Jump to content

should trans people get their own sports league?


bathory
 Share

Recommended Posts

No, they shouldn't have to compete in their own leagues, not least because the small numbers would make it impractical.

 

As perspective, let's remember that Lia Thomas has set records, but she's also not dominant the way some recent swimmers have been: I read she finished fifth and eighth in her other events, and that's hardly crushing the opposition.

 

For further scale, Utah just passed one of these "protect girls' sports" bills to impact the 75,000 high schools athletes in Utah, ONE of whom is a transgender female now competing as female. I'll eat my head if even five percent of the people who agitated for this bill could tell you who won the girls' cross country state title last year. And I'll bet you a dime they were not terribly interested in the US Women's National Soccer team's lawsuit for equal pay.

 

As for unfair advantage, this exists in sports _all the time_ and we learn to live with it. Rich kids can afford coaches, poor kids can't. The Dodgers get to sign Freddie Freeman, the Royals/Mariners/A's don't. The USA has all-weather training facilities with dieticians, counselors, tutors, physical therapists, state-of-art equipment and computer monitoring, Uganda (for example) does not.

 

If someone's life is "ruined" because she finished second instead of first in a race in high school or college, that suggests rather an outsize importance. Is a person's life really gonna peak at 22? Is that poor woman going to wind up living in a van down by the river because her 10,000 hours of practice didn't result in first? Most people's efforts don't result in first; that's life.

 

As for the transgendered "switching back," this is a question grounded in (deliberate?) misunderstanding of what gender dysmorphia is. Is there even a statistically significant record of this happening? Let's not get carried away on the slippery slope.

 

There's a lot wrong with what you have said here. Right now, I'll just focus on your sophistry regarding what's fair and unfair.

 

You give three examples, and they all three boil down to money. The kids who can afford coaches, the baseball teams with unlimited budgets, and countries with nicer training facilities. This all has to do with the amount of money that is available to spend on training or putting a team together.

 

You are correct about that.

 

However, there are no leagues that are specifically instituted to divide players or teams based on socio-economic status. Maybe NCAA Division One and Division Two comes close.

 

But what we definitely have a distinct division in, and at all levels, is division by sex. There is a reason for that.

 

You say that Lia Thomas didn't win every race against the women she competed against. This is true. But she won a lot of them, and she set many records. Think about that - a man holds several records in women's swimming.

 

As far as her not winning every race, I'm not surprised. When she was a he, he was ranked 554th against other men. He was not even a top ranked male swimmer. But when he competes against women, he immediately becomes one of the best ever. That what it means when you set records like this. Your time in that event was the fastest ever.

 

554th against men, top five at least against women.

 

And you don't care about the women who didn't get to compete because Lia Thomas took their roster spot.

 

She’s not a man. Please don’t call her one.

Can we still call her penis a penis?

 

I've just read all of this and it looks like you're the only one who intentionally misgendered Lia. Why?

Edited by Amps211
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, they shouldn't have to compete in their own leagues, not least because the small numbers would make it impractical.

 

As perspective, let's remember that Lia Thomas has set records, but she's also not dominant the way some recent swimmers have been: I read she finished fifth and eighth in her other events, and that's hardly crushing the opposition.

 

For further scale, Utah just passed one of these "protect girls' sports" bills to impact the 75,000 high schools athletes in Utah, ONE of whom is a transgender female now competing as female. I'll eat my head if even five percent of the people who agitated for this bill could tell you who won the girls' cross country state title last year. And I'll bet you a dime they were not terribly interested in the US Women's National Soccer team's lawsuit for equal pay.

 

As for unfair advantage, this exists in sports _all the time_ and we learn to live with it. Rich kids can afford coaches, poor kids can't. The Dodgers get to sign Freddie Freeman, the Royals/Mariners/A's don't. The USA has all-weather training facilities with dieticians, counselors, tutors, physical therapists, state-of-art equipment and computer monitoring, Uganda (for example) does not.

 

If someone's life is "ruined" because she finished second instead of first in a race in high school or college, that suggests rather an outsize importance. Is a person's life really gonna peak at 22? Is that poor woman going to wind up living in a van down by the river because her 10,000 hours of practice didn't result in first? Most people's efforts don't result in first; that's life.

 

As for the transgendered "switching back," this is a question grounded in (deliberate?) misunderstanding of what gender dysmorphia is. Is there even a statistically significant record of this happening? Let's not get carried away on the slippery slope.

 

There's a lot wrong with what you have said here. Right now, I'll just focus on your sophistry regarding what's fair and unfair.

 

You give three examples, and they all three boil down to money. The kids who can afford coaches, the baseball teams with unlimited budgets, and countries with nicer training facilities. This all has to do with the amount of money that is available to spend on training or putting a team together.

 

You are correct about that.

 

However, there are no leagues that are specifically instituted to divide players or teams based on socio-economic status. Maybe NCAA Division One and Division Two comes close.

 

But what we definitely have a distinct division in, and at all levels, is division by sex. There is a reason for that.

 

You say that Lia Thomas didn't win every race against the women she competed against. This is true. But she won a lot of them, and she set many records. Think about that - a man holds several records in women's swimming.

 

As far as her not winning every race, I'm not surprised. When she was a he, he was ranked 554th against other men. He was not even a top ranked male swimmer. But when he competes against women, he immediately becomes one of the best ever. That what it means when you set records like this. Your time in that event was the fastest ever.

 

554th against men, top five at least against women.

 

And you don't care about the women who didn't get to compete because Lia Thomas took their roster spot.

 

She’s not a man. Please don’t call her one.

Can we still call her penis a penis?

 

I've just read all of this and it looks like you're the only one who intentionally misgendered Lia. Why?

 

You quoted goose (him being the last poster before you in that quote train), but I don't see him misgendering Lia. He used the pronoun "she." Did you mean to quote someone else?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No

 

My worry is though that a trans woman will come on the scene and dominate a sport. Like become the Tiger Woods or the Michael Jordan of that sport. Will that further or stunt the trans movement that has made great strides recently?

