I wouldn't equate liberals with "democrat politician(s)" the way you're doing. Most Democratic pols abandoned the liberall principals the Democratic Party once stood for long ago. Just like the UK Labour Party has done. Which is why so many genuine liberals are politically homeless.
BTW, the vast majority of American voters today are aligned with neither the Democrats or the Republicans. Latest Gallup poll says 47% of US voters today consider ourselves to be Independents, verus 26% Democrats and 25% Republicans.
As for the claim that "it's unikley you can find a single a demcrat politician" who supported Lia Thomas - I'd point you to the chief Democratic politician in charge of US education policy, Miguel Cardona, who is Biden's US Secretary of Education.
When Cardona testified before Conress in late May of this year, he certainly seemd to take the side of Lia Thomas and other male student-athletes who say they "identify as" girls and women over female student-athletes who actually are girls and women.
Cardona's stance that "rights" of male trans-identified students to girls' school sports and locker rooms must be balanced against, and ulimately prioritized over, the rights of female students to have female-only school sports and locker rooms is consistent with the position he took when he was education commissioner for the state of Connectict. Cardone took the helm over education in CT at the time when CT's entire Democratic-run government and education system went to bat - and to court - to establish and protect the "right" of male students in CT like Terry Miller, Andraya Yearwood and Redmond Sullivan to compete and win in girls' HS sports. Indeed, Cardona's unyielding view that Title IX guarantees males who claim a trans gender identity a "right" to female school sports and spaces is one of the main reason why Cardona got the position in CT and why he was Biden's top choice for US Secy of Ed.
I really don’t care what she has to say. Has she had any effect, at any level, with how transgender athletes are treated? Did she persuade FINA to continue to allow Lia Thomas to compete? Did she overrule the states bans against transgender athletes? Your boogeyman has zero impact on the issue.
LOL, what a childish and ignorant response.
As the United States Secretary of Education, Miguel Cardona is the highest federal official in education in the US. No one has more say about how Title IX is interpreted - including whether it permits female-only school sports, locker rooms, toilets; and how it defines sex discrimination, sexual harassment, indecent exposure, voyeurism and sexual assault - in educational institutions that receive federal funding than Miguel Cardona does. Except for Joe Biden, SCOTUS and some of the other higher federal courts.
Cardona's Department of Education has put forward proposed changes to the federal government's rules and regulations implementing Title IX that give students' "gender identity" claims as much legal weight as their actual sex. These rules effectively turn Title IX on its head so that it now can be used to legalize, endorse and encourage sex discrimination - and worse - against female students in US schools.
Cardona's new Title IX rules give male students across the USA the federal goverment's stamp of approval to do as Lia Thomas, CeCe Telfer, June Eastwood and boys in CT were given free rein to do when Cardona was in charge of education policy in that state - use gender identity claims to horn in on and dominate in female school sports; use female toilets and locker rooms; lord it over, bully, sexually harass, flash their dicks and perv on female students; and publicly declare that girls and women who can't beat big strong strapping males like themselves at sports - or don't want them in the female locker rooms, showers and toilets - are bigots, spoilsports, and lazy-ass sore losers who should "just try harder."
FINA is headquarted in Switzerland. The US Secretary of Education has no say there.
Your take on these matters isn't doing your side any favors.
This post was edited 2 minutes after it was posted.
Why dont all the female runners simply sit down on the starting line. Let the guy run by himself. Then when he is near the finish line they all start the official race.
Because many of them have been submersed in toxic ideas, including the proposition that "inclusion" of males in girls' and women's protected spaces is more important than fairness and safety. Some probably don't even understand the magnitude of sex differences in strength and speed, not to mention psychosexual development.
Unfortunately, many of them also view sex as a culturally-constructed category and do not understand that some males are psychosexual predators no matter how many therapeutic programs and wraparound services they're given. Now they're being taught that feeling uncomfortable around males who identify as women and enter bathrooms and changing rooms is a sign of their own hatred and prejudice rather than an adaptive response to potential violence.
Yes you did. You keep posting articles that focus on appearance and completely ignore the real issue.
WHERE did I mention her appearance? Why do you think the articles I have posted focus on appearance? It's all in your head. You need to ask yourself why you are so obsessed with trans people's physical appearance.
Cut the crap. On other threads you regularly post pictures of "passing" trans people and ask questions like, "Does this person belong in the women's bathroom?" Don't pretend you don't engage in that tactic and that it didn't at all motivate you to post that particular story.
You are playing the language game here because you do not have any answer to the substance of my question.
How exactly is "the sanctity of 40+ years of progress in women's sports" threatened if that PERSON is allowed to play field hockey?
Do you now have an answer because I don't refer to that PERSON as a girl? Cisgender boys have been playing against girls in HS hockey for decades. Although that's a problem in and of itself, at least it has not threatened "the sanctity of 40+ years of progress in women's sports."
So how does one teenager who identifies as a femalewoman change that all of a sudden? Because the particular individual identifies as a femalewoman?
You can identify as a woman, but you cannot identify as female. Therefore, if you are male, you cannot compete in the female-only category. It's really that simple.
Also, if you're argument in return is that many sports use gender-based terms like "girls" and "women" when designating different categories, please save it. Anyone with a modicum of sense knows that these categories were created on the basis of sex and were always intended to be female-only.
This goes all the way to the top for Democrats. On Biden's first day in office he signed executive orders forcing schools that receive federal funding to allow anyone to compete according to their "gender identity". If you voted for Biden, this travesty is your fault.
But Thomas, or anyone else that didn’t complete testosterone suppression prior to commencing puberty, is ineligible to compete in NCAA or WA events. The Lia Thomas problem was identified and dealt with. Why are you still complaining about it?
