Another one. (You’re ok with this, ACLU? This is what you want? This is what you consider a civil liberty?) Another man wins a women’s race. I hate having to cite The Federalist, because I really do not like their politics on any other subject, but nobody else is reporting on it.

Sherry Mix puts in 10 to 15 hours a week training for elite-level mountain and fat-tire bike races in the region. The Verona, Wis[consin] woman says it’s hard work but rewarding to the women who ride.

But as “equity” politics are further infused into just about every aspect of life, including competitive sports, cyclists like Mix are forced to compete on an unequal course. Last month, Mix finished third in a Snow Crown Fat Bike Series event in De Pere billed Fattyshack. The winner of the USA Cycling-sanctioned event was Kenzie Statz, a cyclist who was born male and now identifies as a transgender woman.

…

Statz has been finishing in the money in a number of races. Before transitioning and competing in the women’s events, it appears Statz didn’t fare nearly as well in the men’s competitions.

Mix said Statz is a really nice person, and she has nothing against transgender people wanting to compete in a terrific sport. But Statz, like other men who identify as women, often have a distinct physiological advantage over their fellow female opponents that cannot be denied.

“We’re just trying to figure out what we can do. You get these guys actually training, they’re just naturally faster and stronger than women. It’s just science, how bodies work,” Mix said.

I doubt that Statz truly is a really nice person, because a really nice person would be sharply aware of how unfair it is for someone with a male body to compete against women in most sports. A really nice person wouldn’t do it.

Also…I don’t think the competing against women is just happenstance, just an odd little exception in an otherwise decent guy’s life. The reason I think that is that Statz has to know what an advantage he’s giving himself, and that that advantage is exactly why he shouldn’t dream of doing it. It’s unfair and selfish and a bully move, so no, however pleasant he is in person, I don’t believe he’s really nice.

During the 2020 presidential campaign, Joe Biden vowed to use the Department of Education to investigate and address any violations of transgender students’ civil rights, including removing federal funding or risking legal action. Sure enough, one of President Biden’s first acts in office was to issue an executive order that, in part, demands transgender students be allowed to compete on opposite-sex sports teams.

One of his first acts. I didn’t post about it because I wanted to ignore it for the time being, but I sure as hell wondered what the big fucking hurry was.

A few weeks later, Montana’s American Civil Liberties Union chapter used Biden’s executive order to threaten the state’s federal funding if it passed legislation protecting women’s sports by banning men who identify as women from participating.

So that’s how “I apologize for not answering the question” woman got to recite the mantra.

“I understand they’re [transgender athletes are] looking for a place to belong, but I don’t think putting them in the women’s category is the right answer,” Mix said.

She said other cyclists feel similarly, but they’re afraid to speak out for fear of being labeled bigots and the threat of losing their licenses to compete. USA Cycling-sanctioned races require a license to enter.

“People are scared to say anything. It’s deemed bullying,” Mix said. “They can tell you you can’t race. They can kick you out of a race. I could have my license taken away.”

It’s another twist in the left’s conflicted culture wars. The losers, critics say, are the women who have worked so hard to advance the rights of women to compete.

“Most of us are riding 10 hours a week, easily 15 hours a week in the summer. We train every day for this,” Mix said. “To have a guy come in and take that away, that’s why women fought so hard to protect our equal rights. It’s like taking those equal rights away.”

That’s exactly what it is.

I’ve been meaning to get back to that paper by Alison Phipps, kind of the way one gets back to a mosquito bite.

Reactionary feminisms, which coalesce around debates about sex workers’ rights and transgender equality, magnify the political whiteness of the mainstream and deliberately withhold womanhood and personhood from marginalised Others.

Now there’s an outright lie. Feminism that opposes pimping doesn’t withhold womanhood or personhood from prostituted women, it argues that prostitution exploits women. Gender critical feminism doesn’t withhold womanhood or personhood from anyone, it simply doesn’t repeat the lie that men can become women by identifying as women. It’s not “witholding womanhood” from men to say they are men, any more than it’s witholding bearhood from rabbits to say rabbits are rabbits. Being a bear is not an option for rabbits and being a woman is not an option for men. We are what we are. We can comfort ourselves with fantasies, but we can’t bully and threaten other people into pretending our fantasies are reality.

Trans women are defined as ‘biological men’ while trans-exclusionary feminists are ‘adult human females’. Sex workers’ rights are juxtaposed with ‘women’s safety’, a manoeuvre in which the womanhood of sex workers is implicitly denied.

