It’s super hard to follow the liberal ideology. Man this is crazy fun trying though
It’s super hard to follow the liberal ideology. Man this is crazy fun trying though
Lenny Leonard wrote:
CrispyChicken wrote:
It's quite a leap to go from saying a person doesn't believe in or support something to saying that they have an irrational fear of that something. I don't particularly like rates, but I am not a musophobe or musophobic.
"-phobia" essentially means "a strong aversion to." When someone calls you "transphobic," isn't doesn't mean you have an irrational fear of transpeople; it means that you really dislike them and avoid them when possible.
You are transphobic. Wear it with pride. Or not. I wouldn't. I would take a look in the mirror and try to be a better person.
You must be using the Leftist Liberal Newspeak Dictionary first published in 1984.
According to Johns Hopkins Medicine, "a phobia is an uncontrollable, irrational, and persistent fear of a specific object, situation, or activity."
According to Merriam-Webster, a phobia is "an exaggerated usually inexplicable and illogical fear of a particular object, class of objects, or situation."
Joe Jackson wrote:
Tatar... wrote:
If you're saying trans people don't exist or can't exist then it's transphobia.
Read the quote. That's not at all what RunRagged is saying.
Well I'd like to know what was being said.
If you think gay people aren't gay but have made a choice to be gay then you'll get rightly called out for homophobia. But if you say Ms Thomas isn't trans she's a man and trans isn't legitimate way of being, then how is this different?
former d1 coach wrote:
lasdjfodifj wrote:
I really want to see a big D1 school actively and publicly recruit only trans women. Could you image how unstoppable a basketball, soccer, or lacrosse team would be if the coach only fielded trans women and not a single cis woman?
I would 100% pay to see that. A program like Ucon or Tennesee for basketball or UNC for soccer come out and very publicly state they are only interested in giving scholarships to trans women. Bonus points if they actual state it is ok if the trans women are faking it just for the free education.
Great idea. I actually think the way to do this is for for some conservative leaning school to do it. After playing 4 years on the men's basketball team, instead of graduating, have the seniors come out as trans and then play on the women's team. Remember, all they have to do it take a single birth control pill one time and they will be in compliance for being on testosterone reducing medication.
You're suggesting something that's impossible. The 4 years on the men's team would burn off their eligibility and regardless of whether you are correct in your claim of the effects of taking a single birth control pill, they would still have to sit out a year. It would be bizarro world for a school to attempt such a scheme and it would result in a ban from the N.C.A.A.
Tatar... wrote:
Joe Jackson wrote:
Read the quote. That's not at all what RunRagged is saying.
Well I'd like to know what was being said.
If you think gay people aren't gay but have made a choice to be gay then you'll get rightly called out for homophobia. But if you say Ms Thomas isn't trans she's a man and trans isn't legitimate way of being, then how is this different?
Ms. Thomas is a trans-woman. Ms. Thomas is not a woman. That's what's being said.
Thomas's teammates are speaking out:
https://swimswam.com/anonymous-penn-swimmer-speaks-out-on-lia-thomas-presence-on-the-womens-team/
A trans person is someone born of a particular biological sex who identifies as another. You seem to be saying that isn't true. But biology does not care about how you identify. I think recognizing the athlete's biological sex regardless of how the athlete is wired to identify is less denial than arguing a complete fiction based on politeness.
^ At least one teammate, anyway.
SDSU Aztec wrote:
former d1 coach wrote:
Great idea. I actually think the way to do this is for for some conservative leaning school to do it. After playing 4 years on the men's basketball team, instead of graduating, have the seniors come out as trans and then play on the women's team. Remember, all they have to do it take a single birth control pill one time and they will be in compliance for being on testosterone reducing medication.
You're suggesting something that's impossible. The 4 years on the men's team would burn off their eligibility and regardless of whether you are correct in your claim of the effects of taking a single birth control pill, they would still have to sit out a year. It would be bizarro world for a school to attempt such a scheme and it would result in a ban from the N.C.A.A.
But let's approach this as a thought exercise.
We know that a man can swim for three years, sit out one year, and then swim on the women's team the following year.
So, what if a few (four or five) members of a Division I men's basketball team played for three years and then, in an equally legitimate fashion (they are honestly trans), sat out one year and then joined the women's basketball team.
What if they did so on scholarship?
What if they cruised to an undefeated season and NCAA title?
What if they won every game by obscene, lopsided scores?
Whether someone thinks this is absurd and would "never happen" is immaterial. When you create policy that allows things to happen, you have to be prepared for all things to happen that are within the rules. Good policy stands strong in the face of extreme situations. Bad policy is exposed.
How do we think society would react? Would the NCAA change course? Would the courts be immediately involved?
If you can see a situation in which a policy will epically fail while not being violated, you are better to address the policy sooner rather than later.
Is it now possible for a 25-year who thinks he is 12 years old to now play Little League baseball? I don't see much difference between that and a man who thinks he is a woman (but isn't) competing in women's sports (which require you to be a woman to compete in).
None of that matters, if you are a man you cannot compete in women sports, Really is just that simple, Be a woman just stay away from sports
Tatar... wrote:
If you think gay people aren't gay but have made a choice to be gay then you'll get rightly called out for homophobia. But if you say Ms Thomas isn't trans she's a man and trans isn't legitimate way of being, then how is this different?
