Modern Vespa

Okay, Bob -- since you disregarded my request to curtail further discussion on this topic, I think it's fair to ask: what is your personal stake in this subject?

Dude!

But decriminalising it is a good idea.

We might as well make abortion illegal as well as pot. The cat is out of the bag, the genie is out of the bottle, we have internet there are youtube videos...

Maybe we should make alcohol illegal again as well? I mean I have been thinking maybe I should cut back a little bit...

Are you guys insane?

Ya can't just make something illegal like that it just doesn't work. People, being people will find a way and people will do it. Making it illegal just doesn't work.

Just like not being accepting over time just doesn't work. Can you imagine in this day and age being proud of standing up for slavery?

That's what it's like in the not too distant future. People have access to a lot more information now than they did just a few short years ago. It's out there and then you have your diffusion studies...I have always been an early adopter. Sapolsky also has lectures about determinism. I am convinced I am an early adopter because of how my life happened.

My favorite explanation of a diffusion study is in this article I have posted before I am sure but for those who havent seen it the cool hunt.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1997/03/17/the-coolhunt-malcolm-gladwell

I guess the whole point of bringing up diffusion is how it seems things are changing and some adopt earlier than others...point being didn't just about everyone end up using the new improved corn seed?

All but two by 1941.

Interesting stuff I think

One of the most famous diffusion studies is Bruce Ryan and Neal Gross's analysis of the spread of hybrid seed corn in Greene County, Iowa, in the nineteen-thirties. The new seed corn was introduced there in about 1928, and it was superior in every respect to the seed that had been used by farmers for decades. But it wasn't adopted all at once. Of two hundred and fifty-nine farmers studied by Ryan and Gross, only a handful had started planting the new seed by 1933. In 1934, sixteen took the plunge. In 1935, twenty-one more followed; the next year, there were thirty-six, and the year after that a whopping sixty-one. The succeeding figures were then forty-six, thirty-six, fourteen, and three, until, by 1941, all but two of the two hundred and fifty-nine farmers studied were using the new seed. In the language of diffusion research, the handful of farmers who started trying hybrid seed corn at the very beginning of the thirties were the "innovators," the adventurous ones The slightly larger group that followed them was the "early adopters." They were the opinion leaders in the community, the respected, thoughtful people who watched and analyzed what those wild innovators were doing and then did it themselves. Then came the big bulge of farmers in 1936, 1937, and 1938—the "early majority" and the "late majority," which is to say the deliberate and the skeptical masses, who would never try anything until the most respected farmers had tried it. Only after they had been converted did the "laggards," the most traditional of all, follow suit. The critical thing about this sequence is that it is almost entirely interpersonal. According to Ryan and Gross, only the innovators relied to any great extent on radio advertising and farm journals and seed salesmen in making their decision to switch to the hybrid. Everyone else made his decision overwhelmingly because of the example and the opinions of his neighbors and peers.

Well said, both of you, and we should all remember that you never know what means a lot to someone and that "sharing uninformed opinions about topics in which you have absolutely no stake" about anything at all can reveal a level self-unawareness, thoughtlessness, and a sadly predictable and embarrassing adherence to a bone-headed tribal sense of superiority that can wipe out years of goodwill in a moment.

Tailgating...WTF is wrong with people lately? This happens about 90% of the time when I'm on a scooter no matter how much over the speed limit I'm going. I think people in cars/trucks feel somehow superior than to have to follow a lowly scooter.. I've experimented with what all the motorcycle riding manuals and my 25+ years riding experience tell you will happen if you speed up to get the tailgater off your ass - they'll speed up too. ESPECIALLY women drivers. You'll end up going 100 mph...! But now it seems to happen daily in either of our cars. Is everyone in that much of a hurry? On their phone? This is probably the number one way to get involved in road rage... idiots.

Bob

Personally I chalk this up to the proliferation of safety devices. People live under the conception that nothing bad can happen to them. Don't get me wrong, all the things like seat belts, airbags, helmets, antilock brakes, etc., have saved tens, if not hundreds of thousands of lives over the decades.

The problem is, people know these things exist, and behave "less safe" because of them.

**Sips coffee.

People who choose to not drink coffee should not be trusted. People who drink their coffee black are superior coffee drinkers.

