It's not true that the lawsuit filed by female athletes challenging Connecticut's policies that allow males to compete, and dominate, in girls' HS track got nowhere in court.
Yes, the federal judge who originally heard the case dismissed it, and his dismissal was initially held up by a three-member panel of the US Court of Appeals, Second Circuit in a decision issued in December 2022.
But earlier this year, the Second Circuit reversed course, announcing that the the full Court of Appeal had weighed in and decided that case will be re-heard and a new ruling issued, this time by all 13 judges on the Second Circuit.
Lia Thomas was the real deal but the rest won’t ever move the needle. The only one that triggered a lawsuit got nowhere in a court in Connecticut.
This thread was initiated by a stupid publicity stunt and the guy that did it is far, far worse than any legitimate transgender athlete.
What does that even mean? You know that 43 year old Laurel Hubbard took an Olympic spot from a young 20 year old lifter, right? There are consequences.
The women who lose out on medals, prize money, scholarships, opportunities, making a team, standing on a podium matter.
Sure, we should be outraged over something that happened in a country in a different hemisphere.
I've been saying for years, all it takes is someone to bite the bullet and do something like this. Men who don't make the NBA should identify as female and go play in the WNBA. The 500th best NCAA male player would be #1 in the WNBA. Then they'd have to block biological males from competing.
It'll happen eventually. Dudes sitting around after the NCAA tournament, looking at a bleak employment environment will say, "screw it, I'm saying I'm female to make $500k a year in the WNBA." Pretty good deal if you ask me. If they don't block you, you make $500k a year and more over time when you score 50 points a game.
$500k a year is twice the supermax in WNBA, which a player cannot get until her fifth season. In the meantime, this hypotehtical player will get ZERO in sponsor endorsement.
What does that even mean? You know that 43 year old Laurel Hubbard took an Olympic spot from a young 20 year old lifter, right? There are consequences.
The women who lose out on medals, prize money, scholarships, opportunities, making a team, standing on a podium matter.
Sure, we should be outraged over something that happened in a country in a different hemisphere.
Wut? So the only people who have legitimate reason to be outraged over what happens in other countries and hemispheres are those who live there?
Since the 2020/21 Olympics were held in Japan, you really think it's ridiculous for anyone not in Asia to object to the fact at least three males we know of - Hubbard of New Zealand, Stephanie Barrett of Canada and Chelsea Wolfe of the USA - were allowed to take spots away from female athletes in their home countries/regions so the males could go to the Tokyo Games as ersatz women?
This post was edited 55 seconds after it was posted.
What does that even mean? You know that 43 year old Laurel Hubbard took an Olympic spot from a young 20 year old lifter, right? There are consequences.
The women who lose out on medals, prize money, scholarships, opportunities, making a team, standing on a podium matter.
Sure, we should be outraged over something that happened in a country in a different hemisphere.
Happening in another hemisphere is a strange reason to not care, especially when talking about Olympic events
Liberalism is the virus. And really, the institution (especially the left) wants to weaken and distract society by doing things such as this, creating controversy.
You're correct, but note that the problem is not liberalism as in "them dern libruls" but rather classical liberalism - i.e. prioritization of free ideological and economic markets over strict social and economic control. Atomization of identity and the proliferation of intersectional identity niches is a direct and unavoidable result of free speech and free market capitalism. Capitalism encourages the proliferation of identities because each identity niche creates a new market where goods can have value to their purchasers not only on the basis of their utility but also on the basis of their perceived alignment with the purchaser's particular identity niche. This situation is very favorable for producers because it allows them to tailor individual products to niches by clever marketing. Producers who follow this marketing method make more money and can afford even larger marketing budgets that allow them to create even more niche markets. The cycle will continue to atomize social groups until the point where the cost of identity atomization outweighs the benefits of having products manufacutred for that identity. We are not there yet.
Very based comment. Someone read Why Liberalism Failed I See
The "slippery-slope" is a well known logical fallacy. You have just demonstrated it. One thing does not necessarily or inevitably lead to another unless there is an irrefutable causal connection. Mere association is not enough to prove that. The argument above presumes such a causal connection but does not show it.
Says the person who has proven to be the greatest illiterate troll on this site.
It appears your pacifier has fallen out of your mouth.
I'm a liberal, NEVER have and don't believe I ever will vote for a republican, but I believe I'm far from alone as a liberal in saying that biological males competing in women's sports is utterly insane. Even if you've made the "transition"... just ridiculous. You still have the bone structure and musculature of a male. I think a lot of liberals are scared of speaking out on this for fear of being labeled "anti-trans."
The problem is what started as a sports-only criticism of inclusion of trans athletes morphs into a more general opposition to transgender people.
If they successfully exclude trans athletes from sports, they will ban them from other places and take away their rights to healthcare. If they can take healthcare and bodily autonomy from trans people, they will take it from other people, such as women wanting abortions.
Is it really so terrible to recognize someone as a trans woman and not as a biological woman? The absolute truth of the matter is that said person is a biological man who believes themself to be a woman. It's not bigoted, transphobic, hateful, etc. to recognize both of those things.
The solutions are also simpler than we're being led to believe. Bathrooms are easy- Go into whatever bathroom you look like or face social stigmatization. That rule applies to any identity. Sports, healthcare- treat the biology of the person without regard for their identity. A black man bleaching his skin does not reduce his risk of sickle-cell anemia. Gender-affirming care-subject to the same requirements as any other health intervention, harm reduction, peer reviewed studies of efficacy. Pronouns-call somebody what they look like, if they correct you do your best to call them what they ask. If you're consistently being 'mis-gendered' then you may want to reflect on why that is.