 

It could very obviously happen.

 

The sports world has it's hands full here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, they shouldn't have to compete in their own leagues, not least because the small numbers would make it impractical.

 

As perspective, let's remember that Lia Thomas has set records, but she's also not dominant the way some recent swimmers have been: I read she finished fifth and eighth in her other events, and that's hardly crushing the opposition.

 

For further scale, Utah just passed one of these "protect girls' sports" bills to impact the 75,000 high schools athletes in Utah, ONE of whom is a transgender female now competing as female. I'll eat my head if even five percent of the people who agitated for this bill could tell you who won the girls' cross country state title last year. And I'll bet you a dime they were not terribly interested in the US Women's National Soccer team's lawsuit for equal pay.

 

As for unfair advantage, this exists in sports _all the time_ and we learn to live with it. Rich kids can afford coaches, poor kids can't. The Dodgers get to sign Freddie Freeman, the Royals/Mariners/A's don't. The USA has all-weather training facilities with dieticians, counselors, tutors, physical therapists, state-of-art equipment and computer monitoring, Uganda (for example) does not.

 

If someone's life is "ruined" because she finished second instead of first in a race in high school or college, that suggests rather an outsize importance. Is a person's life really gonna peak at 22? Is that poor woman going to wind up living in a van down by the river because her 10,000 hours of practice didn't result in first? Most people's efforts don't result in first; that's life.

 

As for the transgendered "switching back," this is a question grounded in (deliberate?) misunderstanding of what gender dysmorphia is. Is there even a statistically significant record of this happening? Let's not get carried away on the slippery slope.

 

There's a lot wrong with what you have said here. Right now, I'll just focus on your sophistry regarding what's fair and unfair.

 

You give three examples, and they all three boil down to money. The kids who can afford coaches, the baseball teams with unlimited budgets, and countries with nicer training facilities. This all has to do with the amount of money that is available to spend on training or putting a team together.

 

You are correct about that.

 

However, there are no leagues that are specifically instituted to divide players or teams based on socio-economic status. Maybe NCAA Division One and Division Two comes close.

 

But what we definitely have a distinct division in, and at all levels, is division by sex. There is a reason for that.

 

You say that Lia Thomas didn't win every race against the women she competed against. This is true. But she won a lot of them, and she set many records. Think about that - a man holds several records in women's swimming.

 

As far as her not winning every race, I'm not surprised. When she was a he, he was ranked 554th against other men. He was not even a top ranked male swimmer. But when he competes against women, he immediately becomes one of the best ever. That what it means when you set records like this. Your time in that event was the fastest ever.

 

554th against men, top five at least against women.

 

And you don't care about the women who didn't get to compete because Lia Thomas took their roster spot.

 

She’s not a man. Please don’t call her one.

Can we still call her penis a penis?

 

I've just read all of this and it looks like you're the only one who intentionally misgendered Lia. Why?

 

You quoted goose (him being the last poster before you in that quote train), but I don't see him misgendering Lia. He used the pronoun "she." Did you mean to quote someone else?

 

Looks like it was Maverick. Thanks and sorry goose

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, they shouldn't have to compete in their own leagues, not least because the small numbers would make it impractical.

 

As perspective, let's remember that Lia Thomas has set records, but she's also not dominant the way some recent swimmers have been: I read she finished fifth and eighth in her other events, and that's hardly crushing the opposition.

 

For further scale, Utah just passed one of these "protect girls' sports" bills to impact the 75,000 high schools athletes in Utah, ONE of whom is a transgender female now competing as female. I'll eat my head if even five percent of the people who agitated for this bill could tell you who won the girls' cross country state title last year. And I'll bet you a dime they were not terribly interested in the US Women's National Soccer team's lawsuit for equal pay.

 

As for unfair advantage, this exists in sports _all the time_ and we learn to live with it. Rich kids can afford coaches, poor kids can't. The Dodgers get to sign Freddie Freeman, the Royals/Mariners/A's don't. The USA has all-weather training facilities with dieticians, counselors, tutors, physical therapists, state-of-art equipment and computer monitoring, Uganda (for example) does not.

 

If someone's life is "ruined" because she finished second instead of first in a race in high school or college, that suggests rather an outsize importance. Is a person's life really gonna peak at 22? Is that poor woman going to wind up living in a van down by the river because her 10,000 hours of practice didn't result in first? Most people's efforts don't result in first; that's life.

 

As for the transgendered "switching back," this is a question grounded in (deliberate?) misunderstanding of what gender dysmorphia is. Is there even a statistically significant record of this happening? Let's not get carried away on the slippery slope.

 

There's a lot wrong with what you have said here. Right now, I'll just focus on your sophistry regarding what's fair and unfair.

 

You give three examples, and they all three boil down to money. The kids who can afford coaches, the baseball teams with unlimited budgets, and countries with nicer training facilities. This all has to do with the amount of money that is available to spend on training or putting a team together.

 

You are correct about that.

 

However, there are no leagues that are specifically instituted to divide players or teams based on socio-economic status. Maybe NCAA Division One and Division Two comes close.

 

But what we definitely have a distinct division in, and at all levels, is division by sex. There is a reason for that.

 

You say that Lia Thomas didn't win every race against the women she competed against. This is true. But she won a lot of them, and she set many records. Think about that - a man holds several records in women's swimming.

 

As far as her not winning every race, I'm not surprised. When she was a he, he was ranked 554th against other men. He was not even a top ranked male swimmer. But when he competes against women, he immediately becomes one of the best ever. That what it means when you set records like this. Your time in that event was the fastest ever.

 

554th against men, top five at least against women.

 

And you don't care about the women who didn't get to compete because Lia Thomas took their roster spot.

 

She’s not a man. Please don’t call her one.

