CharonY Posted June 29, 2023 Posted June 29, 2023 In other words, it might be a good idea to revamp categories and rules so that folks can compete according to ability rather than based on genitals they were born with? 1
J.C.MacSwell Posted June 30, 2023 Posted June 30, 2023 10 hours ago, CharonY said: In other words, it might be a good idea to revamp categories and rules so that folks can compete according to ability rather than based on genitals they were born with? That comment, right there, demonstrates the threat to elite women's sports. Which I guess is fine if you consider them less than elite in any case, and that they should compete against other non elite athletes that, for one reason or another (including controlled drug use, whether healthy or not), happen to be at that same performance level overall, as arbitrarily judged by "experts" that think that is possible and reasonable. They've come along way baby! And high time they went back? Male sports are the real elite sports afterall...and as long as that's not threatened I guess everyone else should just take a seat and applaud...and of course enjoy the other more recreational levels that lesser athletes such as pretty much all with XX chromosomes can reasonably aspire to. Well done!
MigL Posted June 30, 2023 Posted June 30, 2023 Recreational sports are one thing; professional are another, and as much about the 'audience' as the athletes. The US Women's National Soccer Team is arguably a bigger draw than the men's National Team, yet your method would guarantee that the women get paid less than the men. Just something to think about.
J.C.MacSwell Posted June 30, 2023 Posted June 30, 2023 (edited) 13 minutes ago, MigL said: Recreational sports are one thing; professional are another, and as much about the 'audience' as the athletes. The US Women's National Soccer Team is arguably a bigger draw than the men's National Team, yet your method would guarantee that the women get paid less than the men. Just something to think about. Was that directed at my post? (much of it intended as sarcasm) I consider the US Women's Soccer Team elite (and deserve pay based on their ability to generate revenue, not on their eliteness...as high as it is...otherwise they would deserve no more than any other, say, Olympic Champion in other sports that generates considerably less) And for some that might have missed it...no the xy chromosome 15 year olds that can beat them are not elite athletes (but they could become one with equal dedication) Edited June 30, 2023 by J.C.MacSwell
dimreepr Posted June 30, 2023 Posted June 30, 2023 23 hours ago, Intoscience said: Sorry, I I thought the ongoing argument was around transgender women competing against cis gender women? Where there can be and has proven to be, in many disciplines, a clear unfair physical advantage. And we're back to the start. 😣 Every Olympian has a physical advantage, in a very narrow window of opportunity; mine was wanking, I ripped the head off that thing... 😉 But don't worry, I tucked the rest in and made a beautiful job of it, I'm so proud...
StringJunky Posted June 30, 2023 Posted June 30, 2023 (edited) 11 minutes ago, dimreepr said: And we're back to the start. 😣 Every Olympian has a physical advantage, in a very narrow window of opportunity; mine was wanking, I ripped the head off that thing... 😉 But don't worry, I tucked the rest in and made a beautiful job of it, I'm so proud... Classy and en pointe. Edited June 30, 2023 by StringJunky
dimreepr Posted June 30, 2023 Posted June 30, 2023 Just now, StringJunky said: Classy. Careful, you're showing your bias Knickers...
