It is clear that many women feel - rightly - aggrieved that males are being allowed to compete as if they are females. Women's sport exists for a reason. And British housewives are as well placed as anyone to have a view on this matter.
It is clear that many women feel - rightly - aggrieved that males are being allowed to compete as if they are females. Women's sport exists for a reason. And British housewives are as well placed as anyone to have a view on this matter.
This silly woke nonsense really hurts the democrats. Pretending it's ok for a dude to compete against women is so obviously ridiculous. All the mental gymnastics needed to justify it makes people supporting this sound insane.
Lenny Leonard wrote:
dhe8282uehdh wrote:
It does not contradict at all. Gender is fluid, biological sex is static outside of edge cases.
In everyday life biological sex doesn't matter much, gender does. Gender determines your pronouns, choice if restroom, etc. When there is a reason for biological sex to matter, like athletic competition, conception, etc then that should override gender.
You said you are “100% for trans rights,” and then you immediately pointed out an area where you are against a specific right for trans athletes. That’s the contradiction.
At best you are like 99% for trans rights, wouldn’t you agree?
You can say, “I’m not taking away their right to compete, just their right to compete in their gender.”
How is that any different from someone saying, “I’m not taking away your right to go to the bathroom, just your right to use the one that corresponds to your gender?”
Competing isn't a right, it is a privledged.
I don't want to take away their privledged to compete. I want them to compete based on their biological sex while they continue, even while competing as their biological sex, to identify as the gender of their choice.
They can use the women's locker room, showers, everything that is determined by gender but mine up in the race that is determined by their biological sex.
It is the best situation that allows for fairness in sport.
Please educate me, has the trans dude turned in his equipment? Or is he still hanging?
dumbassMF wrote:
This silly woke nonsense really hurts the democrats. Pretending it's ok for a dude to compete against women is so obviously ridiculous. All the mental gymnastics needed to justify it makes people supporting this sound insane.
It's not that simple. This issue doesn't divide us into the normal camps.
As I, and many others, have said in these threads over the years, I am a Democrat and on most social issues I lean left.
On this issue, I think that allowing trans women to compete against females is absurd, offensive, and we need the courts to put a stop to it. I am hoping a case goes to the Supreme Court and that, at least in the educational environment under Title IX law, they put a stop to this.
Surveys show that somewhere between 60 and 70 percent of Americans agree, which means that a lot of Democrats feel the same way; this has to stop.
One quibble/clarification - Richards never had the opportunity to play professionally as a male, because when she was a competitive male in her 20s there wasn't professional tennis of the kind that existed by the time she transitioned. She won first-round matches at two U.S. championships in the late 1950s, both times making it to the final 64 (which included about 45 Americans), so one could argue that she might have been in the top 50 players in the country for a while. I suppose that might be the equivalent of a borderline pro.
She also has said in recent years that if she had transitioned at 22 and started on the women's tour at 24, she would have had an insurmountable advantage over her competitors.
RossiCheated wrote:
dumbassMF wrote:
This silly woke nonsense really hurts the democrats. Pretending it's ok for a dude to compete against women is so obviously ridiculous. All the mental gymnastics needed to justify it makes people supporting this sound insane.
It's not that simple. This issue doesn't divide us into the normal camps.
As I, and many others, have said in these threads over the years, I am a Democrat and on most social issues I lean left.
On this issue, I think that allowing trans women to compete against females is absurd, offensive, and we need the courts to put a stop to it. I am hoping a case goes to the Supreme Court and that, at least in the educational environment under Title IX law, they put a stop to this.
Surveys show that somewhere between 60 and 70 percent of Americans agree, which means that a lot of Democrats feel the same way; this has to stop.
Agreed, but this gets put on the democrats and hurts them.
Previous dude!
JamesD2 wrote:
One quibble/clarification - Richards never had the opportunity to play professionally as a male, because when she was a competitive male in her 20s there wasn't professional tennis of the kind that existed by the time she transitioned. She won first-round matches at two U.S. championships in the late 1950s, both times making it to the final 64 (which included about 45 Americans), so one could argue that she might have been in the top 50 players in the country for a while. I suppose that might be the equivalent of a borderline pro.
She also has said in recent years that if she had transitioned at 22 and started on the women's tour at 24, she would have had an insurmountable advantage over her competitors.
yeah we were talking someone who was really good as a male and then performed one notch better as a female. They were older but those 1970 womans fields werent exactly deep.