Can we still call her penis a penis?

 

I've just read all of this and it looks like you're the only one who intentionally misgendered Lia. Why?

 

You quoted goose (him being the last poster before you in that quote train), but I don't see him misgendering Lia. He used the pronoun "she." Did you mean to quote someone else?

 

Looks like it was Maverick. Thanks and sorry goose

No worries

 

The complications in this specific case is that Lia is still physically male, and presented as male during the prior two years of collegiate competition. Presenting as female is clearly her choice, but it's also true that she now brings a dramatic physical advantage unavailable to her female competitors, an advantage based solely on her having been born, raised and trained as a male.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about males compete with males, and females compete with females (unless they really want to compete with males and are good enough to do so and not get seriously injured)? The non-parenthetical part is how it’s worked forever without issue, and the parenthetical part is how it’s unofficially been for a while, also without incident.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, they shouldn't have to compete in their own leagues, not least because the small numbers would make it impractical.

 

As perspective, let's remember that Lia Thomas has set records, but she's also not dominant the way some recent swimmers have been: I read she finished fifth and eighth in her other events, and that's hardly crushing the opposition.

 

For further scale, Utah just passed one of these "protect girls' sports" bills to impact the 75,000 high schools athletes in Utah, ONE of whom is a transgender female now competing as female. I'll eat my head if even five percent of the people who agitated for this bill could tell you who won the girls' cross country state title last year. And I'll bet you a dime they were not terribly interested in the US Women's National Soccer team's lawsuit for equal pay.

 

As for unfair advantage, this exists in sports _all the time_ and we learn to live with it. Rich kids can afford coaches, poor kids can't. The Dodgers get to sign Freddie Freeman, the Royals/Mariners/A's don't. The USA has all-weather training facilities with dieticians, counselors, tutors, physical therapists, state-of-art equipment and computer monitoring, Uganda (for example) does not.

 

If someone's life is "ruined" because she finished second instead of first in a race in high school or college, that suggests rather an outsize importance. Is a person's life really gonna peak at 22? Is that poor woman going to wind up living in a van down by the river because her 10,000 hours of practice didn't result in first? Most people's efforts don't result in first; that's life.

 

As for the transgendered "switching back," this is a question grounded in (deliberate?) misunderstanding of what gender dysmorphia is. Is there even a statistically significant record of this happening? Let's not get carried away on the slippery slope.

 

There's a lot wrong with what you have said here. Right now, I'll just focus on your sophistry regarding what's fair and unfair.

 

You give three examples, and they all three boil down to money. The kids who can afford coaches, the baseball teams with unlimited budgets, and countries with nicer training facilities. This all has to do with the amount of money that is available to spend on training or putting a team together.

 

You are correct about that.

 

However, there are no leagues that are specifically instituted to divide players or teams based on socio-economic status. Maybe NCAA Division One and Division Two comes close.

 

But what we definitely have a distinct division in, and at all levels, is division by sex. There is a reason for that.

 

You say that Lia Thomas didn't win every race against the women she competed against. This is true. But she won a lot of them, and she set many records. Think about that - a man holds several records in women's swimming.

 

As far as her not winning every race, I'm not surprised. When she was a he, he was ranked 554th against other men. He was not even a top ranked male swimmer. But when he competes against women, he immediately becomes one of the best ever. That what it means when you set records like this. Your time in that event was the fastest ever.

 

554th against men, top five at least against women.

 

And you don't care about the women who didn't get to compete because Lia Thomas took their roster spot.

 

She’s not a man. Please don’t call her one.

 

She may not be a man, but she is a male.

 

And given the number of times I have used "Lua" and "her" in this discussion, I think I've shown proper respect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, they shouldn't have to compete in their own leagues, not least because the small numbers would make it impractical.

 

As perspective, let's remember that Lia Thomas has set records, but she's also not dominant the way some recent swimmers have been: I read she finished fifth and eighth in her other events, and that's hardly crushing the opposition.

 

For further scale, Utah just passed one of these "protect girls' sports" bills to impact the 75,000 high schools athletes in Utah, ONE of whom is a transgender female now competing as female. I'll eat my head if even five percent of the people who agitated for this bill could tell you who won the girls' cross country state title last year. And I'll bet you a dime they were not terribly interested in the US Women's National Soccer team's lawsuit for equal pay.

 

As for unfair advantage, this exists in sports _all the time_ and we learn to live with it. Rich kids can afford coaches, poor kids can't. The Dodgers get to sign Freddie Freeman, the Royals/Mariners/A's don't. The USA has all-weather training facilities with dieticians, counselors, tutors, physical therapists, state-of-art equipment and computer monitoring, Uganda (for example) does not.

 

If someone's life is "ruined" because she finished second instead of first in a race in high school or college, that suggests rather an outsize importance. Is a person's life really gonna peak at 22? Is that poor woman going to wind up living in a van down by the river because her 10,000 hours of practice didn't result in first? Most people's efforts don't result in first; that's life.

 

As for the transgendered "switching back," this is a question grounded in (deliberate?) misunderstanding of what gender dysmorphia is. Is there even a statistically significant record of this happening? Let's not get carried away on the slippery slope.

 

There's a lot wrong with what you have said here. Right now, I'll just focus on your sophistry regarding what's fair and unfair.

 

You give three examples, and they all three boil down to money. The kids who can afford coaches, the baseball teams with unlimited budgets, and countries with nicer training facilities. This all has to do with the amount of money that is available to spend on training or putting a team together.

 

You are correct about that.

 

However, there are no leagues that are specifically instituted to divide players or teams based on socio-economic status. Maybe NCAA Division One and Division Two comes close.

 

But what we definitely have a distinct division in, and at all levels, is division by sex. There is a reason for that.

 

You say that Lia Thomas didn't win every race against the women she competed against. This is true. But she won a lot of them, and she set many records. Think about that - a man holds several records in women's swimming.