You know there's this magical space in between black and "let's fill this up to a quart with milk and syrup and hell let's put some whipped cream in there too".

Agreed, unless caffeine withdrawal is possible. This is why I drink decaf.

To clarify. I am not bashing marijuana per-se. I'll go on record as saying I've never smoked it and really don't care to.

Why my hot take is it shouldn't have been legalized is more about stupid people. When illegal were there issues? Yes, of course. However, since it's legalization, I can't ride twenty minutes in traffic without smelling someone smoking it in their car. Is smoking it in your car illegal? Of course it is, but it has been a very obvious case of "give an inch, take a mile". When people heard "legal weed" they were immediately smoking it everywhere, including while driving.

Also, for the record, I have had personal stakes in the past concerning marijuana use, so I'm not just blowing smoke (pun intended). I lost one of the best techs I ever trained because of. 'random' drug test on a Monday following Super-Bowl Sunday and nearly lost my own job going toe-to-toe with our GM over fair testing practices. His argument was they didn't want that influence to be part of our company and I strongly suggested testing everyone from the top down starting with himself. It was an interesting meeting.

That's been going on long before it was legal.

Yes, it has, but it has been a very pronounced, very distinct change since it was made legal. From 'almost never smelled' to 'almost always'.

It's that almost always smelling it that bugs me. I don't care what people do in their homes, but I don't want to be subjected to that stench every time I venture outside. And it seems odd to me that our government has pretty much been trying to crush out the practice of smoking tobacco (which I've also never done), but has no problem with smoking weed. It's a remarkable bit of hypocrisy that Prime Minister Trudeau used to get elected.

The original campaign against cannabis in North America was funded by the tobacco industry - to eliminate competition. They succeeded to the point that the entire plant from root to leaf tip was declared illegal - not just the narcotic part.

The hemp plant is actually a most useful plant for human consumption, nutrition, clothing fibre and construction fibre. It also grows from germination to harvest in 100 days, allowing for year-round cultivation in milder climates.

In South Africa, cannabis has been traditionally used for centuries by indigenous peoples, mostly for medicinal use. This is now legalised and cultivation for personal use is decriminalised. Users no longer have to seek out pushers of other narcotics to get their weed.

My local shopping centre now has a small cannabis club where members over 18 can buy seeds and other products containing THC for personal use. They pay rent for the premises and they pay income tax on profits generated, so they are now part of the formal small business sector...

Cannabis tea and essential oils have been used for decades to treat chronic pain due to arthritis and cancer. I favour such use.

We were at Hobby lobby the other day. Hobby Freaking Lobby. Somebody there was polluting one whole corner of the store because they reeked of pot. I mean, I can see if it had been Walmart, but Hobby Lobby?

Like you said, I can sit in my back yard and enjoy a beer or a scotch and not bother anyone. And yeah, it bugs me smelling it in public, but smelling it in traffic bugs me even more. And just staying with the thread of my original rant, this is not about pot per-se, it's about people being stupid about it. Sure it's legal, but it is still governed by laws and those laws are there to protect other people, like when they are driving. I do have the same opinions about drinking and driving, FTR. Something else I don't do. If I do something stupid and hurt myself (and I have) shame on me, but the thought of being stupid and hurting someone else? I don't think I could live with that.

Hypocrisy? One causes cancer, the other one has less unhealthy side effects than drinking beer.

so smoking weed won't cause cancers? and beer has no health benefits? ya better do a bit more research on that.

quantity and quality.

There are many ways to get cannabis in your system. Smoking is but one of them.

Not ever saying that beer isn't great, though you might contemplate that cannabis has its heath benefits as well. Or so it might appear from its availability through prescriptions and medical dispensaries.

Nicotine.

I have heard it said that nicotine is a wonder drug.

Nicotine is the only drug that automatically knows if you need a pick me up or a calm me down. Very beneficial in the everyday rat race...

The only problem is that the delivery system is highly carcinogenic.

But yeah just imagine the stink everywhere if that got popular again?

It's the smoking of it that annoys me, and most other non-users. If people were getting it in gummies, I likely wouldn't know about it, or care.