She can’t be that stupid, can she? Prostitution is extremely dangerous for the prostitutes, aka sex work is extremely dangerous for the sex workers. How does saying that implicitly (or explicitly) deny the womanhood of sex workers? Farming is also extremely dangerous, as is mining, as is construction work, as is meat processing – is it denying the manhood or womanhood or humanity of the workers in those industries to say that? Hardly; it’s the first step in reforming the industries and improving the protections for workers in them.

This reasserts the normative economically productive body and reproductive sex. It conjures up colonial sex difference and bourgeois white womanhood as a symbol of moral order, set against the racialised and enslaved inhabitants of colonised and settled territories and the multi-racial, ‘dangerous, immoral, and libidinal lower classes’ of the metropolis…

She’s not really even trying to say anything there. There’s no real meaning, and no real thinking, it’s just deploying a set of Approved words and phrases so that people will think she’s one of the Good Ones. It’s frivolous, it’s vain, it’s self-admiring, it’s careerist – all while pretending to be very very extra enlightened and left-wing. It’s such crap.

Meanwhile today –

Attending and reporting on in tweets.

Much of the reporting is procedural, on questions like whether names can be redacted.

I have a problem with that claim. It’s true in a literal sense, which may be how he means it (literal in the sense that discrimination is just choosing this instead of that, like pears instead of apples for instance), but if he means the political version of the word, I think I differ. Racist views are widely held but I don’t think it’s an unjust form of discrimination to call them bigoted.

Hearing will resume tomorrow.

They weren’t playing.

The evidence is now undeniable. What we saw on Wednesday was the definitive proof that what broke into the Capitol last month was a hunting party. They came to kill people. “Hang Mike Pence” was not a metaphor. Hearing the hunters caroling, “Nannnnnn-cy? Nannnnnnnn-cy?” in that horror-movie sing-song was to hear the trilling of murderous intent. They came to the Capitol to kill people. Mitt Romney probably was saved by Officer Eugene Goodman, and this was before Goodman saved everyone else. (A security camera caught Goodman encountering Romney outside the Senate chamber as Romney was headed unwittingly into the teeth of the mob. Romney pivots like genuine Barry Sanders and beats feet in the other direction.)

What the clips yesterday showed us is also how very close it was. It appears that there are multiple instances in which if the rioters had been just a little faster or the cops or the fleeing legislators and staffers just a little slower then there really would have been some murders on that day.

The House managers brought this evidence through a series of enormously gifted storytellers, and storytelling always has been an important part of legal proceedings. This was particularly true of Stacey Plaskett, a former NYC prosecutor who represents the U.S. Virgin Islands as their delegate to the Congress.

Oh she’s a former prosecutor. That explains it. She did indeed do a hell of a job. It helps to have such…abundant material.

He’s reading it correctly.

Bookshop boss now says he now regrets apology for apology. Tune in tomorrow for another exciting episode of Who Will Apologize Last?

The Sydney Morning Herald on that slimy apology for letting Julie Bindel speak:

In 2018 Bindel, a campaigner against male violence, spoke at a Hawthorn bookshop event about her book, The Pimping of Prostitution, about the global sex trade.

On Tuesday, Readings issued a statement on its website saying it “regrets programming Julie Bindel in 2018”. The independent bookseller apologised for “any hurt caused by highlighting the work of an author whose current stance is to divide our community”.

Bindel told The Age that she believed the apology was directly linked to an online event with transgender author Juno Dawson, which Readings would be hosting later this month.

Why would she believe that? Because Readings posted a tweet about the Juno Dawson event, and the very next tweet after that, two hours later, was the one throwing mud at Julie. Gee, imagine seeing a connection.

“Readings have publicly humiliated me and insulted me,” she said. “They have cowardly capitulated to bullies when for decades they have supported a diverse range of writers and publishers.”

…

The apology was welcomed by Transgender Victoria media representative Sally Goldner, AM, and Dylan O’Hara, from Vixen Collective, Victoria’s peer-only sex worker organisation.

Ms Goldner said: “Her views have no reasonable and rational basis and they cause ridicule, vilify and could reasonably incite harm against transgender people.

“To say we don’t exist, or to use twisted terms like to call someone like myself … a so-called biological male, just denies that my sense of self exists.”

It’s not using “twisted terms” to say that a person with a male body is a man.

As for denying someone’s “sense of self exists” – what can that even mean? It’s an impersonal general truth-claim to say that people with male bodies are men, and is nothing to do with anyone’s “sense of self” and whether it exists or not. This gruesomely narcissistic idea that public discourse has to take into account some random guy’s “sense of self” is infantile and thick as a brick.

Plot twist: Readings apologized for the apology. Then another plot twist: Readings decides not to apologize for the apology after all.