 

As far as her not winning every race, I'm not surprised. When she was a he, he was ranked 554th against other men. He was not even a top ranked male swimmer. But when he competes against women, he immediately becomes one of the best ever. That what it means when you set records like this. Your time in that event was the fastest ever.

 

554th against men, top five at least against women.

 

And you don't care about the women who didn't get to compete because Lia Thomas took their roster spot.

 

She’s not a man. Please don’t call her one.

 

She may not be a man, but she is a male.

 

And given the number of times I have used "Lua" and "her" in this discussion, I think I've shown proper respect.

 

Whatever man. This is why I'm not in SOCN. I'm not about to debate that level of semantics in defense of someone I don't know.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, they shouldn't have to compete in their own leagues, not least because the small numbers would make it impractical.

 

As perspective, let's remember that Lia Thomas has set records, but she's also not dominant the way some recent swimmers have been: I read she finished fifth and eighth in her other events, and that's hardly crushing the opposition.

 

For further scale, Utah just passed one of these "protect girls' sports" bills to impact the 75,000 high schools athletes in Utah, ONE of whom is a transgender female now competing as female. I'll eat my head if even five percent of the people who agitated for this bill could tell you who won the girls' cross country state title last year. And I'll bet you a dime they were not terribly interested in the US Women's National Soccer team's lawsuit for equal pay.

 

As for unfair advantage, this exists in sports _all the time_ and we learn to live with it. Rich kids can afford coaches, poor kids can't. The Dodgers get to sign Freddie Freeman, the Royals/Mariners/A's don't. The USA has all-weather training facilities with dieticians, counselors, tutors, physical therapists, state-of-art equipment and computer monitoring, Uganda (for example) does not.

 

If someone's life is "ruined" because she finished second instead of first in a race in high school or college, that suggests rather an outsize importance. Is a person's life really gonna peak at 22? Is that poor woman going to wind up living in a van down by the river because her 10,000 hours of practice didn't result in first? Most people's efforts don't result in first; that's life.

 

As for the transgendered "switching back," this is a question grounded in (deliberate?) misunderstanding of what gender dysmorphia is. Is there even a statistically significant record of this happening? Let's not get carried away on the slippery slope.

 

There's a lot wrong with what you have said here. Right now, I'll just focus on your sophistry regarding what's fair and unfair.

 

You give three examples, and they all three boil down to money. The kids who can afford coaches, the baseball teams with unlimited budgets, and countries with nicer training facilities. This all has to do with the amount of money that is available to spend on training or putting a team together.

 

You are correct about that.

 

However, there are no leagues that are specifically instituted to divide players or teams based on socio-economic status. Maybe NCAA Division One and Division Two comes close.

 

But what we definitely have a distinct division in, and at all levels, is division by sex. There is a reason for that.

 

You say that Lia Thomas didn't win every race against the women she competed against. This is true. But she won a lot of them, and she set many records. Think about that - a man holds several records in women's swimming.

 

As far as her not winning every race, I'm not surprised. When she was a he, he was ranked 554th against other men. He was not even a top ranked male swimmer. But when he competes against women, he immediately becomes one of the best ever. That what it means when you set records like this. Your time in that event was the fastest ever.

 

554th against men, top five at least against women.

 

And you don't care about the women who didn't get to compete because Lia Thomas took their roster spot.

 

She’s not a man. Please don’t call her one.

 

She may not be a man, but she is a male.

 

And given the number of times I have used "Lua" and "her" in this discussion, I think I've shown proper respect.

 

I don’t get the bolded part. If Lia is a male, how could he not be a man? What definition of “man” are you using which may allow for that contradictory conclusion?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, they shouldn't have to compete in their own leagues, not least because the small numbers would make it impractical.

 

As perspective, let's remember that Lia Thomas has set records, but she's also not dominant the way some recent swimmers have been: I read she finished fifth and eighth in her other events, and that's hardly crushing the opposition.

 

For further scale, Utah just passed one of these "protect girls' sports" bills to impact the 75,000 high schools athletes in Utah, ONE of whom is a transgender female now competing as female. I'll eat my head if even five percent of the people who agitated for this bill could tell you who won the girls' cross country state title last year. And I'll bet you a dime they were not terribly interested in the US Women's National Soccer team's lawsuit for equal pay.

 

As for unfair advantage, this exists in sports _all the time_ and we learn to live with it. Rich kids can afford coaches, poor kids can't. The Dodgers get to sign Freddie Freeman, the Royals/Mariners/A's don't. The USA has all-weather training facilities with dieticians, counselors, tutors, physical therapists, state-of-art equipment and computer monitoring, Uganda (for example) does not.

 

If someone's life is "ruined" because she finished second instead of first in a race in high school or college, that suggests rather an outsize importance. Is a person's life really gonna peak at 22? Is that poor woman going to wind up living in a van down by the river because her 10,000 hours of practice didn't result in first? Most people's efforts don't result in first; that's life.

 

As for the transgendered "switching back," this is a question grounded in (deliberate?) misunderstanding of what gender dysmorphia is. Is there even a statistically significant record of this happening? Let's not get carried away on the slippery slope.

 

There's a lot wrong with what you have said here. Right now, I'll just focus on your sophistry regarding what's fair and unfair.

 

You give three examples, and they all three boil down to money. The kids who can afford coaches, the baseball teams with unlimited budgets, and countries with nicer training facilities. This all has to do with the amount of money that is available to spend on training or putting a team together.

 

You are correct about that.

 

However, there are no leagues that are specifically instituted to divide players or teams based on socio-economic status. Maybe NCAA Division One and Division Two comes close.

 

But what we definitely have a distinct division in, and at all levels, is division by sex. There is a reason for that.

 

You say that Lia Thomas didn't win every race against the women she competed against. This is true. But she won a lot of them, and she set many records. Think about that - a man holds several records in women's swimming.