In all of these cases we end up in the situation of having no clue what the person has done. What level of hoemones are they on and for how long. What surgury? And so on.
dhe8282uehdh wrote:
Lenny Leonard wrote:
You said you are “100% for trans rights,” and then you immediately pointed out an area where you are against a specific right for trans athletes. That’s the contradiction.
At best you are like 99% for trans rights, wouldn’t you agree?
You can say, “I’m not taking away their right to compete, just their right to compete in their gender.”
How is that any different from someone saying, “I’m not taking away your right to go to the bathroom, just your right to use the one that corresponds to your gender?”
Competing isn't a right, it is a privledged.
I don't want to take away their privledged to compete. I want them to compete based on their biological sex while they continue, even while competing as their biological sex, to identify as the gender of their choice.
They can use the women's locker room, showers, everything that is determined by gender but mine up in the race that is determined by their biological sex.
It is the best situation that allows for fairness in sport.
When I read the language of Title IX, it sounds like there is a right to compete, not just a privilege:
“ No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”
You are arguing that she should be excluded. Telling her that she can just swim against men is absurd. Women swim against women. That’s what the law states.
In the eyes of the law, she is a woman. Have her swim against women.
“Fairness” is not what we should be making decisions on. That is the kind of stuff that 10-year-olds care about. We should be concerning ourselves with participation and the absence of discrimination.
flyingfrog wrote:
Please educate me, has the trans dude turned in his equipment? Or is he still hanging?
Are dickectomies peformed simultaneously with addadicktomies to conserve resources and eliminate waste?
Lenny Leonard wrote:
dhe8282uehdh wrote:
Competing isn't a right, it is a privledged.
I don't want to take away their privledged to compete. I want them to compete based on their biological sex while they continue, even while competing as their biological sex, to identify as the gender of their choice.
They can use the women's locker room, showers, everything that is determined by gender but mine up in the race that is determined by their biological sex.
It is the best situation that allows for fairness in sport.
When I read the language of Title IX, it sounds like there is a right to compete, not just a privilege:
“ No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”
You are arguing that she should be excluded. Telling her that she can just swim against men is absurd. Women swim against women. That’s what the law states.
In the eyes of the law, she is a woman. Have her swim against women.
“Fairness” is not what we should be making decisions on. That is the kind of stuff that 10-year-olds care about. We should be concerning ourselves with participation and the absence of discrimination.
Good grief. At which point do we stop coddling these ppl and say enough is enough? Why must the rest of the world bow down and accommodate what is clearly a mental illness?
I don’t give a sh*t what you identify as as long as it doesn’t negatively affect those around you. This is CLEARLY negatively impacting women’s sports. What about their rights? They did absolutely nothing wrong.
Lenny Leonard wrote:
dhe8282uehdh wrote:
Competing isn't a right, it is a privledged.
I don't want to take away their privledged to compete. I want them to compete based on their biological sex while they continue, even while competing as their biological sex, to identify as the gender of their choice.
They can use the women's locker room, showers, everything that is determined by gender but mine up in the race that is determined by their biological sex.
It is the best situation that allows for fairness in sport.
When I read the language of Title IX, it sounds like there is a right to compete, not just a privilege:
“ No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”
You are arguing that she should be excluded. Telling her that she can just swim against men is absurd. Women swim against women. That’s what the law states.
In the eyes of the law, she is a woman. Have her swim against women.
“Fairness” is not what we should be making decisions on. That is the kind of stuff that 10-year-olds care about. We should be concerning ourselves with participation and the absence of discrimination.
Are you for real, or just being provocative?
You sound so asinine. I can't imagine someone standing in front of me in person and spouting such crap.
Lenny Leonard wrote:
dhe8282uehdh wrote:
Competing isn't a right, it is a privledged.
I don't want to take away their privledged to compete. I want them to compete based on their biological sex while they continue, even while competing as their biological sex, to identify as the gender of their choice.
They can use the women's locker room, showers, everything that is determined by gender but mine up in the race that is determined by their biological sex.
It is the best situation that allows for fairness in sport.
When I read the language of Title IX, it sounds like there is a right to compete, not just a privilege:
“ No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”
You are arguing that she should be excluded. Telling her that she can just swim against men is absurd. Women swim against women. That’s what the law states.
