just tried on firefox, no www. Got in.

I'd really rather use chrome though, and my phone.

I have to go through http://hidemyass-freeproxy.com otherwise I get a connection refuses.

if it's not from my computer or phone... or through the proxy, I get in fine.

I said I didn't know the timeframe, She was still much older then at that point. 2 and 5 is a very short career, so in retrospect he wasn't even a middling player as male, he was a washout. 66-110 then at that age shows just how much more competitive she was when playing women. A crappy male player, when well past prime was able to compete in the womens division.

Still proving my point slick.

You love to ignore the fact that 24 years had passed, and she had gone from middling to competitive in the Semi-Finals, and to the Doubles Finals.

She was middle aged and gone through the stresses of a transition, and was competitive against the best in the World in the finals.

Your 66-110 stat is intriguing, I don't know the timeframe that played out over, but it would seem to be a decent stretch of time, and she would have only been aging more and more.

comparing like to like after transitioning but still in her younger years I'll quote a highly complimentary article from tennis.com:

"Just one year before, Dr. Richard Raskind, an accomplished athlete who had captained the men's team at Yale two decades earlier, had undergone sexual-reassignment surgery. Soon after, as Dr. Renée Richards, she moved from New York to Newport Beach, CA, to start a new life. But there was one thing she couldn't leave behind: her conspicuous skill at tennis.

After impressing the members at her new club, Richards agreed to enter a tournament in nearby La Jolla. A woman in the audience made the connection between the tall lefty who was mowing down the competition, and a story she heard about a tennis-playing doctor who moved west after having a sex change."

Mowing down the competition... seems that a midling male player had no problem "mowing down the competition" when still closer to her prime.

Ultimately, I don't think Renee in anyway makes your point, 24 years older and highly competitive I still feel makes the contrary point.

Renee Richards says that 24 years before she competed as a woman, she competed as a man, and was a non mention.

But, now, much much older, she was able to compete against women in their prime, and win through to the semifinals... and make it to the finals in the Doubles competition.

Seems Laura that Renee Richards may say I'm full of it, but her performance at the US Opens in her 40's would seem to indicate that you are full of it.

So never post on a topic here again then Snoofy unless you are actively engaged in promoting the furthering of whatever that knowledge is to whatever the foremost body on it is.

Do you forget this is a site designed to debate topics?

Why is it so hard to just discuss the possibility that just maybe a man who transitions to being a woman might retain some of the physical advantage they had before they transitioned Laura?

Why is your go to to label anyone who would try to examine the issue transphobic?

Chief,

If it were proven that "being on the lookout" for potential terrorists would never catch a terrorist, why would you push for more "being on the lookout" legislation?

If you think it's a good idea then your friggin retarted

The only difference is I'm angry that Wilson isn't being prosecuted, and your angry this woman is.

What's your ideal state of things, that laws are just guidlines but people can pretty much do what they want?

We either have laws, or we don't.

Texas made an example out of Crystal Mason - for breaking the law.

Ftfy

"from Philips' persepective"?

So the Post's article read: "So I saw a bunch of teenagers and group of black racists arguing. So I thought, self, you should march right into that group of teenagers while banging a drum... right into the middle of them until I run right into one of them.... That'll calm things down!!!"

Otherwise the article wasn't from Philips' perspective.

Border.

So the grand solution to the boarder issue is...

Let the unaccompanied children in, a let them wander, they probably had a plan.

Yet in other threads people will argue to the death that letting an American child play alone in a park for an hour is too dangerous 😄🤔

#72 Snoofy...

The way I set up my analogy??? YOU set it up. You're the one that initially compared eating oneself to obesity with JOINING the military. That was you, and I called you on your ----- analogy.

And what dumbass newsworthied your case of early onset dementia?

Snoofy do you not get that eating too much has one outcome... Obesity

While joining the military can lead to many outcomes, many of which are not having PTSD.