 

As far as her not winning every race, I'm not surprised. When she was a he, he was ranked 554th against other men. He was not even a top ranked male swimmer. But when he competes against women, he immediately becomes one of the best ever. That what it means when you set records like this. Your time in that event was the fastest ever.

 

554th against men, top five at least against women.

 

And you don't care about the women who didn't get to compete because Lia Thomas took their roster spot.

 

She’s not a man. Please don’t call her one.

 

She may not be a man, but she is a male.

 

And given the number of times I have used "Lua" and "her" in this discussion, I think I've shown proper respect.

 

I don’t get the bolded part. If Lia is a male, how could he not be a man? What definition of “man” are you using which may allow for that contradictory conclusion?

 

I'm using "male" to denote biological sex, and I'm using "man" to denote gender identity. The funny thing is, I refer to this person in the present as "Lia" and "her," trying to be respectful, and I've done that throughout this thread. And I referred to her as a "man" one time, and I get called out for it. Why do I even try?

 

But back to my point. It's the whole sex does not equal gender thing that NWK was pushing in SOCN a few years ago. It's like when they would say climate does not equal weather. The idea being that a male can identify as and adopt the gender role of a woman, and a female can identify as and adopt the gender role of a man. The issue here is that the language is being twisted in ways it was never meant to be.

 

The problem with what's going on in sports is that these trans athletes and their allies are now saying that, in fact, sex does equal gender. A fully grown and physically mature male who competed for three years in college as a man begins to transition to being a woman, and demands to be allowed to compete against females.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, they shouldn't have to compete in their own leagues, not least because the small numbers would make it impractical.

 

As perspective, let's remember that Lia Thomas has set records, but she's also not dominant the way some recent swimmers have been: I read she finished fifth and eighth in her other events, and that's hardly crushing the opposition.

 

For further scale, Utah just passed one of these "protect girls' sports" bills to impact the 75,000 high schools athletes in Utah, ONE of whom is a transgender female now competing as female. I'll eat my head if even five percent of the people who agitated for this bill could tell you who won the girls' cross country state title last year. And I'll bet you a dime they were not terribly interested in the US Women's National Soccer team's lawsuit for equal pay.

 

As for unfair advantage, this exists in sports _all the time_ and we learn to live with it. Rich kids can afford coaches, poor kids can't. The Dodgers get to sign Freddie Freeman, the Royals/Mariners/A's don't. The USA has all-weather training facilities with dieticians, counselors, tutors, physical therapists, state-of-art equipment and computer monitoring, Uganda (for example) does not.

 

If someone's life is "ruined" because she finished second instead of first in a race in high school or college, that suggests rather an outsize importance. Is a person's life really gonna peak at 22? Is that poor woman going to wind up living in a van down by the river because her 10,000 hours of practice didn't result in first? Most people's efforts don't result in first; that's life.

 

As for the transgendered "switching back," this is a question grounded in (deliberate?) misunderstanding of what gender dysmorphia is. Is there even a statistically significant record of this happening? Let's not get carried away on the slippery slope.

 

There's a lot wrong with what you have said here. Right now, I'll just focus on your sophistry regarding what's fair and unfair.

 

You give three examples, and they all three boil down to money. The kids who can afford coaches, the baseball teams with unlimited budgets, and countries with nicer training facilities. This all has to do with the amount of money that is available to spend on training or putting a team together.

 

You are correct about that.

 

However, there are no leagues that are specifically instituted to divide players or teams based on socio-economic status. Maybe NCAA Division One and Division Two comes close.

 

But what we definitely have a distinct division in, and at all levels, is division by sex. There is a reason for that.

 

You say that Lia Thomas didn't win every race against the women she competed against. This is true. But she won a lot of them, and she set many records. Think about that - a man holds several records in women's swimming.

 

As far as her not winning every race, I'm not surprised. When she was a he, he was ranked 554th against other men. He was not even a top ranked male swimmer. But when he competes against women, he immediately becomes one of the best ever. That what it means when you set records like this. Your time in that event was the fastest ever.

 

554th against men, top five at least against women.

 

And you don't care about the women who didn't get to compete because Lia Thomas took their roster spot.

 

She’s not a man. Please don’t call her one.

 

She may not be a man, but she is a male.

 

And given the number of times I have used "Lua" and "her" in this discussion, I think I've shown proper respect.

 

I don’t get the bolded part. If Lia is a male, how could he not be a man? What definition of “man” are you using which may allow for that contradictory conclusion?

 

I'm using "male" to denote biological sex, and I'm using "man" to denote gender identity. The funny thing is, I refer to this person in the present as "Lia" and "her," trying to be respectful, and I've done that throughout this thread. And I referred to her as a "man" one time, and I get called out for it. Why do I even try?

 

But back to my point. It's the whole sex does not equal gender thing that NWK was pushing in SOCN a few years ago. It's like when they would say climate does not equal weather. The idea being that a male can identify as and adopt the gender role of a woman, and a female can identify as and adopt the gender role of a man. The issue here is that the language is being twisted in ways it was never meant to be.

 

The problem with what's going on in sports is that these trans athletes and their allies are now saying that, in fact, sex does equal gender. A fully grown and physically mature male who competed for three years in college as a man begins to transition to being a woman, and demands to be allowed to compete against females.

I’m so over what was a push for empathy morphing into accepting insanity. If I refer to Lia as a dude using her previous name get over it. If I see William in the locker room and he wants to correct me let him. I’m not policing my language on this, N-word, R-word, there Im done. Midget, there I said it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, they shouldn't have to compete in their own leagues, not least because the small numbers would make it impractical.

 

As perspective, let's remember that Lia Thomas has set records, but she's also not dominant the way some recent swimmers have been: I read she finished fifth and eighth in her other events, and that's hardly crushing the opposition.

