial recognition and other forms of surveillance can promote safer less crime-ridden societies if done right.
Loved this! What a great four brains. I’m sure they’ll all be good in future but this one’s outta the park. They’ll always be the OGs to me
So good to see this conversation with these four rockstars!
We need more of these!
Fantastic and informative conversation. Thank you. I love The FP!!
This is a great mix of temperaments and sentiments - I’m really enjoying this and hope this series catches on.
Will this be available in a format that I can access from my podcast player. Thanks
I liked this a lot while I also agree with Hank’s comment about a love fest. We all learn more (and it’s usually also more fun) when there is disagreement and good reasoning in support of all sides. But I am sure you guys in the FP will figure out the best format learning on the way.
And big thanks for good additional info from people commenting like Hillary and Diana.
Respect to all the speakers, but this seemed a bit like a love fest. I prefer intellectual joisting or the point counterpoint approach. That said I'm a Big fan of TFP. I've been waiting for this for a long time.
Things like these live shows are so good, which kinda sucks cuz I normally would be staying away from politics right now! :)
Very nice to see you guys in conversation! I have one critique - about the business of Walz retirement, it would be better to inform yourselves about the rules and conventions that govern retirement, before commenting. No fan of Walz here, but there's no evidence at all that i can see of lying or impropriety in his military career or his statements about it.
I thought this experiment very interesting, I love good well moderated debate and discourse, but it is very different from print journalism which has more boundaries and there has been more opportunity to research and reflect before releasing material or weighing in on hot button topics. So I took some notes as I listened. First, there seems to be an acknowledgement that there is misinformation vs. disinformation, (and my I add, fake news). It seems to be one of intent, inadvertant (misinformation) vs. disinformation (deliberate). I am a great supporter of the First Amendment Right to Free Speech. I agree that hateful speech is usually protected (while hate crimes are clearly not). But not all speech is protected. None of our "fundamental" rights in the US are absolute and have no limitation. Misinformation seems to fall within protected margins, but disinformation which is designed to deliberately mislead with intent to harm might not be. I think it becomes part of that slippery slope and gray area. I don't have the answer, I just raise it. Second, "Vibes" is a terrible measure for a voter to rely upon to elect the most powerful and life-changing politicians in our country, Pres/VP/Sen/Rep., but that is precisely what we do because we are too lazy to look beyond TikTok/X/FB/Insta. Nobody can seem to manage to focus on anything for more than a minute. Mr. Hughes has that dead to rights. Third, the boxing horribilus - "anguish" of anybody is not the equalizer here. Again, Mr. Hughes is correct in my opinion. It is not the exterior that determines your gender, it is the interior. I can cut my hair, remove my breasts, ovaries and uterus, even take male hormones and estrogen suppressors. That does not make me a "male". It may make me look and sound like a man, but I will never by fully male without a Y choromosome. I would always be a "man-in-transition". I will never have testes, I will never produce sperm, I will never be able to impregnate a female. The opposite scenario is IMO also true. I can become a woman in sound and appearance, but I cannot become "female", requiring XX.) Yes, there most certainly appears that nature has created a third gender, those who we unfortunately refer to as having DSD. It is not the outside that is the determinant, it is how the inside has acted upon the physiological development that separates the brawn between all 3 sexes. Another class of boxing must be created to permit all to compete fairly, including trans-athletes. Lastly, the riots in the UK. I beg to differ that we are not seeing the same kinds of violence here. We are. Our American campuses and cities have been a perfect picture of this. We have similar racial divisions here and also widespread anti-Semitism that needs to be called out, just like everywhere else around the globe. I think that the issue we are also dancing around is that immigration in previous generations in the US have been largely Judeo-Christian based immigration, and those who seek to adopt Western values. What we do not wish to tackle is that issue. We, like the UK, are now dealing with not just religious differences as we have faced in the past, but religions that are more than that, they are ideologies (more along the lines of how we think of Socialism/Communism/Capitalism as ideologies), that may be or are incompatible with Western value systems. It is very much in issue of integration into a country which someone or someone's family chose to move into. Ms. Sumbramanya says Brits are Brits second while Americans are American first, that I think is in flux when dealing with anti-Western value systems being advocated here. Add "wokeism" that has raised individualism to a fever pitch, and we insist on having others "accept" everything we bring with us. I would suggest that this is backwards. When you choose another country, you then have entered into the social compact of that country and that country's underlying values. You must respect its laws and customs and be a participating citizen. You must to a pretty significant degree, work to assimilate and integrate. You can still value your heritage, follow your customs at home, but you do not have the right to foist your "wants" on anyone else and insist that somehow you must be treated differently than any other citizen of this country. (Even guests are required to abide by the rules of their hosts homes). Immigrants are important to every country. In the US we are all from immigrant stock. But here, we are a plurality not multicultural. "Out of many, One" is on our Great Seal. We are in the midst of one of the greatest periods of turmoil I have ever seen in my life. Again, I have no answers, and am open to discourse and debate.
If you are going to attempt to discuss the IOC’s policy on women’s sports it would look a whole lot better if any one of you had done a little bit of research. Many former Olympians and elite athletes have been speaking out about this for years. In 1999, the OIC washed its hands of sex testing (a cheek swab) and instructed the different international sports federations to make their own determinations for fairness and safety in their respective sports. In June 2022 World Aquatics (the governing body for international swimming) determined that any male who had experienced puberty retained an unfair advantage and would be ineligible to compete in the women’s category. In March 2023 they published their POLICY ON ELIGIBILITY FOR THE MEN’S AND WOMEN’S COMPETITION CATEGORIES (BOTH APPROVED BY THE FINA BUREAU AND RATIFIED BY THE FINA CONGRESS ON 19 JUNE 2022). This is why Lia Thomas could not compete in the Olympics. He challenged the guidelines in the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) and his claim was dismissed in June of this year.
Boxing is arguably one of the most dangerous contact sports. The International Boxing Association ruled that Khelif and Yu-Ting were found to be male (XY) after being tested. They were both afforded the opportunity to appeal the decision which they declined. The IOC has chosen to disregard the ruling of IBA (hinting at Russian disinformation) and are basing both boxers’ eligibility on their passports. The IBA gave a press conference in Paris on August 5th which you can watch on youtube and compare with the reporting.
Today, IOC President Thomas Bach gave a press conference where he makes the deranged assertion that science can no longer determine a person’s sex. On Sunday he casually mentioned that no one wants to bring back sex testing making it sound as if women would have to climb into stirrups for an intrusive and humiliating internal exam when in actuality a cheek swab had been the method prior to 1999 and a majority of elite female athletes want a return of this test.
For a very clear explanation of the type of DSD Caster Semenya and Khalif probably have you can listen here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9rynD9KlU0&list=PL7nffRXPOhPBwDwhB9WFI59MiVu91qwqq&index=1
To hear Caster Semenya talk about how his testicles do not make him less of a woman: https://x.com/Riley_Gaines_/status/1721896581396607132
To listen to the IOC’s president: https://x.com/Scienceofsport/status/1821931717495493075
P....look so forward to more.
This was awesome!! You guys get such smart people to share their insights with us!