Any man who thinks beating a woman in any sporting event is some accomplishment needs help.
Any decent high school boy sprinter can beat Elaine Thompson, wow, big deal.
Any man who thinks beating a woman in any sporting event is some accomplishment needs help.
Any decent high school boy sprinter can beat Elaine Thompson, wow, big deal.
DinoZ wrote:
Any man who thinks beating a woman in any sporting event is some accomplishment needs help.
Any decent high school boy sprinter can beat Elaine Thompson, wow, big deal.
Word
Armstronglivs wrote:
liar soorer wrote:
Because of their biological history.
One of balance, like all social construction of morality.
Do read stuff.Oh ! you never do.
As a starter try John Rawls.Or even go back to Kant.
But then you never got round to reading the WADA Code even after a 100 plus posts.
Because of their "biological history" - but not their present? It is a sign of your intellectual limitations that you are never embarrassed by your blunders. And they never end.
Separating of sex and gender.
Obviously their history is one that was based on a testosterone fueled puberty that has determined their current biology and one; that if you ever bothered to read around the subject; is not overcome by any testosterone limiting drugs.Thus biological history.
Simples ! The only blunder was to forget the limitations of some of the readers.
How are you getting on with John Rawls?
I am especially interested in his concept of “ veil of ignorance “. Any thoughts?
liar soorer wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Because of their "biological history" - but not their present? It is a sign of your intellectual limitations that you are never embarrassed by your blunders. And they never end.
Separating of sex and gender.
Obviously their history is one that was based on a testosterone fueled puberty that has determined their current biology and one; that if you ever bothered to read around the subject; is not overcome by any testosterone limiting drugs.Thus biological history.
Simples ! The only blunder was to forget the limitations of some of the readers.
How are you getting on with John Rawls?
I am especially interested in his concept of “ veil of ignorance “. Any thoughts?
Rawls must have had you in mind.
Armstronglivs wrote:
liar soorer wrote:
Separating of sex and gender.
Obviously their history is one that was based on a testosterone fueled puberty that has determined their current biology and one; that if you ever bothered to read around the subject; is not overcome by any testosterone limiting drugs.Thus biological history.
Simples ! The only blunder was to forget the limitations of some of the readers.
How are you getting on with John Rawls?
I am especially interested in his concept of “ veil of ignorance “. Any thoughts?
Rawls must have had you in mind.
So predictable. I gave up an open goal and you could not resist.
Any apology for you not grasping the biology history point and then insulting?
Got round to reading anything of intellectual depth yet.
Any probs with Rawls and I will help you.
This post was removed.
Why post all these articles? Yes, one side of the mainstream
media sees this as a step forward. The other side of the mainstream media thinks it’s lunacy. I fail to see the point of putting up a bunch of headlines.
If you’re forming your opinions off of what the media tells you, then that’s a problem you need to fix.
This post was removed.
Lenny Leonard wrote:
Why post all these articles? Yes, one side of the mainstream
media sees this as a step forward. The other side of the mainstream media thinks it’s lunacy. I fail to see the point of putting up a bunch of headlines.
If you’re forming your opinions off of what the media tells you, then that’s a problem you need to fix.
His point should be obvious and it was made with a mic drop at the end.
Some people are suggesting that trans athletes are vilified in the media, and if not that then they certainly are not treated as heroes.
I think he made it unequivocally clear that they are very often treated as heroes, trailblazers, courageous, and so on.
This speaks to why it is so difficult for women to speak up and say, "I am a woman and I have a problem with this," without risking being called transphobic.
Lenny Leonard wrote:
Why post all these articles? Yes, one side of the mainstream
media sees this as a step forward. The other side of the mainstream media thinks it’s lunacy. I fail to see the point of putting up a bunch of headlines.
If you’re forming your opinions off of what the media tells you, then that’s a problem you need to fix.
I thought the articles were a good addition to the thread.
They inform my thinking but do not form them.
This is a matter of worldwide significance and not beer league .