 

For further scale, Utah just passed one of these "protect girls' sports" bills to impact the 75,000 high schools athletes in Utah, ONE of whom is a transgender female now competing as female. I'll eat my head if even five percent of the people who agitated for this bill could tell you who won the girls' cross country state title last year. And I'll bet you a dime they were not terribly interested in the US Women's National Soccer team's lawsuit for equal pay.

 

As for unfair advantage, this exists in sports _all the time_ and we learn to live with it. Rich kids can afford coaches, poor kids can't. The Dodgers get to sign Freddie Freeman, the Royals/Mariners/A's don't. The USA has all-weather training facilities with dieticians, counselors, tutors, physical therapists, state-of-art equipment and computer monitoring, Uganda (for example) does not.

 

If someone's life is "ruined" because she finished second instead of first in a race in high school or college, that suggests rather an outsize importance. Is a person's life really gonna peak at 22? Is that poor woman going to wind up living in a van down by the river because her 10,000 hours of practice didn't result in first? Most people's efforts don't result in first; that's life.

 

As for the transgendered "switching back," this is a question grounded in (deliberate?) misunderstanding of what gender dysmorphia is. Is there even a statistically significant record of this happening? Let's not get carried away on the slippery slope.

 

There's a lot wrong with what you have said here. Right now, I'll just focus on your sophistry regarding what's fair and unfair.

 

You give three examples, and they all three boil down to money. The kids who can afford coaches, the baseball teams with unlimited budgets, and countries with nicer training facilities. This all has to do with the amount of money that is available to spend on training or putting a team together.

 

You are correct about that.

 

However, there are no leagues that are specifically instituted to divide players or teams based on socio-economic status. Maybe NCAA Division One and Division Two comes close.

 

But what we definitely have a distinct division in, and at all levels, is division by sex. There is a reason for that.

 

You say that Lia Thomas didn't win every race against the women she competed against. This is true. But she won a lot of them, and she set many records. Think about that - a man holds several records in women's swimming.

 

As far as her not winning every race, I'm not surprised. When she was a he, he was ranked 554th against other men. He was not even a top ranked male swimmer. But when he competes against women, he immediately becomes one of the best ever. That what it means when you set records like this. Your time in that event was the fastest ever.

 

554th against men, top five at least against women.

 

And you don't care about the women who didn't get to compete because Lia Thomas took their roster spot.

 

She’s not a man. Please don’t call her one.

 

She may not be a man, but she is a male.

 

And given the number of times I have used "Lua" and "her" in this discussion, I think I've shown proper respect.

 

I don’t get the bolded part. If Lia is a male, how could he not be a man? What definition of “man” are you using which may allow for that contradictory conclusion?

 

I'm using "male" to denote biological sex, and I'm using "man" to denote gender identity. The funny thing is, I refer to this person in the present as "Lia" and "her," trying to be respectful, and I've done that throughout this thread. And I referred to her as a "man" one time, and I get called out for it. Why do I even try?

 

But back to my point. It's the whole sex does not equal gender thing that NWK was pushing in SOCN a few years ago. It's like when they would say climate does not equal weather. The idea being that a male can identify as and adopt the gender role of a woman, and a female can identify as and adopt the gender role of a man. The issue here is that the language is being twisted in ways it was never meant to be.

 

The problem with what's going on in sports is that these trans athletes and their allies are now saying that, in fact, sex does equal gender. A fully grown and physically mature male who competed for three years in college as a man begins to transition to being a woman, and demands to be allowed to compete against females.

I’m so over what was a push for empathy morphing into accepting insanity. If I refer to Lia as a dude using her previous name get over it. If I see William in the locker room and he wants to correct me let him. I’m not policing my language on this, N-word, R-word, there Im done. Midget, there I said it.

 

That's a real danger here, that any empathy, understanding, etc. for trans individuals is at risk of being dissolved because of this insanity the movement is pushing people towards.

 

And I feel like I can't say too much more about this without getting this thread thrown into SOCN, so I'll just leave it at that.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, they shouldn't have to compete in their own leagues, not least because the small numbers would make it impractical.

 

As perspective, let's remember that Lia Thomas has set records, but she's also not dominant the way some recent swimmers have been: I read she finished fifth and eighth in her other events, and that's hardly crushing the opposition.

 

For further scale, Utah just passed one of these "protect girls' sports" bills to impact the 75,000 high schools athletes in Utah, ONE of whom is a transgender female now competing as female. I'll eat my head if even five percent of the people who agitated for this bill could tell you who won the girls' cross country state title last year. And I'll bet you a dime they were not terribly interested in the US Women's National Soccer team's lawsuit for equal pay.

 

As for unfair advantage, this exists in sports _all the time_ and we learn to live with it. Rich kids can afford coaches, poor kids can't. The Dodgers get to sign Freddie Freeman, the Royals/Mariners/A's don't. The USA has all-weather training facilities with dieticians, counselors, tutors, physical therapists, state-of-art equipment and computer monitoring, Uganda (for example) does not.

 

If someone's life is "ruined" because she finished second instead of first in a race in high school or college, that suggests rather an outsize importance. Is a person's life really gonna peak at 22? Is that poor woman going to wind up living in a van down by the river because her 10,000 hours of practice didn't result in first? Most people's efforts don't result in first; that's life.

 

As for the transgendered "switching back," this is a question grounded in (deliberate?) misunderstanding of what gender dysmorphia is. Is there even a statistically significant record of this happening? Let's not get carried away on the slippery slope.

 

There's a lot wrong with what you have said here. Right now, I'll just focus on your sophistry regarding what's fair and unfair.

 

You give three examples, and they all three boil down to money. The kids who can afford coaches, the baseball teams with unlimited budgets, and countries with nicer training facilities. This all has to do with the amount of money that is available to spend on training or putting a team together.

 

You are correct about that.

 

However, there are no leagues that are specifically instituted to divide players or teams based on socio-economic status. Maybe NCAA Division One and Division Two comes close.