So since one is a direct correlation(obesity), and the other (PTSD) is not

Your analogy, as usual, is ---.

I have no idea why you use them to try and make your arguments, because you suck at analogies.

Rcade is also approaching this from the perspective of "acknowledging his privilege" and feels that Cukor should have done the same. I disagree in that tailgating into a building that he doesn't normally have access to changes the situation. Somehow Rcade feels that he is not in the wrong in being in that building without being let in by a resident. I'd still like to hear that justification.

Rcade is approaching this with hindsight...

At the time this happened this was known.

Guy lives in a building with a callbox for access.
Another guy tailgates in.
When questioned claims to know someone who lives there, can name them, but they're not home.
Guy who lives there wants the non tenant to leave.

That's really it. Leave any description about race out of it, and I'm pretty sure most people would say that the non-tenant should leave.

He didn't live in the building... he did not have a right to be there. Why do you think he did?

So black people are incapable of breaking any social convention rules because others have been wrongly accused of it?

Michel obviously knew he was making this resident uncomfortable, and could have waited outside the building for his friend just as easily. Actually more easily as he had to wait anyway, and Cukor could have gone his way.

Instead, he decided that the only reason this was happening was because of his race. So this tenant that he was making uncomfortable, he decided needed to be videoed. Seems Michel escalated it.

There were two people one who lived there, the other who would be a guest but his host wasn't there. The tenant would have preferred he left, and instead the host-less guest escalated the situation.

It's hysterical that with little evidence in either direction that so many people here KNOW this guy is a racist.

It would seem that his claim that there had been robberies could be verified... Would that make you think that he could possibly just be overzealous with enforcing no tailgating?

What would it take for you to consider that the guy could just be a jerk?

rcade, just because you don't care about the safety of your neighbors, doesn't mean that is unreasonable for others to care.

You keep claiming that he had no right... as a resident of a secure building, he had every right to question someone trying to tailgate into the building. Again just because you don't care, doesn't make you right. It might be super rigid how he tried to enforce the building rules, but as a resident, he doesn't have to allow someone to be in the building without the person they are there to see being there.

Staying strict to the rules, and now how you would do it doesn't make it wrong or racist.

#49->#50-#51

This is Snoofy being Snoofy.

Statement:
I see people kicked out all the time.... In a discussion about police officers being asked to leave an establishment.

Someone Says:
In 35 years I've never seen someone kicked out of a place

Now of course people are asked to leave businesses sometimes... across 50 states and 35 years, it has happened. In lower socio-economic neighborhoods, probably more. This discussion is about a Starbucks in a decent neighborhood though, where on a daily basis, across the country NO ONE is asked to leave.

So of course Snoofy does his go to move, he makes a poor analogy, or extreme example:

"Really. You've never seen a junkie in the bathroom for 20 minutes get kicked out?"
To be honest I can't tell what this one is, it might even be the rare combination of the extreme example via poor analogy.

You see normal rational people who've been in stores and shops their whole lives, and go virtually every day almost never see someone asked to leave and can identify that a drug addict in the bathroom is not a good example as they aren't acting as a normal customer, in a normal fashion, for how one should act in the establishment.

So Snoofy when we read your statement it really comes across as comparing a druggie in the bathroom to an officer in the coffee shop. I'm sure you didn't mean it that way, but it reads like that because you suck at analogies and examples.

Jesus Christ Snoofy is it that hard to see that putting up an apartment building of affordable apartments would make a developer more money than building a single house that rents for 4k a month? they could make much more with many cheaper apartments in that building. This would house more people, at an affordable rate.

How is this so hard to understand.

Now go ahead as usual and lift one part of my sentence and claim I said something different, or make a horrible analogy that in no way shape or form relates.

Sorry for the autocorrect above snoofy

Snooty I always took the flag etiquette about not wearing it as clothing to mean turning an actual flag into clothing. Not decorating clothing to look like a flag or to have a flag like emblem or logo on it.