I'm transphobic , if ya stand to pee you are a man so act like one.
RunRagged wrote:
Lenny Leonard wrote:
Why post all these articles? Yes, one side of the mainstream
media sees this as a step forward. The other side of the mainstream media thinks it’s lunacy. I fail to see the point of putting up a bunch of headlines.
If you’re forming your opinions off of what the media tells you, then that’s a problem you need to fix.
I am posting these articles to refute the claim made by another poster on this thread, and made by many others on other threads and generally in Western society today, that these male athletes are not portrayed as heroes or sympathetically in mainstream discourse - and, further, to refute the frequently-made claim that males who "identify as" the opposite sex nowadays are the most marginalized, discriminated against, oppressed, put-upon and "vulnerable" members of society.
Also, for the record, I haven't posted a bunch of headlines like you say. I've posted links to each article/video so that with a simple click others can see for themselves how these athletes are portrayed. Whereas all you ever contribute to these threads is the same misogynistic, unscientific, reality-denying assertions and opinions.
But the larger issue is: who the hell are you to tell me what to do? Where do you get off wokescolding me from on high, wagging your finger in mansplaining fashion that I am ill-informed about this topic, and exhorting me that I have "a problem" I "need to fix"?
You might as well have just said "educate yourself" and "do better," LOL. Your attitude reminds me of this hilarious comedy sketch of yesteryear:
https://youtu.be/LS37SNYjg8w
Do conservatives not understand humor?
That’s a great sketch, but just so I can explain it to you again as it is analogous to our conversation:
The old guys who are at the party = those who think transgender women are “men” who are “ruining women’s sports.”
The women in the sketch = those of us who realize that transgendered people are actual real people who deserve to compete in the gender in which they live every other facet of their lives.
The sketch is presented in a serious way, but we laugh at it because we can clearly see that the premise is absurd. It’s called satire.
You compete in athletics vs those who are the same sex, doesn't matter who ya want to be it's about what you actually are.
DinoZ wrote:
You compete in athletics vs those who are the same sex, doesn't matter who ya want to be it's about what you actually are.
This is the transphobic argument in a nutshell:
Trangenderism does not exist, so transgender athletes cannot compete in their gender.
I’m sorry if this comes off as “misogynistic,” but if don’t even accept the humanity of a group of people, then I’d say that you are oppressing them. As a result, your opinion on their participation is null based on not even getting over the first hurdle.
RunRagged wrote:
Lenny Leonard wrote:
Why post all these articles? Yes, one side of the mainstream
media sees this as a step forward. The other side of the mainstream media thinks it’s lunacy. I fail to see the point of putting up a bunch of headlines.
If you’re forming your opinions off of what the media tells you, then that’s a problem you need to fix.
I am posting these articles to refute the claim made by another poster on this thread, and made by many others on other threads and generally in Western society today, that these male athletes are not portrayed as heroes or sympathetically in mainstream discourse - and, further, to refute the frequently-made claim that males who "identify as" the opposite sex nowadays are the most marginalized, discriminated against, oppressed, put-upon and "vulnerable" members of society.
Also, for the record, I haven't posted a bunch of headlines like you say. I've posted links to each article/video so that with a simple click others can see for themselves how these athletes are portrayed. Whereas all you ever contribute to these threads is the same misogynistic, unscientific, reality-denying assertions and opinions.
But the larger issue is: who the hell are you to tell me what to do? Where do you get off wokescolding me from on high, wagging your finger in mansplaining fashion that I am ill-informed about this topic, and exhorting me that I have "a problem" I "need to fix"?
You might as well have just said "educate yourself" and "do better," LOL. Your attitude reminds me of this hilarious comedy sketch of yesteryear:
https://youtu.be/LS37SNYjg8w
If they're considered such heros, why does 60% of Americans believe they should be banned from women's sports? Why have so many states passed legislation to ban them? I don't recall a single post on LR from someone saying they were cheering on Eastwood or any other transgender athlete. Most posters seem to be outraged by Thomas swimming well.