MigL Posted June 30, 2023 Posted June 30, 2023 10 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said: Was that directed at my post? No JC, it was directed at CharonY; I get your sarcasm. 35 minutes ago, dimreepr said: mine was wanking One might argue you're still a 'wanker' 😄 . ( hope I'm using the term correctly )
dimreepr Posted June 30, 2023 Posted June 30, 2023 (edited) 8 minutes ago, MigL said: One might argue you're still a 'wanker' 😄 . ( hope I'm using the term correctly ) Indeed, but then you aren't an Olympian of indeterminate sex... Unless you're flicking the correct part's... 🧐 Edited June 30, 2023 by dimreepr
StringJunky Posted June 30, 2023 Posted June 30, 2023 I originally put this in the 'Whiteboard'' thread and realized it's in the wrong place. To lift it to here, do people think this was handled well?: Quote Essex school toilet sex assaults sees boy arrested A boy has been arrested by police investigating reports of serious sexual assaults in a gender neutral toilet at a school. Essex Police said it was working closely with the school and local authorities while inquiries continued. The boy, under the age of 16, has been bailed with conditions. Essex County Council confirmed it was working with police and relevant authorities on a "safeguarding matter" at a school. "We are supporting the leadership at the school and will provide additional support to the school community if required," a spokesman said. "The school have communicated with parents and carers and have offered support. "As this is an ongoing police investigation, we are not able to comment further at this time." An Essex Police spokesperson said in a statement: "We are currently investigating reports of serious sexual assaults, which are believed to have occurred at a school in north Essex. "A boy, under the age of 16, has been arrested and since been bailed with conditions. "We are working closely with the school and local authorities whilst enquiries for this investigation continue." https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-66052546
zapatos Posted June 30, 2023 Posted June 30, 2023 45 minutes ago, StringJunky said: I originally put this in the 'Whiteboard'' thread and realized it's in the wrong place. To lift it to here, do people think this was handled well?: Generally seems fine to me. They are addressing it with the police, the parents, and the parents of other children. The fact that it happened in a toilet seems irrelevant to me. Should receive the same response whether in the toilet, gymnasium, classroom or school yard.
StringJunky Posted June 30, 2023 Posted June 30, 2023 35 minutes ago, zapatos said: Generally seems fine to me. They are addressing it with the police, the parents, and the parents of other children. The fact that it happened in a toilet seems irrelevant to me. Should receive the same response whether in the toilet, gymnasium, classroom or school yard. I thought it was interesting, and seems to be working without further political uproar... as it would be your side of the pond..
CharonY Posted June 30, 2023 Posted June 30, 2023 Well, I guess some folks would weaponize anything and individual evens especially of teenagers acting out or doing stupid things seems to be a gold mine for that. That being said, I also suspect that folks are getting numb a bit, and it requires something more shocking to rouse more than the facebook groups.
StringJunky Posted June 30, 2023 Posted June 30, 2023 40 minutes ago, CharonY said: Well, I guess some folks would weaponize anything and individual evens especially of teenagers acting out or doing stupid things seems to be a gold mine for that. That being said, I also suspect that folks are getting numb a bit, and it requires something more shocking to rouse more than the facebook groups. There will always be some frauds and mentally-ill people, I think that is recognised, hence the lack of arm-flailing.
StringJunky Posted July 1, 2023 Posted July 1, 2023 (edited) Trump vowed to "take historic action to defeat the toxic poison of gender ideology to restore the timeless truth that God created two genders, male and female." - Trump at a rally. I hope to see all this rhetoric thrown back at him if he wins the nomination. and then has to present it to the swing states. Edited July 1, 2023 by StringJunky
mistermack Posted July 1, 2023 Posted July 1, 2023 1 hour ago, StringJunky said: I hope to see all this rhetoric thrown back at him Trump has no fear whatsoever of rhetoric coming back to haunt him. He didn't build the wall, he didn't put Hilary in jail. Nobody on his side cared. He kept his promise of not being Hilary Clinton. That was enough for them. I'm not sure that the swing voters care too much about transgender issues either. And nobody else really matters. Except maybe the can/can't be bothered to vote people. If you can find an issue that gets them out of the house, you might be on a winner. But I don't think transgender issues would be close enough to home to get them out on polling day.
