Culture

[drayer54]

You misread, my point is that it's not happening to 99.9999% of people who compete in sports on every level. I

My point is that it should be 100% and never on the scale of the Olympics.

 

[TorontoGold]

What would you consider an acceptable level for women athletes to be cheated out of an award, a scholarship, or a championship? 99.9999% of people didn't get murdered today or raped. That doesn't mean we should be OK with the .0001% who were. Regardless of how small the numbers, there are things we simply don't accept and be OK with. And we all know how this works: "Oh, it's only 1 in a million, so no big deal!" then next year it's "Oh, it's only 1 in 100,000, so no big deal!" and eventually we get to, "Well, it's common now and it's going on for years and you didn't have a problem with it before, so why are you just now complaining?" We've seen this before. Enough.

If you're one of those women who trained for years (or their parents) and then got robbed by a guy claiming to be a woman, I bet you wouldn't think it was no big deal and an insignificant number. There is no acceptable number, just as there's no acceptable number for a lot of things. A man competing as a woman, even if he's taking hormones or hormone blockers or has had his junk cut off, has a significant advantage over genuine female athletes, and it's a mockery of fair competition and a great disservice to women.

Well if the slippery slope fallacy was correct in this instance we would have seen an increase in transgender athletes dominating women's athletics since Caster Semenya. Instead there were common sense reforms made, and whether they went far enough is something that can be debated. I would rather leave it up to science to determine the levels of T that statistically impact a persons chances of developing an unfair advantage ie. if someone transitions 10 years before than that's ok, and you can't just throw a skirt on and compete in boxing. This should all be science based.

The real elephant in the room is that a lot people just see transgender people as these attention seeking weirdo's that they actually wanted to become transgender to compete in a sport. That's the first hurdle for a lot of people. Using logic and humanity will solve a lot issues people have with someone being transgender, nobody is cutting their dick off to compete in the women's pole vaulting lmao. I really want to believe that people aren't transphobic because they're just that insecure with themselves.

 

[drayer54]

Well if the slippery slope fallacy was correct in this instance we would have seen an increase in transgender athletes dominating women's athletics since Caster Semenya. Instead there were common sense reforms made, and whether they went far enough is something that can be debated. I would rather leave it up to science to determine the levels of T that statistically impact a persons chances of developing an unfair advantage ie. if someone transitions 10 years before than that's ok, and you can't just throw a skirt on and compete in boxing. This should all be science based.

The real elephant in the room is that a lot people just see transgender people as these attention seeking weirdo's that they actually wanted to become transgender to compete in a sport. That's the first hurdle for a lot of people. Using logic and humanity will solve a lot issues people have with someone being transgender, nobody is cutting their dick off to compete in the women's pole vaulting lmao. I really want to believe that people aren't transphobic because they're just that insecure with themselves.

Don’t recall saying they converted to win a medal. Do recall saying it’s not appropriate or fair athletic competition.
Common sense is recognizing that this is not a
level playing field.

 

[Blazers46]

Well if the slippery slope fallacy was correct in this instance we would have seen an increase in transgender athletes dominating women's athletics since Caster Semenya. Instead there were common sense reforms made, and whether they went far enough is something that can be debated. I would rather leave it up to science to determine the levels of T that statistically impact a persons chances of developing an unfair advantage ie. if someone transitions 10 years before than that's ok, and you can't just throw a skirt on and compete in boxing. This should all be science based.

The real elephant in the room is that a lot people just see transgender people as these attention seeking weirdo's that they actually wanted to become transgender to compete in a sport. That's the first hurdle for a lot of people. Using logic and humanity will solve a lot issues people have with someone being transgender, nobody is cutting their dick off to compete in the women's pole vaulting lmao. I really want to believe that people aren't transphobic because they're just that insecure with themselves.

I think the crux of the issue or the root of the issue is conservatives (like me) are trying to raise ladies and gentleman the way they/we see a lady and a gentleman ought to be raised. We understand nature v nurture. The more we normalize these deviant lifestyles and coddle these mental health issues the more "normal" it will become in society and harder for parents to combat the behavior.

Its easy to be indifferent about it if you have no direct dog in the fight. People tend to think if it does not directly affect you then you should not have an opinion. I think one person told me once, just because others are "winning" and getting certain rights does not mean you are "losing". I 100% disagree. We see it as a loss for society.

Its not insecurity or tranphobia or any other phobia to want better for the society we are in and the society we hope to raise our kids in. Someone will reply and fight me on the argument if its good or bad for society. You wont convince me its a good thing so dont try. I am just responding the statement/claim that a lot of people just see them as weird attention seekers. A lot of people just see trans people and maybe anyone that falls into the LGBTQ community as a net negative to society rather than a net positive.

