why? do you think he/she would become violent (road rage?)
This post was removed.
This post was removed.
This post was removed.
why? do you think he/she would become violent (road rage?)
This post was removed.
Honest question for the brojos of the world -- do advantages only matter to you if we're talking about someone who is trans? Michael Phelps is a genetic freak -- was it unfair to line up against him? Thomas is taking testosterone suppressants & graduates in 3 months. Are their times still behind Olympic caliber swimmers? I feel like this is a bigger deal than it needs to be because it gets used to score political points.
FightFor15 wrote:
Honest question for the brojos of the world -- do advantages only matter to you if we're talking about someone who is trans? Michael Phelps is a genetic freak -- was it unfair to line up against him? Thomas is taking testosterone suppressants & graduates in 3 months. Are their times still behind Olympic caliber swimmers? I feel like this is a bigger deal than it needs to be because it gets used to score political points.
This is stupid logic. Sports isn't a level playing ground and by nature simply can't be. It only ever could be if all humans were genetically identical and used the same equipment under the same conditions every time. How then we would ever decide a winner I have no idea. There will always be athletes (like Phelps, or Jordan, or Gretzky, or Williams) who are simply more gifted than their peers in terms of genetics and the application of them. And we can't categorize to the n'th degree and say "all athletes above 6 ft tall, with "x" percentage testosterone, with this muscle mass and this body fat, and this length of Achilles tendon" - you guys are this category and then go on doing this for all permutations because clearly is just stupid.
What sport did do was categorize and segment itself in the most simple form possible. Biologically assigned gender. Is that perfect? No - but nothing will ever be. There will always be, as mentioned above, outliers that simply become the best. There will also be outliers that don't and those without the pinnacle of physical gifts that make it by other means - that's what makes sports great. Back to the categorization - it's worked pretty well wouldn't you agree? Most sport at a competitive level is in general pretty even all things considered. Where it is not even is when you start pitching males vs females and the reasons for this are well known and I am not even going to bother discussing them (if you don't know go google it).
So in the case of Lia Thomas the advantages matter more. They matter more than Phelps and his massive lungs and flipper feet, they matter more than Usain Bolts faster twitch fibers and mass in a 6'4 body. Because despite the advantages amongst their peers which Phelps or Bolt have, nothing compares to the advantage a male has over a female.
The times of Lia Thomas compared to Olympians is irrelevant. This person is competing in the NCAA my friend and not against Olympians but young women who just want to test themselves on the most level playing ground they can have. And even if they come up short they at least have the opportunity to find out where they stand because they can participate - in this case Lia Thomas is actually hindering that participation which is the worst thing that can possibly happen.
As for politics? Why should political "point scoring" be allowed to impact the hopes and aspirations of, in this case, innocent young woman? Your points make zero sense.
Two important things in this article.
Brooke Forde says she has no problem with racing against Thomas.
FINA will announce a new policy early next month.
https://swimswam.com/stanfords-brooke-forde-says-shes-okay-with-racing-lia-thomas-at-ncaas/
Whate else is she going to say? It is pure coercion.
This post was removed.
RunRagged wrote:
'Multiple swimmers have raised it, multiple different times,'
Interesting phrasing...
astro wrote:
Whate else is she going to say? It is pure coercion.
Obviously, you did not read the article. No one asked her opinion. She voluntarily issued a statement through his father. So who coerced her? Her father?
BTW, this is "what else" Forde could have said. Another Olympian speaking her mind.
https://swimswam.com/erika-brown-we-cannot-allow-transgender-females-to-compete-against-women/
But apparently, some old men on this board seem to have a problem with young women disagreeing with one another.
Looks like Thomas is really "done." USA Swimming has just released their new policy.
https://swimswam.com/usa-swimming-publishes-athlete-transgender-policy/
This post was removed.
Reads like a forced confession from a Soviet show trial.
NVM. Thought it was the other statement I read recently. My bad.
This is a complete mess. It just pretends to solve the problem but, as RunRagged has pointed out, it just raises many problems for the future. Kicking the can down the road, yet again.
As RR says, this new “policy”:
opens up chances for a whole lot of corruption, politicking, special pleading and underhanded tactics like arm-twisting, bribing, blackmailing, smearing, rumor-mongering, intimidation and threats.
To paraphrase Josef Stalin, “it doesn’t matter who votes, what matters is who counts the votes.”
So, who gets to appoint the “panel of experts”? And what are the criteria for being an “expert”? Could it be that the “experts” are athletes who have transitioned themselves? And now, The New York Times tells us that the “experts” can be rejected by an “athletes’ advisory council,” whatever that is. A Star Chamber something like Safe Sport? Can “experts” be disqualified if they have spoken out for or against trans females in women’s sports?
In attempting to be “firm” but “equitable” USA Swimming has just stumbled yet again, resolved little, and is likely to face a mountain of protests and even lawsuits.
Glad to see RunRagged is back with her condescension as usual!
Vancomycin wrote:
Glad to see RunRagged is back with her condescension as usual!
All she did was post the letter. She didn't even pass comment about it.