There's no poll to support it, but Thomas's fans are probably less than 20% of the population. There's a larger population at the other end that actually hate her.
This post was removed.
RunRagged wrote:
I am posting these articles to refute the claim made by another poster on this thread, and made by many others on other threads and generally in Western society today, that these male athletes are not portrayed as heroes or sympathetically in mainstream discourse - and, further, to refute the frequently-made claim that males who "identify as" the opposite sex nowadays are the most marginalized, discriminated against, oppressed, put-upon and "vulnerable" members of society.
Also, for the record, I haven't posted a bunch of headlines like you say. I've posted links to each article/video so that with a simple click others can see for themselves how these athletes are portrayed. Whereas all you ever contribute to these threads is the same misogynistic, unscientific, reality-denying assertions and opinions.
But the larger issue is: who the hell are you to tell me what to do? Where do you get off wokescolding me from on high, wagging your finger in mansplaining fashion that I am ill-informed about this topic, and exhorting me that I have "a problem" I "need to fix"?
You might as well have just said "educate yourself" and "do better," LOL. Your attitude reminds me of this hilarious comedy sketch of yesteryear:
OMG, more lecturing from on high! It was bad enough for you to tell me that as a mere female I am uninformed about the issues under discussion and don't know what I am talking about. But your new claim that I don't understand humor - and your mansplaining attempt to spell out the meaning of the clip I posted in easy-to-follow terms like I'm a featherbrained dunderhead - really take the biscuit.
The comedy sketch I posted had nothing to do with transgenderism. It was about the sexism and condescending attitudes of old-fashioned misogynistic male supremacists towards female people.
The men in the sketch = male people with a superior attitude towards women (the biological kind) like you. The women = female people like me, the sort you talk down to, lecture about who is a girl/woman, and call misinformed about women's sports, human sex differences and gender ideology.
I agree with you that "transgendered [sic] people are actual real people." I think they should be allowed to live their lives without mistreatment by others. But along with many trans-identified people, I disagree with your contention that males who say they "identify as" the opposite sex "deserve to compete in the gender in which they live every other facet of their lives" .
Because sports are divided into two categories based on sex, not gender, gender identity or gender expression. We compete in sports based on the physical realities of our bodies, not on the fantasies we have in our heads about our "identities;" the way we dress, groom and wear our hair; our interests and hobbies; the avatars and labels we adopt; who we date; or whether or not we've had cosmetic surgeries.
Moreover, I think all this genderist bollox is regressive, sexist, unscientific nonsense based on the antiquated stereotypes that women - and many men - have been fighting against for generations. Your position is actually the traditionalist conservative one, not mine.
Please explain what it means for a person "live in a gender" without resorting to sexist stereotypes.
(BTW, when quoting your comment about "transgendered people" above, I added the [sic] because the term "transgendered" is considered antiquated and transphobic.)
You won't even say 'man' or 'woman' anymore. Reduced to 'male person', 'female person' and 'trans-identified person'. You are using this weird language because deep down you understand more goes into womanhood than just wombs and X chromosomes.
And you are wrong also. If you are born a boy and later identify as a woman, it's a fair bet you're going to have a tough time. To reject the privileges of manhood in favor of identifying as a woman is just about the surest way to infuriate the sexists. The patriarchy considers masculinity the highest characteristic and for someone to reject it is a huge deal.
This post was removed.
RunRagged wrote:
SDSU Aztec wrote:
If they're considered such heros, why does 60% of Americans believe they should be banned from women's sports? Why have so many states passed legislation to ban them? I don't recall a single post on LR from someone saying they were cheering on Eastwood or any other transgender athlete. Most posters seem to be outraged by Thomas swimming well.
Sixty percent of Americans believe males who identify as transgender should be banned from women's sports because they know that there are significant physical differences between males and females that give males huge advantages over females in nearly all sports. And that these differences are not done away with or appreciably diminished once a guy declares he "feels like " or "identifies as" the opposite sex, reduces his testosterone for a spell and/or changes aspects of his appearance to conform to stereotypes usually associated with females.