 

[TorontoGold]

I think the crux of the issue or the root of the issue is conservatives (like me) are trying to raise ladies and gentleman the way they/we see a lady and a gentleman ought to be raised. We understand nature v nurture. The more we normalize these deviant lifestyles and coddle these mental health issues the more "normal" it will become in society and harder for parents to combat the behavior.

Its easy to be indifferent about it if you have no direct dog in the fight. People tend to think if it does not directly affect you then you should not have an opinion. I think one person told me once, just because others are "winning" and getting certain rights does not mean you are "losing". I 100% disagree. We see it as a loss for society.

Its not insecurity or tranphobia or any other phobia to want better for the society we are in and the society we hope to raise our kids in. Someone will reply and fight me on the argument if its good or bad for society. You wont convince me its a good thing so dont try. I am just responding the statement/claim that a lot of people just see them as weird attention seekers. A lot of people just see trans people and maybe anyone that falls into the LGBTQ community as a net negative to society rather than a net positive.

Well, kudos for coming out and saying what so many are unwillingly/cowardly to say. The last statement is a real howler, not sure who it was, but someone was really really hurt that there is a perception that people look at conservatives as overweight redneck hillbillies. Kinda jokes that in 2021 someone can say or rationalize that a member of the LGBTQ community is a net negative.

 

[calvegas04]

I'm guessing she will be the favorite to win gold.

New Zealand weightlifter to become first transgender athlete at Olympic Games


https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/21/australia/laurel-hubbard-olympics-transgender-intl-hnk-spt/index.html

Should be something in the Paralympics for this kind of stuff

 

[Wild Bill]

Well, kudos for coming out and saying what so many are unwillingly/cowardly to say. The last statement is a real howler, not sure who it was, but someone was really really hurt that there is a perception that people look at conservatives as overweight redneck hillbillies. Kinda jokes that in 2021 someone can say or rationalize that a member of the LGBTQ community is a net negative.

Why do you think people are unwilling or too cowardly to give their honest opinion

 

[Bishop2b5]

Well if the slippery slope fallacy was correct in this instance we would have seen an increase in transgender athletes dominating women's athletics since Caster Semenya. Instead there were common sense reforms made, and whether they went far enough is something that can be debated. I would rather leave it up to science to determine the levels of T that statistically impact a persons chances of developing an unfair advantage ie. if someone transitions 10 years before than that's ok, and you can't just throw a skirt on and compete in boxing. This should all be science based.

The real elephant in the room is that a lot people just see transgender people as these attention seeking weirdo's that they actually wanted to become transgender to compete in a sport. That's the first hurdle for a lot of people. Using logic and humanity will solve a lot issues people have with someone being transgender, nobody is cutting their dick off to compete in the women's pole vaulting lmao. I really want to believe that people aren't transphobic because they're just that insecure with themselves.

1. There's so much more to this than testosterone levels. Yes, lower testosterone levels lowers muscle mass and strength, but has no real effect on the underlying framework. A man can have surgery and take hormones and such, but he still has broad shoulders, larger and stronger bones, hips and a pelvic girdle designed for power & speed instead of birthing, and etc. Take the turbo off a race car and put regular fuel in it, and it may greatly reduce its performance, but it still has a racing suspension, high performance trannie (no pun intended) and a large displacement engine. You haven't turned it into a Prius or something a Prius can compete with.

2. I hope you don't really believe your "real elephant in the room" comment. This has nothing to do with transphobia or hatred of trans people or our insecurities, nor do any of us believe anyone would cut their dick off just to get a scholly to play women's BB or go to the Olympics. This is 100% about the fact that a man, surgery and hormones or not, has a huge competitive advantage over a genuine woman in most athletic endeavors. I don't want a high school kid entering my 5th grader's science fair this fall. I don't want an Olympic runner entering the Paralympics. I don't want men competing as women and taking away opportunities and chances to win from them. It's contrary to all our concepts of fair competition.

 

[Irish#1]

You misread, my point is that it's not happening to 99.9999% of people who compete in sports on every level. I

What percentage should it be before it's not right? No, I knew exactly what you are saying. You're trying to sell this on the fact that transgenders competing as women is very small percentage. This is very true. To be fair though, you have to include the other women competitors into the equation which is the basis of my point. It's not fair to them. They are at a distinct disadvantage. Which is more unfair, penalizing all of the women competitors or one transgender?

The IOC should create a transgender class. Seems this is probably the most equitable solution.

 

[Irish#1]

Well if the slippery slope fallacy was correct in this instance we would have seen an increase in transgender athletes dominating women's athletics since Caster Semenya. Instead there were common sense reforms made, and whether they went far enough is something that can be debated. I would rather leave it up to science to determine the levels of T that statistically impact a persons chances of developing an unfair advantage ie. if someone transitions 10 years before than that's ok, and you can't just throw a skirt on and compete in boxing. This should all be science based.

