BigRedBuster
Active member
[No message]
The Democrat Utopia
- Thread starter GBR0988
- Start date
JJ Husker
Donor
The more I think about this trans women in sports thing the more I realize that really isn’t the problem I have with it. Yeah it triggers fairness issues but I really don’t give a rip about women’s sports and TBH I care even less about providing competitive opportunities for trans women. My daughter is done with competitive sports so I don’t have to be concerned with her being placed at an unfair disadvantage. My main problem is that anyone thinks it is okay. I guess that’s what annoys me most about the whole deal. It’s just completely insane.
I say bar them from normal competition and, if the demand makes it necessary, give them their own trans women’s sports classification.
I’m sure this will piss some people off. Just know that I don’t care so you can save the virtue signaling diatribe for somebody else.
I say bar them from normal competition and, if the demand makes it necessary, give them their own trans women’s sports classification.
I’m sure this will piss some people off. Just know that I don’t care so you can save the virtue signaling diatribe for somebody else.
Born N Bled Red
New member
One thing I wonder. Could there simply be a trans division that features anyone transitioning from one sex to the other, biologically speaking? Male transitioning to female has the benefit of increased testosterone during puberty and a differing physiology. Female transitioning to male have the benefit of increased levels of testosterone in the present sense. Would this create an equal playing field?
JJ Husker
Donor
I can’t imagine that would provide a truly equal playing field. But sure, a single 3rd class of athlete would be more economically viable than 4. I mean I really doubt anything more than 2 is viable but maybe that is a possible solution. It could be entertaining as they become hypocrites while each side argues over how it is or isn’t fair.
I imagine (I don’t really know) the more important aspect for trans people is to be accepted as their new gender and not so much with a level sporting field. So a 3rd or 4th classification probably would just alienate them further from what they desire.
Enhance
Administrator
No, I probably wasn't as clear as I could've been. I'm not deep into the science and biology of say transitioning from a man to a woman, but I wager there are biological and/or physical markers that might suggest a transitioned female has a clear physiological advantage over a person born female. Whatever those markers may be. I don't think we should wait to see if they're good or not and THEN decide.
Personally, I don't really know where I've landed on the trans athlete discussion. Part of me think it probably isn't a big deal in most cases, but the other part of me thinks it will unsettle the playing field in some circumstances, and that that's a choice somebody will have to live with if it is ultimately decided they can't compete.
Lorewarn
New member
For clarity want to come back to this point for a second.
The 'average as a guy' ranked in the 400s narrative isn't actually true, or is at least dramatically misleading. I'm still far from an expert on swimming but they were CollegeSwimming national swimmer of the week, an all-american and placed in 2nd in all 3 events they competed in as a man in the Ivy League championships.
It actually looks like she got worse as a woman overall relative to her competition if you compare her times to the median of the top 8 in Ivy League championship placing.
BigRedBuster
Active member
If he’s that good, keep competing there after transition. I’m sure she would find a level she could compete at and be happy.
Lorewarn
New member
She did compete in men's swimming the first year of transitioning and undergoing hormone therapy, and has lost over 15 seconds on her 500 time. Per her account in an SI article, she actually was hesitant to begin hormone therapy for some time because she was fearful she'd lose the ability to swim competitively (not in terms of not being allowed, but in terms of losing so much ability.
BigRedBuster
Active member
So????
I fail to see how this makes ok fir her to then compete in women’s swimming.
I just don’t get it.
Lia Thompson and other trans athletes should not be allowed to compete with women. Totally ruins womens sports. If trans athletes can compete with men and succeed fine. Women have fought hard to get where they are and now they have to deal with this. If I was women athlete I would be pissed.
The genderless levels of competition is bad for women too. We would still have professional level mens sports and college mens sports, but it would ruin sports for women when men or trans athletes that cannot compete at the higher levels start to mix in women’s competitions. Would a sport like gymnastics have to mix events?
I think the solution is to let trans athletes compete with men and let the chips fall where they may.
The genderless levels of competition is bad for women too. We would still have professional level mens sports and college mens sports, but it would ruin sports for women when men or trans athletes that cannot compete at the higher levels start to mix in women’s competitions. Would a sport like gymnastics have to mix events?
I think the solution is to let trans athletes compete with men and let the chips fall where they may.
Lorewarn
New member
Not sure why the judge was asked this question but we have gotten to the point where we are afraid to define what a women is. Absolutely nuts. I am surprised women’s groups are not speaking up more. I assume we are headed to a genderless society because constantly coming up with new genders is not sustainable. People are already throwing up their hands up at it. Teenage kids are writing made up genders into job applications because they think it’s funny. What does a genderless society look like?
Last edited by a moderator:
Exactly. There is no rational point to be made that would make it ok for that person to compete in female athletics. People are just twisting very hard because they can’t accept that their position is wrong.
Enhance
Administrator
I think the question served two purposes - first, indirectly gaining insight into how Judge Jackson would potentially rule in cases related to transgender/gender rights/"progressive politics." Second, partisan political points to rile up conservatives. The latter has become common place in these hearings. I don't know which intent Sen. Blackburn was aiming for but I have my inclinations...
I don't personally get too caught up in the gender identity debate. I don't give a rip what someone wants to identify as. I'll do my best to accommodate their preference, but I'm also not going to apologize for defaulting to man/woman, because I think that's how the majority of people view themselves.
I am supporter of transgender rights, though, specifically the ability to work and have equal opportunities without being discriminated against. So if Sen. Blackburn shares that viewpoint and wants to work towards a less discriminatory world then great! But, that's definitely not the vibe given off by the line of questioning.