Also, no states that I know of have passed legislation to ban transgender-identified people from sports. The legislation has been drafted to very specifically state that trans-identified males should compete with others of their same sex.
Most of the legislation that I have seen has also said that trans-identified females who are taking exogenous T should be excluded from female sports under long-standing doping regulations - but trans-identified females who are not taking exogenous T should be free to compete in female sports.
If you "don't recall a single post on LR from someone saying they were cheering on Eastwood or any other transgender athlete", that's on you and your memory. A number of posters on LRC have vehemently supported males using "gender identity" claims to participate in women's sports. Some are doing so on this very thread.
Moreover, many posters on LRC have condemned posters who raise objections as haters, bigots and transphobes. And they've been particularly hard on female people who object, slagging us off as "cry babies," "pearl clutchers," "sore losers," "whiners" and right wingers in a "moral panic," "housewives" etc. I've personally been told on LRC that I'm a "garbage person," "evil" and "despicable" for defending fair play for female persons in sports.
The discussion is whether they transgender athletes are "heros" Acceptance and cheering them on are different things. It's already been ruled in court that they are allowed to compete against women so I consider ranting about it a waste of time but I'm hardly a fan.
Many of LRers actually are bigots but comments about the transgender athletes possibly having an unfair advantage or that they should have their own division, don't bother me in the least.
I don't recall your posts on other threads but I haven't really seen the type of labels that you claim have been put on you or even for the actual bigots here. I don't have any problem with anything you have posted on this thread.
RunRagged wrote:
SDSU Aztec wrote:
If they're considered such heros, why does 60% of Americans believe they should be banned from women's sports? Why have so many states passed legislation to ban them? I don't recall a single post on LR from someone saying they were cheering on Eastwood or any other transgender athlete. Most posters seem to be outraged by Thomas swimming well.
Sixty percent of Americans believe males who identify as transgender should be banned from women's sports because they know that there are significant physical differences between males and females that give males huge advantages over females in nearly all sports. And that these differences are not done away with or appreciably diminished once a guy declares he "feels like " or "identifies as" the opposite sex, reduces his testosterone for a spell and/or changes aspects of his appearance to conform to stereotypes usually associated with females.
Also, no states that I know of have passed legislation to ban transgender-identified people from sports. The legislation has been drafted to very specifically state that trans-identified males should compete with others of their same sex.
Most of the legislation that I have seen has also said that trans-identified females who are taking exogenous T should be excluded from female sports under long-standing doping regulations - but trans-identified females who are not taking exogenous T should be free to compete in female sports.
If you "don't recall a single post on LR from someone saying they were cheering on Eastwood or any other transgender athlete", that's on you and your memory. A number of posters on LRC have vehemently supported males using "gender identity" claims to participate in women's sports. Some are doing so on this very thread.
Moreover, many posters on LRC have condemned posters who raise objections as haters, bigots and transphobes. And they've been particularly hard on female people who object, slagging us off as "cry babies," "pearl clutchers," "sore losers," "whiners" and right wingers in a "moral panic," "housewives" etc. I've personally been told on LRC that I'm a "garbage person," "evil" and "despicable" for defending fair play for female persons in sports.
I don’t think males should be in women’s sports.
Transwomen are not males. The reason you are being called bigoted is because you call transwomen “a guy who feels like the opposite sex.”
Transwomen are women. They should be in women’s sports.
Again, we should not be making decisions based on making a “fair play for female persons in sport.” This is even made moot based on the fact that transfemales are females.
Ingebrigtsen brothers release incredibly catchy Olympic music video (listen here + full lyrics)
2024 College Track & Field Open Coaching Positions Discussion
Matt Fox/SweatElite harasses one of his clients after they called him out
Per sources, Colorado expected to hire NAU assistant coach Jarred Cornfield as head xc coach
Sometimes it seems like Cooper Teare is not that good BUT…