Very impressive.

That depends on what you mean by that innocent little word “be.”

Looked at one way it’s just an empty platitude. Looked at another way it’s an insulting lie. Suzanne Moore looks at it that second way.

The right way to react to this ridiculous mantra is surely to feel murderous. What is this slogan for? Who is it for? These endless attempts at inclusivity mean that being a woman can now even be a feeling in a man’s head. Eddie Izzard, I saw the other day, had been voted the best female comedian. Sorry, but I am not laughing.

There is no wrong way to be a woman. Are they serious? Let me list the ways. I and many women live with them every single day.

One of them is to live in fear. One woman is killed every three days in this country – a figure which has become much higher in lockdown.

And many more women are raped, groped, slapped, punched, beaten up, strangled – you get the idea. There are some drawbacks to being the weaker member of a dimorphic species.

Another wrong way to be a woman is to refuse to stop talking about what it is like living in a female body: periods, endometriosis, childbirth, miscarriage, infertility, menopause and that icky stuff. Speaking of this apparently excludes those women whose bodies don’t do those things.

And the response is torrents of threats to punch slap strangle kill the women who exclude “those” women. There’s always some good reason to get violent with the nearest woman.

Another very wrong way to be a woman is to think of yourself as more than a collection of body parts: lactators, menstruators, birthers, cervix havers. You do have to wonder what the word “woman” even means now that some organisations have banned us from saying it altogether.

One thing is clear though – if you are a woman the message you receive from birth is that you are pretty much always doing it wrong. That you will never be good enough.

But if you’re a man who identifies as a woman…you will always be good enough.

My god this is infuriating.

I don’t know what hearing this is. There was a hearing on a bill on transgender athletes in Montana in January and I couldn’t find one on a federal bill so this is probably Montana, but I don’t know for sure.

But anyway – it’s astounding. He asks the obviously relevant question, if in 20 years there is a women’s team that is all “biological males” would you support that? And she doesn’t answer. She’s so flummoxed she asks him to repeat it, so he does, and she just outright refuses to answer, and even says “I apologize for not answering the question,” and then robotically repeats the moronic formula. Answer the fucking question!! If this new dispensation becomes normal and males take advantage of it and “women’s teams” become all-male, will you still think that’s a fine thing?

Yes or no?!

Pretty harrowing to listen to.

Very progressive.

Whatcha gonna do when they come for you?

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis has opened a criminal investigation into Donald Trump’s attempt to interfere with Georgia’s election, the New York Times reported on Wednesday. While the former president faces potential criminal liability in several states, including New York, now that he has left office, the Georgia probe may pose the most immediate threat. All available evidence suggests that prosecutors are considering charges that amount to election fraud—a felony offense under Georgia law, and the very crime that Trump claimed he sought to stop.

The focus is on that call to Raffensperger.

As election law expert Rick Hasen noted at the time, there is no question that Trump was asking Raffensperger to manufacture enough votes to overturn the Georgia election on the basis of paranoid delusions. The former president’s call was thus not only corrupt, but very likely criminal. Under Georgia law, it is illegal to falsify any records used in connection with an election, or to place any false entries in such records. And any person who “solicits, requests, commands, importunes, or otherwise attempts to cause the other person” to falsify voting records is guilty of “criminal solicitation to commit election fraud in the first degree.” The crime is a felony offense, punishable by up to three years in prison (and no less than one year). An individual is culpable even if they failed to induce fraud.

Trump importuned. He importuned as hard as he could, complete with threats. Cleverly he did it over the phone, so that it could be recorded.

Willis noted in the retention request that the investigation includes potential violations of Georgia laws “prohibiting the solicitation of election fraud, the making of false statements to state and local governmental bodies, conspiracy, racketeering, violation of oath of office and any involvement in violence or threats related to the election’s administration.” This lengthy list of possible offenses indicates that the district attorney is focusing on the most obvious charge, solicitation of election fraud, but also looking at a broad range of criminal laws in building her case against Trump. In her letter to state officials, Willis described the Trump investigation as a “high priority” and said the case will go before a grand jury as early as March, with subpoenas to follow shortly thereafter.

This is good, and not just because I want to see Trump brought down with a crash, but because nobody should be able to do that with impunity, not even a vulgarian from Queens with a tiny tiny tiny vocabulary.

Also new.

New item.

The most dangerous jobs during the pandemic:

A new study from the University of California, San Francisco suggests that line cooks have the highest risk of mortality during the Covid pandemic — even more than healthcare workers.