Lia Thomas is a transwoman, which means she is both a man and a woman, in different contexts. In the context of competitive sports, Lia is male and should not be on the women's swim team.
Trans is a "legitimate way of being" in terms of most social interactions. Just not this one.
The comparison to gays is not valid. Sexual orientation is purely mental; it's about who someone is attracted to. Trans issues are about both physical and mental differences.
A second female member on the Penn swim squad has spoken out objecting to the unfairness:
After years of battling for Title IX and equal rights with men in college athletics, the biological women are pretty much being told to shut their mouths and move along by the school and the NCAA.
“While they say they care about all of us, our interests are in direct conflict with the interests of Lia in regards to fair competition and getting to compete. While we support Lia as a person to make decisions for her own life, you cannot make that decision and then come and impede on other people and their rights,” OutKick’s source added.
“Your right doesn’t supersede everyone else’s right.”
So what’s the solution here? Thomas’ teammate doesn’t have a magical policy that the NCAA should follow to make everyone happy.
“I don’t know what the solution is, but I know this is not it. Because people talk about how the trans community might’ve been marginalized before and this is supposed to be helping, but you can’t help the trans community by marginalizing [biological] women.”
https://www.outkick.com/outkick-exclusive-second-female-penn-swimmer-steps-forward/
This Lia b*tch absolutely sucks. I hate her. She is everything wrong with this world. Be trans all you want but doing what she is doing is a joke and bad for everyone. I’m going to dead name the sh*t out of her if I ever meet her.
She’s delusional:
https://twitter.com/greg_price11/status/1469044358271938568?s=21
“While they say they care about all of us, our interests are in direct conflict with the interests of Lia in regards to fair competition and getting to compete. While we support Lia as a person to make decisions for her own life, you cannot make that decision and then come and impede on other people and their rights,” OutKick’s source added.
I have and will continue to march in Pride Parades as an ally of the LGTBQ+ community.
I would march the next day with women who are seeking to preserve women's sports as a place for XX humans to have a place to fairly compete, if such marches existed.
I imagine that the young woman who gave this quote feels the same way.
RossiCheated wrote:
SDSU Aztec wrote:
You're suggesting something that's impossible. The 4 years on the men's team would burn off their eligibility and regardless of whether you are correct in your claim of the effects of taking a single birth control pill, they would still have to sit out a year. It would be bizarro world for a school to attempt such a scheme and it would result in a ban from the N.C.A.A.
But let's approach this as a thought exercise.
We know that a man can swim for three years, sit out one year, and then swim on the women's team the following year.
So, what if a few (four or five) members of a Division I men's basketball team played for three years and then, in an equally legitimate fashion (they are honestly trans), sat out one year and then joined the women's basketball team.
What if they did so on scholarship?
What if they cruised to an undefeated season and NCAA title?
What if they won every game by obscene, lopsided scores?
Whether someone thinks this is absurd and would "never happen" is immaterial. When you create policy that allows things to happen, you have to be prepared for all things to happen that are within the rules. Good policy stands strong in the face of extreme situations. Bad policy is exposed.
How do we think society would react? Would the NCAA change course? Would the courts be immediately involved?
If you can see a situation in which a policy will epically fail while not being violated, you are better to address the policy sooner rather than later.
OK, but it would be impossible to convince even one swimmer to forfeit his scholarship, much less four. You're calling for extreme sacrifices in protest over a transgender athlete, but are you willing to contribute your life savings to a fund to cover tuition and living expenses for these athletes or quit your job to show solidarity to the cause?
Meanwhile, a childlike hissy fit will have no affect on N.C.A.A. rules.
briswiss wrote:
She’s delusional:
https://twitter.com/greg_price11/status/1469044358271938568?s=21
What is this dude with the long hair talking about? He sounds and looks like he is going to bust out laughing at any second.
CrispyChicken wrote:
Lenny Leonard wrote:
"-phobia" essentially means "a strong aversion to." When someone calls you "transphobic," isn't doesn't mean you have an irrational fear of transpeople; it means that you really dislike them and avoid them when possible.
You are transphobic. Wear it with pride. Or not. I wouldn't. I would take a look in the mirror and try to be a better person.
You must be using the Leftist Liberal Newspeak Dictionary first published in 1984.
According to Johns Hopkins Medicine, "a phobia is an uncontrollable, irrational, and persistent fear of a specific object, situation, or activity."
According to Merriam-Webster, a phobia is "an exaggerated usually inexplicable and illogical fear of a particular object, class of objects, or situation."
I just went on Websters website and it lists "-phobia" as "intolerance or aversion for"
If you are intolerant of transpeople, you are transphobic. You also seem to not understand how dictionaries or even affixes function in language.
One of the problems today is that we talk about rights as a zero sum game. We identify groups as being allegedly more or less marginalized, and then we advocate allowing members of the alleged more marginalized group to violate the rights of others deemed less marginslized. There is no attempt at something more nuanced. That is not civil rights, but petty tribalism.
So my sisters all three of them are playing football with some friends which they did do. Some big guy pulls up and asks if he can play, he identifies as a female, So they.. ok sure, well he hurts one of my sisters, guess what happens to Mr Confused.
Really is hard believe we can even be talking about this, if you are a man you can't compete vs the girls, simply common sense.