 

But what we definitely have a distinct division in, and at all levels, is division by sex. There is a reason for that.

 

You say that Lia Thomas didn't win every race against the women she competed against. This is true. But she won a lot of them, and she set many records. Think about that - a man holds several records in women's swimming.

 

As far as her not winning every race, I'm not surprised. When she was a he, he was ranked 554th against other men. He was not even a top ranked male swimmer. But when he competes against women, he immediately becomes one of the best ever. That what it means when you set records like this. Your time in that event was the fastest ever.

 

554th against men, top five at least against women.

 

And you don't care about the women who didn't get to compete because Lia Thomas took their roster spot.

 

She’s not a man. Please don’t call her one.

 

She may not be a man, but she is a male.

 

And given the number of times I have used "Lua" and "her" in this discussion, I think I've shown proper respect.

 

I don’t get the bolded part. If Lia is a male, how could he not be a man? What definition of “man” are you using which may allow for that contradictory conclusion?

 

I'm using "male" to denote biological sex, and I'm using "man" to denote gender identity. The funny thing is, I refer to this person in the present as "Lia" and "her," trying to be respectful, and I've done that throughout this thread. And I referred to her as a "man" one time, and I get called out for it. Why do I even try?

 

But back to my point. It's the whole sex does not equal gender thing that NWK was pushing in SOCN a few years ago. It's like when they would say climate does not equal weather. The idea being that a male can identify as and adopt the gender role of a woman, and a female can identify as and adopt the gender role of a man. The issue here is that the language is being twisted in ways it was never meant to be.

 

The problem with what's going on in sports is that these trans athletes and their allies are now saying that, in fact, sex does equal gender. A fully grown and physically mature male who competed for three years in college as a man begins to transition to being a woman, and demands to be allowed to compete against females.

 

Just like the very misused word "homophobia" if something is spoken long enough it will eventually become the norm whether right or wrong. There are people out there who are irrationally afraid of homosexuals which is what homophobia means but I've yet to meet one.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, they shouldn't have to compete in their own leagues, not least because the small numbers would make it impractical.

 

As perspective, let's remember that Lia Thomas has set records, but she's also not dominant the way some recent swimmers have been: I read she finished fifth and eighth in her other events, and that's hardly crushing the opposition.

 

For further scale, Utah just passed one of these "protect girls' sports" bills to impact the 75,000 high schools athletes in Utah, ONE of whom is a transgender female now competing as female. I'll eat my head if even five percent of the people who agitated for this bill could tell you who won the girls' cross country state title last year. And I'll bet you a dime they were not terribly interested in the US Women's National Soccer team's lawsuit for equal pay.

 

As for unfair advantage, this exists in sports _all the time_ and we learn to live with it. Rich kids can afford coaches, poor kids can't. The Dodgers get to sign Freddie Freeman, the Royals/Mariners/A's don't. The USA has all-weather training facilities with dieticians, counselors, tutors, physical therapists, state-of-art equipment and computer monitoring, Uganda (for example) does not.

 

If someone's life is "ruined" because she finished second instead of first in a race in high school or college, that suggests rather an outsize importance. Is a person's life really gonna peak at 22? Is that poor woman going to wind up living in a van down by the river because her 10,000 hours of practice didn't result in first? Most people's efforts don't result in first; that's life.

 

As for the transgendered "switching back," this is a question grounded in (deliberate?) misunderstanding of what gender dysmorphia is. Is there even a statistically significant record of this happening? Let's not get carried away on the slippery slope.

 

There's a lot wrong with what you have said here. Right now, I'll just focus on your sophistry regarding what's fair and unfair.

 

You give three examples, and they all three boil down to money. The kids who can afford coaches, the baseball teams with unlimited budgets, and countries with nicer training facilities. This all has to do with the amount of money that is available to spend on training or putting a team together.

 

You are correct about that.

 

However, there are no leagues that are specifically instituted to divide players or teams based on socio-economic status. Maybe NCAA Division One and Division Two comes close.

 

But what we definitely have a distinct division in, and at all levels, is division by sex. There is a reason for that.

 

You say that Lia Thomas didn't win every race against the women she competed against. This is true. But she won a lot of them, and she set many records. Think about that - a man holds several records in women's swimming.

 

As far as her not winning every race, I'm not surprised. When she was a he, he was ranked 554th against other men. He was not even a top ranked male swimmer. But when he competes against women, he immediately becomes one of the best ever. That what it means when you set records like this. Your time in that event was the fastest ever.

 

554th against men, top five at least against women.

 

And you don't care about the women who didn't get to compete because Lia Thomas took their roster spot.

 

She’s not a man. Please don’t call her one.

 

She may not be a man, but she is a male.

 

And given the number of times I have used "Lua" and "her" in this discussion, I think I've shown proper respect.

 

I don’t get the bolded part. If Lia is a male, how could he not be a man? What definition of “man” are you using which may allow for that contradictory conclusion?

 

I'm using "male" to denote biological sex, and I'm using "man" to denote gender identity. The funny thing is, I refer to this person in the present as "Lia" and "her," trying to be respectful, and I've done that throughout this thread. And I referred to her as a "man" one time, and I get called out for it. Why do I even try?

 

But back to my point. It's the whole sex does not equal gender thing that NWK was pushing in SOCN a few years ago. It's like when they would say climate does not equal weather. The idea being that a male can identify as and adopt the gender role of a woman, and a female can identify as and adopt the gender role of a man. The issue here is that the language is being twisted in ways it was never meant to be.

 

The problem with what's going on in sports is that these trans athletes and their allies are now saying that, in fact, sex does equal gender. A fully grown and physically mature male who competed for three years in college as a man begins to transition to being a woman, and demands to be allowed to compete against females.

 

Just like the very misused word "homophobia" if something is spoken long enough it will eventually become the norm whether right or wrong. There are people out there who are irrationally afraid of homosexuals which is what homophobia means but I've yet to meet one.