Michael_123_ Posted July 3, 2023 Posted July 3, 2023 On 3/5/2021 at 12:51 PM, swansont said: But it’s not an example. It’s a boogie-man. It’s a monster under the bed. A made-up scenario to frighten people. A slippery-slope fallacy. You can’t have an honest discussion if you aren’t properly representing the situation. So you're saying that Mike Tyson isn't human, or that this scenario isn't within the realm of discussion, or that a man with large muscle mass can't possibly identify as female?
swansont Posted July 3, 2023 Posted July 3, 2023 38 minutes ago, Michael_123_ said: So you're saying that Mike Tyson isn't human, or that this scenario isn't within the realm of discussion, or that a man with large muscle mass can't possibly identify as female? Are you having a reading comprehension issue? “Isn’t within the realm of discussion” comes closest, seeing as Tyson has not declared themselves to be transgender. Is it that outrageous to want to discuss facts and actual occurrences, rather than, as I said, a made-up scenario? The latter smacks of a desperate attempt to stir the pot.
Michael_123_ Posted July 3, 2023 Posted July 3, 2023 20 minutes ago, swansont said: Are you having a reading comprehension issue? “Isn’t within the realm of discussion” comes closest, seeing as Tyson has not declared themselves to be transgender. Is it that outrageous to want to discuss facts and actual occurrences, rather than, as I said, a made-up scenario? The latter smacks of a desperate attempt to stir the pot. Don't get passive aggressive. Hypotheticals are important to discuss. But if you don't wish to discuss hypotheticals, then let's stick with the basic question: Do transgender women have a competitive advantage over other female athletes? The answer seems to be yes. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9331831/ https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/55/11/577 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40279-020-01389-3
zapatos Posted July 3, 2023 Posted July 3, 2023 (edited) 16 minutes ago, Michael_123_ said: The answer seems to be yes. The answer seems to be 'yes' depending on how you choose to look at things, under what circumstances, at what time, using which rules, with what training, in what sports, etc. The answer seems to be 'no' if we look at Laurel Hubbard. Perhaps it is not as simple as a 'yes' / 'no' answer. Quote New Zealand weightlifter Laurel Hubbard, one of the first transgender athletes to compete in the Olympics, failed to win a medal Monday in the women’s over-87-kilogram division weightlifting event. It was her first and only event at the Tokyo Games. https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-news/transgender-olympian-laurel-hubbard-fails-win-medal-olympic-debut-rcna1568# Edited July 3, 2023 by zapatos
J.C.MacSwell Posted July 3, 2023 Posted July 3, 2023 7 minutes ago, Michael_123_ said: The answer seems to be yes. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9331831/ https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/55/11/577 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40279-020-01389-3 The counterargument seems to be that if they can be successfully drugged to the point XY chromosome advantage seems to disappear then it would be unfair not to let them compete, the onus should be on anyone wanting to question it to prove any remaining advantage, and that at the same time anyone questioning it should be considered anti-LGBTQIA+.
zapatos Posted July 3, 2023 Posted July 3, 2023 (edited) 3 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said: and that at the same time anyone questioning it should be considered anti-LGBTQIA+. Don't you ever get tired of playing the victim? Edited July 3, 2023 by zapatos
J.C.MacSwell Posted July 3, 2023 Posted July 3, 2023 (edited) 15 minutes ago, zapatos said: Don't you ever get tired of playing the victim? I don't do it. So no. The victims here are elite women athletes, those that might aspire to be, and the XY transgenders themselves that are encouraged to compete against XX females at elite levels and told to believe it's healthy and fair. Nice argument though, against my post..LOL. Edited July 3, 2023 by J.C.MacSwell
StringJunky Posted July 3, 2023 Posted July 3, 2023 11 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said: The counterargument seems to be that if they can be successfully drugged to the point XY chromosome advantage seems to disappear then... and that at the same time anyone questioning it should be considered anti-LGBTQIA+. "Successfully drugged" ? I think it's clear where the author of this post stands. Don't be disingenuous and fly your "anti-LGBTQIA+" flag.
J.C.MacSwell Posted July 3, 2023 Posted July 3, 2023 2 minutes ago, StringJunky said: "Successfully drugged" ? Yes. Fortunately surgery is no longer required. 4 minutes ago, StringJunky said: I think it's clear where the author of this post stands. Don't be disingenuous and fly your "anti-LGBTQIA+" flag. You're suggesting my post is disingenuous?
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now