You rely on the falsehood that testosterone suppression evens the playing field. It doesn't.
Testosterone suppression doesn't account for body composition changes brought on by female puberty. Nor does testosterone suppression account for musculoskeletal differences between biological males and biological females.
Hormone therapy does not create a level playing field. Don't ever bring it up again. It make you sound stupid.
Celebrity makeup artist Nikkie de Jager is not an athlete, but Nikkie's example is still relevant here because Nikkie is one of the "child transitioners" in the Netherlands put on "puberty blockers" and estrogen early enough that Nikkie has supposedly completely skipped all aspects of male-typical development during adolescence and early adulthood. Now that Nikkie is an adult pushing 30, everyone is expected to pretend no can tell Nikkie's sex and it would be totally fair and safe for women of the female sort to have to go up against Nikkie in sport. Here's Nikkie with Ellen DeGeneres, who is 5'7:
WHERE did I mention her appearance? Why do you think the articles I have posted focus on appearance? It's all in your head. You need to ask yourself why you are so obsessed with trans people's physical appearance.
Cut the crap. On other threads you regularly post pictures of "passing" trans people and ask questions like, "Does this person belong in the women's bathroom?" Don't pretend you don't engage in that tactic and that it didn't at all motivate you to post that particular story.
So somehow the bathroom issue and the sports issue are one and the same?
What does the bathroom issue have anything to do with "protecting women's sports"? Do women and girls lose opportunities to win sports titles if trans girls and women are allowed to use women's bathrooms?
For the record, I think the appearance is the most important factor in the bathroom question. No one looks at your internal organs or chromosomes in public bathrooms, so those things are entirely irrelevant.
The fairness in sports is not determined by how someone looks.
Cut the crap. On other threads you regularly post pictures of "passing" trans people and ask questions like, "Does this person belong in the women's bathroom?" Don't pretend you don't engage in that tactic and that it didn't at all motivate you to post that particular story.
So somehow the bathroom issue and the sports issue are one and the same?
What does the bathroom issue have anything to do with "protecting women's sports"? Do women and girls lose opportunities to win sports titles if trans girls and women are allowed to use women's bathrooms?
For the record, I think the appearance is the most important factor in the bathroom question. No one looks at your internal organs or chromosomes in public bathrooms, so those things are entirely irrelevant.
The fairness in sports is not determined by how someone looks.
But but but what if their broad shoulders scrape against and damage the corners of entrances of public women’s bathrooms? Or their narrow hips cause them to tumble into the toilet and damage it? Or if they accidentally elbow and damage a delicate girl with their high bone density and all?
You can identify as a woman, but you cannot identify as female. Therefore, if you are male, you cannot compete in the female-only category. It's really that simple.
Also, if you're argument in return is that many sports use gender-based terms like "girls" and "women" when designating different categories, please save it. Anyone with a modicum of sense knows that these categories were created on the basis of sex and were always intended to be female-only.
Sure you can. Running’s regulatory body doesn’t define woman and female as distinct and sometimes uses them interchangeably while at other times refers to the “female sex” as distinguished from the female gender identity. It considers transwomen women and female because it formally defines an athlete called “Transgender female” who is very much allowed to compete in the female category.
But you are right that “if you are male, you can not compete in the female-only category” because WA requires you to sign a document saying you identify as female; if you do that, you can.
Celebrity makeup artist Nikkie de Jager is not an athlete, but Nikkie's example is still relevant here because Nikkie is one of the "child transitioners" in the Netherlands put on "puberty blockers" and estrogen early enough that Nikkie has supposedly completely skipped all aspects of male-typical development during adolescence and early adulthood. Now that Nikkie is an adult pushing 30, everyone is expected to pretend no can tell Nikkie's sex and it would be totally fair and safe for women of the female sort to have to go up against Nikkie in sport. Here's Nikkie with Ellen DeGeneres, who is 5'7:
As the United States Secretary of Education, Miguel Cardona is the highest federal official in education in the US. No one has more say about how Title IX is interpreted - including whether it permits female-only school sports, locker rooms, toilets; and how it defines sex discrimination, sexual harassment, indecent exposure, voyeurism and sexual assault - in educational institutions that receive federal funding than Miguel Cardona does. Except for Joe Biden, SCOTUS and some of the other higher federal courts.
Cardona's Department of Education has put forward proposed changes to the federal government's rules and regulations implementing Title IX that give students' "gender identity" claims as much legal weight as their actual sex. These rules effectively turn Title IX on its head so that it now can be used to legalize, endorse and encourage sex discrimination - and worse - against female students in US schools.
Cardona's new Title IX rules give male students across the USA the federal goverment's stamp of approval to do as Lia Thomas, CeCe Telfer, June Eastwood and boys in CT were given free rein to do when Cardona was in charge of education policy in that state - use gender identity claims to horn in on and dominate in female school sports; use female toilets and locker rooms; lord it over, bully, sexually harass, flash their dicks and perv on female students; and publicly declare that girls and women who can't beat big strong strapping males like themselves at sports - or don't want them in the female locker rooms, showers and toilets - are bigots, spoilsports, and lazy-ass sore losers who should "just try harder."
FINA is headquarted in Switzerland. The US Secretary of Education has no say there.
Your take on these matters isn't doing your side any favors.
Based on what you said, I am 100% behind Cardona’s proposals. This is the right direction.
As sure as night follows day, there’s always a moment when ‘justanotherhobbyjogger’ realises he’s losing the debate and employs his 'gish gallop' method that attempts to spam the boards into submission.
