UPenn swimmer comes out as trans / switches to women's team after competing on men's team for 3 years and is dominating NCAA

dumbassMF wrote:

Lenny Leonard wrote:

I’m just speaking common sense. No one is losing their right to compete. No one is truly negatively affected in that regard. Will a woman somewhere finish one spot worse in a race? Probably.

What specifically do you have a problem with that I have said?

The next step would be to have one competition and don't worry, everyone gets to compete, they just finish a bunch of places back. Sounds unbelievably stupid.

Women should be able to train towards historical performance levels and evolve the records, not have some dude come in and overturn everything.

You’re arguing against something I never said. I guess that means you have no other argument against what I actually said?

We have two classes: men’s and women’s.

There is no need to eliminate one.

Just have women like Thomas compete against other women.

You have to do some wild mental gymnastics to tell me you think Thomas, a woman, should compete against men.

dumbassMF wrote:

RossiCheated wrote:

It's not that simple. This issue doesn't divide us into the normal camps.

As I, and many others, have said in these threads over the years, I am a Democrat and on most social issues I lean left.

On this issue, I think that allowing trans women to compete against females is absurd, offensive, and we need the courts to put a stop to it. I am hoping a case goes to the Supreme Court and that, at least in the educational environment under Title IX law, they put a stop to this.

Surveys show that somewhere between 60 and 70 percent of Americans agree, which means that a lot of Democrats feel the same way; this has to stop.

Agreed, but this gets put on the democrats and hurts them.

I've often seen posts like yours on LR but the rules regarding transgender athletes have been in place for a few years now and it's not an issue on the left. Why would there be a big push for transgender athletes to be allowed to compete when they already are? It's a big issue on the right because it fires up the base.

Democrats have nothing to do with the current rules. The U.S. was un-woke during the 70s, but Richards won her case anyway. It's probably a strategy on the right to blame Democrats but it's a false accusation.

What would be the case that goes to the Supreme Court? A lawsuit against the NC.A.A. based on one athlete would never gain traction. What would be the damages besides getting pushed back a place in races?

Lenny Leonard wrote:

dumbassMF wrote:

The next step would be to have one competition and don't worry, everyone gets to compete, they just finish a bunch of places back. Sounds unbelievably stupid.

Women should be able to train towards historical performance levels and evolve the records, not have some dude come in and overturn everything.

You’re arguing against something I never said. I guess that means you have no other argument against what I actually said?

We have two classes: men’s and women’s.

There is no need to eliminate one.

Just have women like Thomas compete against other women.

You have to do some wild mental gymnastics to tell me you think Thomas, a woman, should compete against men.

I need wild gymnastics?!

"Thomas, a woman"... sure pal. This guy deciding to play dress-up changes nothing.

Kind of a maven wrote:

flyingfrog wrote:

Please educate me, has the trans dude turned in his equipment? Or is he still hanging?

I don't know. And I still don't know whether Bruce Jenner (I refuse to call HIM "Caitlyn") "dropped his baton." Just the thought is horrible enough.

Why? Seriously, why do you refuse to use Caitlyn? Isn't it just a matter of courtesy? Do you continue to refer to women using their married name if they get a divorce? Nah, you just say it's up to them and get on with your own life.

I agree that sports that are not signed to Wada are not bound by Wada regulations.A big well done for working that out.I assumed it was this vast majority of sports we are talking about. Thus not beer leagues except when they play sports that are Wada sports.

But you are still wrong by saying low level Wada sports are not covered by Wada regulations.They are both applicable and enforced and if you had read my post correctly enforced fully at all levels as the Human Right Act says.

It may be of benefit to look at the sanctioned lists and you will note a full range of lower non professional bans.

However the key point, I think, is that Trans as lower level sport is not such an issue( problem) . A lot of merit in this point but the recent IOC paper makes reference to safety which would be a factor of variation sport by sport.

I would not like to be the person who decided , which sport and which level.

And I can see some nice court cases for injury from contact sports with Trans.

As LR continues to evolve into a normie web site, discussions on this subject will be banned.

Lenny Leonard wrote:

dumbassMF wrote:

The next step would be to have one competition and don't worry, everyone gets to compete, they just finish a bunch of places back. Sounds unbelievably stupid.

Women should be able to train towards historical performance levels and evolve the records, not have some dude come in and overturn everything.

You’re arguing against something I never said. I guess that means you have no other argument against what I actually said?

We have two classes: men’s and women’s.

There is no need to eliminate one.

Just have women like Thomas compete against other women.

You have to do some wild mental gymnastics to tell me you think Thomas, a woman, should compete against men.