 

This is why I asked for a definition of the term “man”. There is a term “trans-man” for a female who identifies as a man, but that doesn’t mean that we have to to misuse words to support that delusion. Using the language of the delusional only empowers them. That doesn’t mean that if you meet a trans-woman in real life you need to be rude and refer to him in a way which is different than with which he identifies. But if we are going to discuss or debate the topic in public, accepting the sexist, unscientific language of the religious cultists gives away the whole argument. Lia is not just a male, he is a man. If you think otherwise, please provide me with a definition of the term which is coherent and scientifically provable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hell, the fact that you even referred to your friend as "her" would have got you a few jabs in SOCN.

 

I refer to her as her because she's a woman. To say otherwise is disrespectful, even in a joking manner. ... maybe especially in a joking manner.

 

oh, I know why you did it. I'm just saying you'd get ridiculed for that if we weren't out here in the normie section of the forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hell, the fact that you even referred to your friend as "her" would have got you a few jabs in SOCN.

 

I refer to her as her because she's a woman. To say otherwise is disrespectful, even in a joking manner. ... maybe especially in a joking manner.

 

oh, I know why you did it. I'm just saying you'd get ridiculed for that if we weren't out here in the normie section of the forum.

 

The normies who are a clear minority in America, and an overwhelming minority in the world?

 

https://news.gallup.com/poll/350174/mixed-views-among-americans-transgender-issues.aspx

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hell, the fact that you even referred to your friend as "her" would have got you a few jabs in SOCN.

 

I refer to her as her because she's a woman. To say otherwise is disrespectful, even in a joking manner. ... maybe especially in a joking manner.

 

oh, I know why you did it. I'm just saying you'd get ridiculed for that if we weren't out here in the normie section of the forum.

 

The normies who are a clear minority in America, and an overwhelming minority in the world?

 

https://news.gallup....der-issues.aspx

 

Good article, but did you notice how in the first paragraph they reference "birth gender" and then "gender identity?" For purposes of being clear, it should have said "biological sex" or just "sex" and then contrasted it with "gender Identity/."

 

I don't know if the person who wrote this is as big a pedant as we ironically pride ourselves (or is it ridicule?) on being in SOCN. I even resisted using the term "birth sex" to replace "birth gender" because once you say "birth sex" you are tacitly implying that that was someone's condition at birth, but subject to change later, like "birth weight."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hell, the fact that you even referred to your friend as "her" would have got you a few jabs in SOCN.

 

I refer to her as her because she's a woman. To say otherwise is disrespectful, even in a joking manner. ... maybe especially in a joking manner.

 

oh, I know why you did it. I'm just saying you'd get ridiculed for that if we weren't out here in the normie section of the forum.

 

The normies who are a clear minority in America, and an overwhelming minority in the world?

 

https://news.gallup....der-issues.aspx

 

Good article, but did you notice how in the first paragraph they reference "birth gender" and then "gender identity?" For purposes of being clear, it should have said "biological sex" or just "sex" and then contrasted it with "gender Identity/."

 

I don't know if the person who wrote this is as big a pedant as we ironically pride ourselves (or is it ridicule?) on being in SOCN. I even resisted using the term "birth sex" to replace "birth gender" because once you say "birth sex" you are tacitly implying that that was someone's condition at birth, but subject to change later, like "birth weight."

 

The whole language of this movement is designed to obfuscate reality. Once you’ve accepted their unscientific, contradictory, self-referential, and poorly-defined terms it becomes difficult to engage them in disagreement or questioning. That is why I refuse to use the language of that cult. I know people do it to be polite, and if I meet someone in real life who wants to use reasonable pronouns I will be polite. But you give away the entire game if you accept the language, as the language assumes the premises you may be questioning or debating.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

hell, the fact that you even referred to your friend as "her" would have got you a few jabs in SOCN.

 

I refer to her as her because she's a woman. To say otherwise is disrespectful, even in a joking manner. ... maybe especially in a joking manner.

 

oh, I know why you did it. I'm just saying you'd get ridiculed for that if we weren't out here in the normie section of the forum.

 

The normies who are a clear minority in America, and an overwhelming minority in the world?

 

https://news.gallup....der-issues.aspx

 

Good article, but did you notice how in the first paragraph they reference "birth gender" and then "gender identity?" For purposes of being clear, it should have said "biological sex" or just "sex" and then contrasted it with "gender Identity/."

 

I don't know if the person who wrote this is as big a pedant as we ironically pride ourselves (or is it ridicule?) on being in SOCN. I even resisted using the term "birth sex" to replace "birth gender" because once you say "birth sex" you are tacitly implying that that was someone's condition at birth, but subject to change later, like "birth weight."

 

The whole language of this movement is designed to obfuscate reality. Once you’ve accepted their unscientific, contradictory, self-referential, and poorly-defined terms it becomes difficult to engage them in disagreement or questioning. That is why I refuse to use the language of that cult. I know people do it to be polite, and if I meet someone in real life who wants to use reasonable pronouns I will be polite. But you give away the entire game if you accept the language, as the language assumes the premises you may be questioning or debating.

 

I couldn't agree more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This all hurts my head.

f**k, just be who you want to be. 99% of the population doesn't care if you were born male and want to wear a dress. Just leave us alone and stop getting in our faces about it.

Just like, i don't get in anyone's face about being hardwired to like girls. No one cares, and I know it. 

Live your lives, use your pronouns, identify as a fluid or as a tree, or whatever, and f**k who or what you want to f**k. Leave me out of it, don't give me shit for not caring, nor for adopting your additions to our reality.  Worry about your haters, that 1% who violently care about what you do. 

I f***ed a sheep, I f***ed a goat, I rammed my cock right down it's throat

so, what, so what you boring little f**k?

I've been here, I've been there, I've been f***ing everywhere
so, what, so what you boring little f**k?


Truer words never sung.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...