Americans have always argued about how our government should be run and what actions it should take. For the most part, we've settled our difference with ballots and not bullets " the Civil War being the worst exception, when irreconcilable differences over the immoral institution of slavery tore our nation in two and claimed the lives of an estimated 620,000 Americans.
Today it seems like we're fighting a small-scale civil war. Some angry people are claiming they have the right to harm and even kill others because of differences over political and public policy issues " or because they believe people belonging to a particular racial, religious, ethnic or other group are somehow evil or inferior and must be attacked.
This is a poisonous attitude that is dangerous and un-American...
The inclusion of elite transwomen athletes in sport is controversial. The recent International Olympic Committee (IOC) (2015) guidelines allow transwomen to compete in the women's division if (amongst other things) their testosterone is held below 10 nmol/L. This is significantly higher than that of cis-women. Science demonstrates that high testosterone and other male physiology provides a performance advantage in sport suggesting that transwomen retain some of that advantage. To determine whether the advantage is unfair necessitates an ethical analysis of the principles of inclusion and fairness. Particularly important is whether the advantage held by transwomen is a tolerable or intolerable unfairness. We conclude that the advantage to transwomen afforded by the IOC guidelines is an intolerable unfairness...
Over on the home page, my colleague Madeleine Kearns tells the disturbing story of Canadian trans activist, Jessica Yaniv, a Canadian biologically-intact man who identifies as a transgender woman and who is trying to legally coerce beauticians into waxing his scrotum. Yes, you read that correctly: He's trying to force unwilling women to handle his genitalia.
Madeleine covers the facts of the case very well. I'd like to focus a bit on how the edges of trans activism can put extraordinary strains on the law, placing elements of nondiscrimination statutes into irreconcilable conflict. The Yaniv case is an extreme example, and one would think that thoughtful trans activists would oppose the idea of forcing women to handle a scrotum, but let's look at mainstream American Democratic policy. Let's look at the conflict between Title IX, Title VII, and the Equality Act, a bill the Democrats passed through the House in May (so far, it's going nowhere in the Senate.)
Last week, the legal unraveling of the Obama-era campus sexual-assault guidelines entered a new phase. A student accused of sexual assault and subject to an unlawful, unconstitutional adjudication process filed a motion seeking class-action certification in his pre-existing lawsuit against Michigan State University. Rather than seeking to void the results only of his own flawed adjudication, he's now seeking to void every adjudication where accused students were punished "without first being afforded a live hearing and opportunity for cross examination."
This new motion comes after a wave of cases across the country that have invalidated and reversed the results of campus kangaroo courts -- and these rulings are coming from judges across the political/judicial spectrum. In California, progressive state-court judges issued rulings that effectively halted proceedings in 75 campus sexual-misconduct cases...
It turns out that the people who care the most about politics have the least understanding of their political opponents.
The More in Common project has just released the results of its latest deep dive into American polarization, and they make for a deeply discouraging read.
It turns out that most Americans have fundamentally mistaken notions about their political opponents, consistently believing that they are substantially more extreme than they really are. For example, Democrats are far less likely to support open borders, far more likely to support private ownership of firearms, and far more friendly to police than Republicans believe they are. Republicans support controlled immigration far more than Democrats believe, and an overwhelming majority believe that racism and sexism still exist in the United States.