Liberalism is the virus. And really, the institution (especially the left) wants to weaken and distract society by doing things such as this, creating controversy. The left also wants to feminise men because strong, intelligent/independent thinking men are a threat to the institution. The institution desires weak, reliant, obedient people to thrive.
Yes, and every single conservative voter attacked the capitol on Jan 6th right? I am liberal as the next guy and can tell you I dont know a single person who is in favor of transgender athletes competing in protected (women's ) division. The majority of leaders are not in favor of it either. It's a tiny minority. We are seeing this issue get fixed but the pace is too slow. Now if you left your basement form time to time you would know all this.
It's the same vocal minority type issue that pops up from time to time. In this case, the pro-trans extreme has shifted the window incredibly effectively. To question anything about transgender publicly is immediately met with bigot/transphobe/?racist?/misogony/cancelling. Look at JK Rowling. The most troubling of all is the 'no debate' standpoint. That is not the view of someone who is confident of their position.
They've shifted the Overton Window so far that anybody in the public eye needs to fall in line or risk being ostracized from their entire livelihood, only further reinforcing the shifting window.
Yes, and every single conservative voter attacked the capitol on Jan 6th right? I am liberal as the next guy and can tell you I dont know a single person who is in favor of transgender athletes competing in protected (women's ) division. The majority of leaders are not in favor of it either. It's a tiny minority. We are seeing this issue get fixed but the pace is too slow. Now if you left your basement form time to time you would know all this.
It's the same vocal minority type issue that pops up from time to time. In this case, the pro-trans extreme has shifted the window incredibly effectively. To question anything about transgender publicly is immediately met with bigot/transphobe/?racist?/misogony/cancelling. Look at JK Rowling. The most troubling of all is the 'no debate' standpoint. That is not the view of someone who is confident of their position.
They've shifted the Overton Window so far that anybody in the public eye needs to fall in line or risk being ostracized from their entire livelihood, only further reinforcing the shifting window.
People can say that transgender athletes have an unfair advantage against women all day long. Who do you believe has been ostracized for doing do? Rowling’s comments had nothing to do with sports.
Sure, we should be outraged over something that happened in a country in a different hemisphere.
Happening in another hemisphere is a strange reason to not care, especially when talking about Olympic events
OK, but many people talk about transgender athletes dominating women’s sports, but there’s zero indication that will ever happen. People keep referring to the same half dozen incidents as a big deal but it’s going to take tens of thousands of transgender athletes to destroy women’s sports.
This post was edited 6 minutes after it was posted.
This is going to start happening more and more often, and in other sports. Imagine some wannabe NBA guy going to dominate the WNBA. It might just be time to scrap divisions and have all athletes compete together, regardless of gender or sex or whatever. That is where it is headed without some strict guidelines.
If there is large amounts of money involved, every mediocre male athlete SHOULD identify as female and take that money.
That’s good news. This will be far more meaningful than a guy taking a dump on his sport to get his 15 minutes of fame.
I think it's more like 15 minutes of helping women by proving the ridiculousness of allowing men who say they're women compete against women
That’s your take. Mine is that he’s no better than the fake transgender athlete people have been warning against. He lied to be in a position to compete against women, set records and received undeserved attention.
It's the same vocal minority type issue that pops up from time to time. In this case, the pro-trans extreme has shifted the window incredibly effectively. To question anything about transgender publicly is immediately met with bigot/transphobe/?racist?/misogony/cancelling. Look at JK Rowling. The most troubling of all is the 'no debate' standpoint. That is not the view of someone who is confident of their position.
They've shifted the Overton Window so far that anybody in the public eye needs to fall in line or risk being ostracized from their entire livelihood, only further reinforcing the shifting window.
People can say that transgender athletes have an unfair advantage against women all day long. Who do you believe has been ostracized for doing do? Rowling’s comments had nothing to do with sports.
More inaccurate claims. JK Rowling's comments on sex, gender identity and the blatant misogyny, male supremacy and male dominance being promulgated and excused in the name of "trans rights" definitely show she is in favor of female-only sports.
Rowling has also made public comments directly applauding those who are playing leadership roles in pushing back against the incursion of males into women's and girls' sports and locker rooms:
Love to you and all the female athletes standing up, Sharron. You're an inspiration. https://t.co/jRNUAwfsdt
More inaccurate claims. JK Rowling's comments on sex, gender identity and the blatant misogyny, male supremacy and male dominance being promulgated and excused in the name of "trans rights" definitely show she is in favor of female-only sports.
Rowling has also made public comments directly applauding those who are playing leadership roles in pushing back against the incursion of males into women's and girls' sports and locker rooms:
This was the kickoff for the skirmish with Rowling:
“On June 6, 2020, Rowling retweeted an op-ed piece that discussed “people who menstruate,” apparently taking issue with the fact that the story did not use the word women. “‘People who menstruate.’ I’m sure there used to be a word for those people. Someone help me out. Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?” she wrote.”
After that, there were a few hundred “Some of my closest friends are transgender” type tweets.
Rowling is not an expert on transgender issues and no one asked her for her opinion. She sells a product and has a huge platform so it seems kind of dumb to wade into a controversy. If she couldn’t stand the heat she should she should have stayed out of the kitchen.