And as for the cancer risk:
https://www.oncolink.org/risk-and-prevention/smoking-tobacco-and-cancer/marijuana-cannabis-smoking-and-cancer-risk#:~:text=Marijuana%20(cannabis)%20smoke%20has%20many,about%20their%20use%20of%20marijuana.

You can mostly fix both of those issues by using a pipe rather than cigarettes.

I remember back when I smoked a pipe there was a particular winter day that extended my drive home from work considerably.

There was a mix I was smoking from a local shop called "Doc Watson" that I quite liked. It wasn't overly sweet and a little spicy.

Being winter I had the windows rolled up. It was a long drive.

I had such a baccy buzz when I got home I had to lay on the couch until it passed.

Just in case anyone questions whether a pipe is an adequate delivery system. Not that I condone either, but yeah. True story.

Yep. There are a couple blends I have that I only smoke in smaller pipes or half bowls. Others… throw a handful in the oversized Savinelli and relax for an hour or two.

excuse my ignorance, but do you not inhale with a pipe ?

if you do, isn't that still as bad as ciggies ?

if not how do you get the nicotine 'hit' ?

You don't need to inhale, as the nicotine is absorbed through the mucous membrane in the mouth, as well as in the stomach when you swallow.

Regular use can cause cancer of the mouth, throat, and esophagus.

You are also going to inhale some "second hand" from the smoke in the air.

thanks

Jess,

Sorry for the delayed response. Personal stake in transgender involvement in women's sports. Fair question.

When I grew up, I participated in organized sports at school from the 5th grade through the 12th grade. Ladies had nothing. I benefited a great deal learning to be self confident, competitive, and mentally tough by caring on even when losing. These experiences severed me well at work in my adult life.

I was an advocate and pleased when Title 9 was passed in 1972 giving ladies teams to play on an scholarships for college - learn the same stuff I benefited from.

Perhaps not that significant - but, I believe the trans involvement detracts from Title 9. I also maintain that nontrans men should not play in women's sports. From what I understand, there is no legal issue in men or women playing in each others sports at any level.

So, if women's swimming was flooded with men, the guys would take the Gold, Silver and Bronze positions relegating women to 4th, 5th and lower finishes.

I am part of the past, call me old fashioned. I do believe athletically men and women are different.

Bob Copeland

No. Virtually no pipe smokers inhale. The original Surgeon General's report from 60 years ago actually showed a very slightly lower rate of mortality in pipe smokers than non smokers. I haven't found a single study since then that included pipe smokers. At this point the number of pipe smokers is so low that I suspect you'd have trouble collecting enough data for any meaningful analysis. Because of this, pipe and cigar smokers usually get lumped together as a group.

For my part… I figure the relaxation and enjoyment I get from smoking my pipe more than offsets, for me, the possible increased risk factors. Even my cardiologist doesn't complain about it.

And Michael Phelps is even more different, what with those abnormally large feet, short legs and massive arm span.

While we're complaining about scents
People who wear scents give me a asthma attack
I basically can't take an Uber, every one has a damn glade plugin stuck to the ac vent
My building had to fire one of the staff, who in spite of repeated warnings, insisted on adding "essential oils" to the mostly unscented cleaning products
Went back & forth with swifer over unscented refills that were anything but, smelled like unrial cakes, their last response was one I have gotten from several companies
We didn't add the scent one of their vendors did, as if that makes it ok to advertise scented products as unscented

A little weed smoke is the least of my worries
Dry vaping combusts without burning & doesn't have any particular smell...

This post should be stickied on MV. Hemp is an amazing plant. I have had a family member dying of cancer benefit from ingesting THC. He got his appetite back and had a decent outlook. I am talking about a man that was laying there ready to go. I smuggled him in gummies and he shared his opiates. I held his hand while he died. We had a few days where we laughed about shit. That's all you can really ask for.

I've been watching the replies for the past week. I too come from an athletic background. I started competing/racing in cross country running back in the early 80's. I was in the 3rd grade. Our little rural elementary school happened to be fortunate enough to have a cross country team. We had both a girls and a boys team. I continued in junior high with xc. I also joined a private track club. And everyone on the track team were there to compete. The boys gave 100%, the girls gave 100%. My sister was also in the same track club. She raced the 800 meters and threw discus and shot put. She also competed in the heptathon. She made it to nationals on the girls relay team. I raced 1500 meter, 3000, meter, and high jump.