Don't try and gaslight people dude. He is a biological man. He has no business competing in women's sports. This is why people say the left is in a cult, because they believe absolute nonsense that conflicts with reality. Trust the science.

cecevans wrote:

Lenny Leonard wrote:

You’re arguing against something I never said. I guess that means you have no other argument against what I actually said?

We have two classes: men’s and women’s.

There is no need to eliminate one.

Just have women like Thomas compete against other women.

You have to do some wild mental gymnastics to tell me you think Thomas, a woman, should compete against men.

Don't try and gaslight people dude. He is a biological man. He has no business competing in women's sports. This is why people say the left is in a cult, because they believe absolute nonsense that conflicts with reality. Trust the science.

Again, it's not an issue on the left. There many Republican politicians pushing for a ban but I don't see Democrat ones pushing for the opposite. It's a done deal.

cecevans wrote:

Lenny Leonard wrote:

You’re arguing against something I never said. I guess that means you have no other argument against what I actually said?

We have two classes: men’s and women’s.

There is no need to eliminate one.

Just have women like Thomas compete against other women.

You have to do some wild mental gymnastics to tell me you think Thomas, a woman, should compete against men.

Don't try and gaslight people dude. He is a biological man. He has no business competing in women's sports. This is why people say the left is in a cult, because they believe absolute nonsense that conflicts with reality. Trust the science.

Exactly. People will walk on egg shells at the PC workplace and then vote for Trump to hopefully make it all go away.

Fkn disgusting 🤮

These article will provide a concise answer, and explain why the Department of Education has already determined that this is a Title IX violation.

As for the second part, you are answering your own question. Being pushed back one place, being denied a title, being denied an honor (like All-Conference or All-American) or losing out on points toward a team title are sufficient damages to bring a case.

The questions before the court would be pretty simple; where Title IX refers to "sex" is it talking about opportunity based on biological sex or gender identity, and is there an advantage for biological males to participate with biological females such that it would cause them to suffer?

Keep in mind, the answer to those questions isn't up to us to answer. It would be in the hands of a court with a 6-3 conservative majority.

It looks as if the decision you linked to was reversed earlier this year?

We'll have to disagree on the second point. There will have to be a wave of transgender athletes taking scholarships to result in a case going to the Supreme Court. A case driven by one plaintiff that graduated years before is not going to do it. All of the parties in the Connecticut lawsuit had graduated and moved on which is why the judge kicked the can down the road

BIDEN'S "INFRASTRUCTURE" BILL FURTHER ALLOWS THIS STARTING 2023. IT HAS PERCEIVED GENDER IDENTITY ON IT.

Lenny Leonard wrote:

dumbassMF wrote:

The next step would be to have one competition and don't worry, everyone gets to compete, they just finish a bunch of places back. Sounds unbelievably stupid.

Women should be able to train towards historical performance levels and evolve the records, not have some dude come in and overturn everything.

You’re arguing against something I never said. I guess that means you have no other argument against what I actually said?

We have two classes: men’s and women’s.

There is no need to eliminate one.

Just have women like Thomas compete against other women.

You have to do some wild mental gymnastics to tell me you think Thomas, a woman, should compete against men.

the easiest way for me to understand the "logic" of your post is that you are another version of david45 jerking it to replies you get from talking total nonsense.

The plaintiffs in the Title IX lawsuit against Michigan (MHSAA) had also graduated and even accepted college scholarships but the court allowed the case to proceed and the young women won. Graduation won't stop a suit if the court believes that others will be similarly harmed in the present and future.

As for the decision being reversed; there is no clear indication yet from the Supreme Court. I fully expect different decisions and reversals from the varied circuit courts, which is exactly why the Supreme Court would be called upon to hear a case and make a final determination for the country as it involves a federal law.

I couldn't find anything about a lawsuit about transger athletes in Michigan. If she graduated and went on to college on a scholarship, what did she "win"?

A bill in Michigan to ban transgender athletes failed. It seems transgender female athletes are approved/disproved on a case by case basis.

I really don't see a case applicable to .3% of the population ever making it to the Supreme Court. Someone like the Penn swimmer showing up every 5 years or so, is not a threat to women's sports.

I’m not referring to a transgender case in Michigan. I was referring to a Title IX case (regarding which season girls sports were played in) to make the point that the plaintiffs graduating does nothing to stop their lawsuit if the question at hand will effect other athletes in the present or future.

liar soorer wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

It's clear you haven't. They say they are women - that is their gender - so why should they be restricted from playing women's sport, unless you are saying biology is the critical factor after all.

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.