For the study, which hasn’t been peer-reviewed yet, researchers analyzed California death certificates for working-age people 18 to 65, during the first seven months of the pandemic. Then they looked at how the number of deaths increased in that time frame compared to pre-pandemic times.

…

Line cooks had a 60% increase in mortality associated with the pandemic.

The top five occupations that had higher than a 50% mortality rate increase during the pandemic include cooks, line workers in warehouses, agricultural workers, bakers and construction laborers.

You’ll notice these are all grunt jobs, labor jobs, mostly badly paid jobs (I think construction pays better than the others). They aren’t jobs you can do on your laptop at home.

The risk also varied by race and ethnicity. The study found that “excess mortality,” which is the gap between the expected number of deaths in past years and 2020, increased 36% for Latino Californians, 28% for Black Californians and 18% for Asian Californians. Among White working-age Californians, the mortality rate increased by 6% during the pandemic.

Privilege of the most literal kind.

Free at last!

The prominent Saudi dissident and women’s rights activist Loujain al-Hathloul has been released from prison after 1,001 days in custody.

Following a concerted campaign by her relatives and global rights groups, Hathloul was granted probation by a judge in Riyadh and released to her family on Wednesday afternoon. Her sister Lina published a photo of a smiling Loujain on Twitter early evening Riyadh time – the first image of the most celebrated political prisoner in the Kingdom since she was detained almost three years ago. “Loujain is at home !!!!!!”, the accompanying message said.

It is understood that the terms of Hathloul’s probation prevent her from discussing her ordeal in prison. She is banned from leaving Saudi Arabia, and has a suspended sentence looming if she breaks the terms of her release.

So, not free, but out of prison, which is a lot better than being in.

Hathloul launched hunger strikes to protest against her imprisonment and joined other female activists in telling Saudi judges that she was tortured and sexually assaulted by masked men during interrogations. The women say they were caned, electrocuted and waterboarded. Some say they were forcibly groped and threatened with rape. Hathloul’s parents said they noticed bruising when they visited her in prison. …

Hathloul became a cause célèbre for leading Democrats in the US during her imprisonment and her case had been championed by Joe Biden during his presidential election campaign. The release of the activist is thought to at least in part be connected to Biden’s election win.

Unlike his predecessor Donald Trump, who fully embraced Prince Mohammed and showed no interest in the Kingdom’s human rights controversies, Biden has been noticeably cooler towards Riyadh and has vowed to reassess the US-Saudi partnership and stand up for human rights and democratic principles.

Hathloul is only one of many, of course.

Lucy Rae, a spokeswoman for Grant Liberty, which campaigns for the rights of prisoners in Saudi Arabia, said: “Loujain al-Hathloul leaves prison a hero – brutalised by the regime, but not broken. Her courage is an inspiration to us all. But she is not alone – the international community must not make the mistake of assuming that her release signals the end of the oppression of women human rights defenders in Saudi Arabia.

“The international community must not relent. It’s not just Loujain – there are many other women in prison today because they fought for human rights in Saudi Arabia. They must be freed, unconditionally. Nothing else will do.”

Showing us the glowing orb is no substitute.

The long arm of the law is getting longer and longer…

Prosecutors in Fulton county, Georgia, are investigating Donald Trump’s attempts to overturn the southern state’s 2020 presidential election results, according to a letter, in the second criminal investigation faced by the former president.

In Georgia! How dare they! Georgia was supposed to be solidly in the white supremacist yay-trump column. That’s the whole point of suppressing the black vote.

The Fulton county district attorney, Fani Willis, has sent a letter asking state government officials to preserve documents, including those related to the then president’s call to the Republican secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, pressuring him to “find” more votes.

“This matter is of high priority, and I am confident that as fellow law enforcement officers sworn to uphold the constitutions of the United States and Georgia, our acquisition of information and evidence of potential crimes via interviews, documents, videos and electronic records will be cooperative,” said the letter dated 10 February.

“This letter is notification that all records potentially related to the administration of the 2020 general election must be preserved, with particular care being given to set aside and preserve those that may be evidence of attempts to influence the actions of persons who were administering that election.“

Tick tock

Trans man knows what it’s like.

I am a 48-year-old transgender man. I was thrilled when the medical community told me six years ago that I could change from a woman to a man. I was informed about all the wonderful things that would happen due to medical transition, but all the negatives were glossed over. Since then, I have suffered tremendously, including seven surgeries, a pulmonary embolism, an induced stress heart attack, sepsis, a 17-month recurring infection, 16 rounds of antibiotics, three weeks of daily IV antibiotics, arm reconstructive surgery, lung, heart and bladder damage, insomnia, hallucinations, PTSD, $1 million in medical expenses, and loss of home, car, career and marriage. All this, and yet I cannot sue the surgeon responsible—in part because there is no structured, tested or widely accepted baseline for transgender health care.