Once in highshool i continued to race xc (5000 meters) track and field (1500m, 3k, and high jump). My sister raced the 800 meter, discus, and was on the swim team. She went to state in both swimming and discus.

A continued racing xc in college. My sister quit with the organized sports and switched to sk8 boarding.

I continued racking after college. I eventually joined a running club and raced on their xc team. I also did LOTS and LOTS of road races…10k, 15k, half marathons, and marathons.

I quit competitively running when i was around 35 years old (nagging calf muscle issue). I now race bicycles at local races. I also go to the gym about 12 hours a week to work on both cardio and weights.

My niece also raced track and cross country. So did my best friend's daughter.

I have literally meet, raced against, or rubbed shoulders with thousands of other competitive athletes (girls, boys, men, women) over the past 40+ years. I have had multiple coaches coach me. I've had both female and male coaches. I'm also friends with multiple coaches whose job WAS to coach other runners. As in the runners would pay the coach $$$$.

I have been, and i have been around highly competitive athletes my whole life (starting at about 8 years to 48 years old…and counting). Being I have seen women's sports get bigger, stronger, more competitive, and better established throughout the years. I have personally know/known countless female runners and cyclists. Of all those competitive girls/women, i have never, ever meet one who would be ok with directly competing against man in a woman's event…like ever. I can say with certainty that the general public has absolutely no idea what competitive men and women sacrifice to hone their ability.
-Going to bed early,
-waking up early.
-track workouts might be at 6am.
-track workouts might be at 9pm.
-skipping deserts
-skip hanging out on a fri/sat night with friends.
-eating LOTS of chicken and rice.
-passing on comfort foods.
-your saturday or sunday mornings revolve around a long 16~20mile run.
-you spend $1000's a year on shoes and running clothes because you quickly wear them out.
-You focus mentally monday through friday in order to be prepared to race on saturday.
-ect, ect, ect.

Both competitively girls, boys, men, and women eat, think, and breathe this way. The general public who trots a 5k fun run on a sunday morning will never understand this.

I believe that ALL people from all walks of life, red, yellow, black, and white, trans, Paralympics, special olympics should be able to compete…BUT compete in their own assigned gender. I'm confident that every single competitive female athlete (runner, swimmer, cyclist) that i've ever meet would be absolutely livid to have a dude in their racing class. And why is that? Well, because men are just built stronger and faster. I don't know what science says different, nor have i ever bother to read that science, but if one decides to look at both the men's and women's times and records, it will undoubtedly put to rest who is physically stronger. Same thing for the records in junior high, highschool, college.

Yes i do know a couple transgender (guys switching over to girls) folks. Just two that i know of personally. One was on my XC team. She (he) fast for a guy, but she (he) was faster than all the other woman that were her (his) age. No one had anything against her whatsoever. No one hated, gave grief, cracked jokes, be mean, ect to her. She was a bit older, so not quite as competitive. It never bothered or fazed me when i would talk with her. There's also another trans at the gym i go to. We're both on a first name basis. We both chat ever now and then, talk about our weekends or jobs. I have absolutely no beef with her. I enjoy seeing her show up to the gym just as much as any other person who walks through the front door. I will say this about here though…even though we have a similar build (body), she can out bench press me and outdo me on the lat pull down machine…just sayin.


Woman's sports have had to scratch and claw itself to where it is now. To have a trans athlete compete in a girls/woman class is really doing a disservice to the young women. I still follow local highschool xc and track. Earlier this year a (local to me in oregon) sophomore dude won first at the state championship in the woman's 200 meter hurdles. I felt sooo bad far all of those young woman who worked so hard to get to state, only to get kicked in the crotch like that. It completely negates everything both girls and women have worked and trained so hard for. I've also been to multiple professional track meets to watch olympians compete. I'm one of those guys who like to watch the women race to watch them compete!…not to ogle or leer at what they're wearing. Probably my favorite all time race discipline to watch is the woman's 1500 meters. Those gals are soooo dang competitive! Elbows being thrown, fists making contact, shoulder checks, pushing, shoving, blocking, ect. Those gals are tuff to say the least!