In the eyes of the law, she is a woman. Have her swim against women.
“Fairness” is not what we should be making decisions on. That is the kind of stuff that 10-year-olds care about. We should be concerning ourselves with participation and the absence of discrimination.
You could end the thread there. They are legally recognized as women, it's been a long fight to get that and no way it's going to be revoked. Any attempt to reverse that will inevitably lead to a tsunami of abuse towards the LGBT community and anyone suggesting it must either be naive or has no care.
dumbassMF wrote:
Lenny Leonard wrote:
When I read the language of Title IX, it sounds like there is a right to compete, not just a privilege:
“ No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”
You are arguing that she should be excluded. Telling her that she can just swim against men is absurd. Women swim against women. That’s what the law states.
In the eyes of the law, she is a woman. Have her swim against women.
“Fairness” is not what we should be making decisions on. That is the kind of stuff that 10-year-olds care about. We should be concerning ourselves with participation and the absence of discrimination.
Are you for real, or just being provocative?
You sound so asinine. I can't imagine someone standing in front of me in person and spouting such crap.
I’m just speaking common sense. No one is losing their right to compete. No one is truly negatively affected in that regard. Will a woman somewhere finish one spot worse in a race? Probably.
What specifically do you have a problem with that I have said?
Kind of a maven wrote:
UPenn swimmer comes out as trans / switches to women's team after competing on men's team for 3 years and is dominating NCAA
Stunning & brave.
It is simple fairness. Sorry. This issue is such a pathetic sideshow. Biological men should not be competing in female sports. If that hurts someone's felling, so what? The people that think they are championing some great cause are deluded. It is neediness looking for a cause. Anyway, we have reached the filibuster stage.
Lenny Leonard wrote:
dumbassMF wrote:
Are you for real, or just being provocative?
You sound so asinine. I can't imagine someone standing in front of me in person and spouting such crap.
I’m just speaking common sense. No one is losing their right to compete. No one is truly negatively affected in that regard. Will a woman somewhere finish one spot worse in a race? Probably.
What specifically do you have a problem with that I have said?
The next step would be to have one competition and don't worry, everyone gets to compete, they just finish a bunch of places back. Sounds unbelievably stupid.
Women should be able to train towards historical performance levels and evolve the records, not have some dude come in and overturn everything.
flyingfrog wrote:
Please educate me, has the trans dude turned in his equipment? Or is he still hanging?
I don't know. And I still don't know whether Bruce Jenner (I refuse to call HIM "Caitlyn") "dropped his baton." Just the thought is horrible enough.
liar soorer wrote:
Wada rules apply to all sports at all levels but are mostly applied to the elite end but by no means exclusively.
I have often felt that such is an unfair selection of only one part of the population for invasive controls and as such may bring down WADA.
Really? You signed a waiver saying you had read and would comply with the WADA anti-doping regulations when you signed up for community beer league volleyball or your local charity race? Well, I guess your handle does have liar in it lol. You should also put "unable to Google something."
Sports federations have to "sign on" to WADA, and it is not automatic - if your organization/federation hasn't voluntarily signed on to be under WADA's umbrella, WADA regulations do not apply. The IAAF is signed up, and so all IAAF sanctioned competitions are under their jurisdiction. Country-based federations that are part of the IAAF are thus also under its jurisdiction.
Random community sports leagues are extremely unlikely to be under WADA. It's pretty easy to tell - you have to sign a waiver acknowledging that you understand the rules and will comply with them. I had to do this each year during college, each year during my club registration paperwork. It also sometimes appears on race registrations (eg. national championships, sanctioned road races). A full list of organizations that are under WADA can be found here, see if you find your local beer league sports lol:
https://www.wada-ama.org/en/code-signatoriesRecall that my point was not that sex categories should not exist. My suggestion was that sex category enforcement should only apply in more elite/professional contexts where the purpose of sport is about the result (money and jobs on the line). There is already precedent for this as anti-doping rules and disability classifications are only applicable and enforced at these higher levels.
If you are upset about my suggestion that results don't matter so much at lower levels, I'd suggest you petition strict enforcement of WADA rules in all events you participate in if you are serious about the absolute validity of your community sports results. You are probably getting beaten by people taking T/HGH for kicks lol.