Does that sound worth it? For something so nebulous and uncertain as transitioning to the “right” body? What kind of “right” body puts you through all that?

Read that again: There is no structured, tested, or widely accepted baseline for transgender health care. Not for 42-year-olds, and not for the many minors embarking on medical transition in record numbers. It is not transphobic or discriminatory to discuss this—we as a society need to fully understand what we are encouraging our children to do to their bodies.

Or maybe we just need to stop encouraging. Allowing, maybe, but encouraging, how about never.

Throughout transition, I second-guessed my decisions, but each counseling session and doctor’s appointment amounted to one more push convincing me I could be cured of being born in the wrong body. The truth was that I didn’t fit in as a dominant, aggressive, assertive lesbian. The dream of finally fitting in dangled like a carrot: The idea that I could fit in catapulted me to a time much like adolescence, with its drive for acceptance, inclusive peers and the fantasy of being normal.

“Normal” is overrated.

During my post-operation 17 months of sheer survival, I discovered that transgender health care is experimental and that large swaths of the medical industry encourage minors to transition due, at least in part, to fat profit margins. I was gobsmacked. Each day I researched more and became increasingly appalled. As I jumped from ER to ER desperately seeking help, I realized that nobody knew what to do. Each physician told me to return to the original surgeon.

It’s lobotomies all over again, I tell you. It’s bleeding people for every illness. It’s sacrificing an animal to appease the god who sent the fever.

H/t Sackbut

Trump is mad that his lawyers are so sucky. Well, Mister Sir, that’s what happens when you’re such a horror that nobody wants to defend you – you can’t get the pick of the crop.

A Trump advisor told the New York Times’ Maggie Haberman that Trump attorney Bruce Castor’s confusing, meandering performance was a “deliberative strategy.” designed to lower the emotion in the room, though, I’d counter, a master strategist wouldn’t need to put out a background statement explaining their strategy.

No that too is to get everyone to calm down.

Other reviews also not great.

“The president’s lawyer just rambled on and on,” said senator John Cornyn, a Republican of Texas. “I’ve seen a lot of lawyers and a lot of arguments, and that was not one of the finest I’ve seen.”

Senator Ted Cruz, a Trump loyalist, told the Washington Post: “I don’t think the lawyers did the most effective job.”

Senator Bill Cassidy of Louisiana was none too impressed with Donald Trump’s defense team. Cassidy told HuffPost’s Igor Bobic: “They talked about many things but they didn’t talk about the issue at hand.”

Meanwhile…

Meanwhile today the impeachment trial has started.

Democrats are aware that the trial outcome is a foregone conclusion – another Trump acquittal, barring sensational new evidence – and that the stakes are lower because he has already left office. But sometimes symbolism is the point. The impeachment trial is a test of accountability, stability and rule of law before a global audience.

…

Like a criminal lawyer, Democrats are seeking to appeal to not only the head but also the heart. They are not only prosecutors but also survivors of the rampage, a point brought home with visceral force by Jamie Raskin in a closing argument that had the chamber silent and spellbound on Wednesday.

“And then there was a sound I will never forget,” he recalled. “The sound of pounding on the door like a battering ram. The most haunting sound I ever heard and I will never forget it.”

Raskin’s 25-year-old son, Tommy, a Harvard law student who struggled with depression, took his own life on New Year’s Eve. A day after Tommy was buried on 5 January, the congressman had brought his daughter and a son-in-law to the Capitol for the ratification of Biden’s victory.

He had assured them it would be safe but, after the mob stormed the building, they were hiding under a desk in a barricaded congressional office sending what they thought were final text messages to loved ones. More than an hour later, they were rescued by Capitol police.

Raskin, fighting back tears, said of his 24-year-old daughter: “I told her how sorry I was and I promised her that it would not be like this again the next time she came back to the Capitol with me. And you know what she said? She said, ‘Dad, I don’t want to come back to the Capitol.’”

At that Raskin broke down for a moment, putting fingers to his eyes before regaining his composure. “Of all the terrible, brutal things I saw and I heard on that day and since then, that one hit me the hardest. That and watching someone use an American flag pole, the flag still on it, to spear and pummel one of our police officers – ruthlessly, mercilessly tortured by a pole with a flag on it that he was defending with his very life.”

It sounds maudlin, but it’s the truth.

It gets worse. (This is interesting because he’s not Owen Jones or Adrian Harrop, but…it seems he might as well be.)

Might as well be.