I don't have any ill will towards a trans athlete. But being a competitive athlete myself, there's no question a trans will have a physical advantage.

So what's the answer? I don't have one, and even if i did i most likely wouldn't ever bring it up in a general conversation with someone who has never been a competitive athlete. I will say this, since women had to work so hard to get recognized and have their own racing class, maybe the trans need to do the same? Over in Portland (which is a very liberal city), there's always bicycle races happening. What the bicycle groups came up with was to separate the classes out…MEN, WOMAN, TRANS. The trans get to race with the men, but are scored separately. As far as i know there's no complaints from either side.


Like i said a few times before, the general public who hasn't ever been competitive will have no idea of how important woman's sports are and how detrimental trans competing are to the woman. So i wouldn't expect them to understand or think that it's a big deal.

FYI, i was at a cross country running meet this morning. LOTS of super fast girls and guys there!

I'm not looking to argue or debate, just to bring to light how important women athletics are!

I'm not looking to argue or debate, just to bring to light how important women athletics are!
[/quote]

Well said whodatschrome. I totally agree with you. I know both gay and lesbian people and have two trans gender customers ( men into women ). I don't judge orientation. I do think that there would be an unfair advantage, the same that enhancing drugs create. I support the idea of putting people in similar classes to compete. There should be a level playing field in my opinion.

I'll remember to never piss you off cause there's no way I'll outrun you! 😉

So this is just not true. The first sentence is misinformation and wrong. The second sentence again, you can't just state something as fact that completely disagrees with the science just because you think so. A few posts back I included a link!!!

Yeah the women have had to scratch and claw for what they got and now that you got yours...I can get behind that. But just know who you are excluding from competing are women. If they are competing at the NCAA level they have privately through their physicians done the required medical treatment to qualify to compete as a woman.

In layman's terms this means they have had their hormones tested. Even in the case of Lia Thomas the most famous trans woman champion her winning time was slower the 7 of the previous 8 champions. Do you really think the girl that would have been beat by 7 of the previous 8 champions should be excluded.

This all ties in to the diffusion study, how long it takes some people to accept information that is right in front of their eyes.

What has recently been made visible by the volleyball tournaments is pretty interesting as well. If you just read the click bait headlines you would think there was some unfair advantage, that some players were afraid of playing with trans women players in a non contact sport.

Again the woman at SDSU that all this fuss is about is not a standout athlete totally dominating the competition to the point of them being afraid of playing with her...

It's about a lawsuit that was filed by a player on SDSU that had shared a room as a room mate for some time, and locker room as a team mate and then learned that the person she was rooming and teaming with was trans she was afraid.

The transwoman qualified medically as a transitioned woman to be able to play in the NCAA. To exclude the trans people from our society is no different than having separate water fountains and bathrooms for a particular race.

I understand a lot of people just don't know yet but I can't say it any plainer. By law and constitution trans people have the same rights as anyone else but mostly they just want to be accepted as who they are and to be included like everyone else.

To exclude them is a hate crime. Especially when the science says they have no advantage. Your real world experience and opinion is not science but rather bias that needs to be unlearned.

https://sports.yahoo.com/opinion-transgender-witch-hunt-san-150949168.html

https://www.outsports.com/2024/4/12/24091267/transgender-athletes-study-research-science-sports-governing-bodies/

https://cces.ca/transgender-women-athletes-and-elite-sport-scientific-review

https://cces.ca/sites/default/files/content/docs/2024-01/transgender-women-athletes-and-elitesport-a-scientific-review-en.pdf

[quote="skids"]

"To exclude them is a hate crime. Especially when the science says they have no advantage. Your real world experience and opinion is not science but rather bias that needs to be unlearned."

I think this is the thing that really gets people. They just cannot accept that what they thought was fact for so long is wrong, incorrect, bias.

It is not science. I understand not liking being forced to learn something. I got a computer virus once. I was forced to learn to debug the damn thing. I was pretty pissed about it at the time but as soon as I got it fixed and it worked again I was pretty proud of myself.

You don't have to read up and accept but you really should. You will be proud of yourself for learning something.