The real elephant in the room is that a lot people just see transgender people as these attention seeking weirdo's that they actually wanted to become transgender to compete in a sport. That's the first hurdle for a lot of people. Using logic and humanity will solve a lot issues people have with someone being transgender, nobody is cutting their dick off to compete in the women's pole vaulting lmao. I really want to believe that people aren't transphobic because they're just that insecure with themselves.

Here we go. Liberals love to turn everything into a hate or phobia debate to deflect. I don't care what a person does to their body or how they want to be identified. I don't lose any sleep over Pride week or change the channel when a commercial comes on that is about LGBT. This conversation is strictly about level playing fields and what is fair. Why did you have to go there?

BTW, about 15 years(?) ago, I'm pretty sure there was a male athlete that did have his junk cut off just so he could compete in the women's category. I'm thinking it was in either tennis or T&F.

 

[drayer54]

Here we go. Liberals love to turn everything into a hate or phobia debate to deflect. I don't care what a person does to their body or how they want to be identified. I don't lose any sleep over Pride week or change the channel when a commercial comes on that is about LGBT. This conversation is strictly about level playing fields and what is fair. Why did you have to go there?

BTW, about 15 years(?) ago, I'm pretty sure there was a male athlete that did have his junk cut off just so he could compete in the women's category. I'm thinking it was in either tennis or T&F.

It's what they do. Emotions over logic. Ohh, you don't support [blatantly liberal policy or way out of the mainstream life choice] then you must be a [......] ist.

The tolerance is really funny on lifestyle choices when you get disqualified for not conforming to the required views.
[TWEET]https://twitter.com/GetOutspokenUSA/status/1407439915961438208?s=20[/TWEET]

 

[TorontoGold]

Here we go. Liberals love to turn everything into a hate or phobia debate to deflect. I don't care what a person does to their body or how they want to be identified. I don't lose any sleep over Pride week or change the channel when a commercial comes on that is about LGBT. This conversation is strictly about level playing fields and what is fair. Why did you have to go there?

BTW, about 15 years(?) ago, I'm pretty sure there was a male athlete that did have his junk cut off just so he could compete in the women's category. I'm thinking it was in either tennis or T&F.

I know you're able to see Blazers post where he said " A lot of people just see trans people and maybe anyone that falls into the LGBTQ community as a net negative to society rather than a net positive." He agrees with my comment. Do you disagree with him? Curious as to why you didn't challenge him on going there. There's more nuanced ways of saying what he said without outright saying it like he did, referring to them as "men" "dudes without a dick" is pretty insensitive.

Source?

I've constantly stated I agree that the premise of a trans person competing against naturally born women as something that needs better defining and I encouraged people to provide science to back their arguments. The responses? ND - "There's other things than T levels" Bishop "Emotionally based arguments that 1 is too many" Drayer "Same as Bishop, with much less eloquence"

So, I ask you, without emotion, is there scientific specifications that you would like to see implemented to prevent an uneven playing field?

 

[Irish#1]

I know you're able to see Blazers post where he said " A lot of people just see trans people and maybe anyone that falls into the LGBTQ community as a net negative to society rather than a net positive." He agrees with my comment. Do you disagree with him? Curious as to why you didn't challenge him on going there. There's more nuanced ways of saying what he said without outright saying it like he did, referring to them as "men" "dudes without a dick" is pretty insensitive.

Source?

I've constantly stated I agree that the premise of a trans person competing against naturally born women as something that needs better defining and I encouraged people to provide science to back their arguments. The responses? ND - "There's other things than T levels" Bishop "Emotionally based arguments that 1 is too many" Drayer "Same as Bishop, with much less eloquence"

So, I ask you, without emotion, is there scientific specifications that you would like to see implemented to prevent an uneven playing field?

No need to keep trying to sell this as bigotry or phobia against the transgender. I don't consider anyone who aligns with any part of LGBTQ as a negative against society. They're a human being just like me or you. That's not what this discussion is about, yet you keep deflecting.

Sorry, no source. It was a long time ago and I've slept since then. Could be hard to find at this point, but if I'm remembering, the athlete was in HS. Disregard if you wish.

As I suggested in a previous post, maybe creating a third category for the transgender athletes is the best way to handle this.

You didn't answer why you felt a need to try and turn the conversation into people hating anyone that is LGBTQ?

You also ignored my question, "Which is more unfair, penalizing all of the women competitors or one transgender"?

 

[Blazers46]

Well, kudos for coming out and saying what so many are unwillingly/cowardly to say. The last statement is a real howler, not sure who it was, but someone was really really hurt that there is a perception that people look at conservatives as overweight redneck hillbillies. Kinda jokes that in 2021 someone can say or rationalize that a member of the LGBTQ community is a net negative.

You are either naive or pretending to be naive if you really think people are just whatever-phobic and think they are just attention seeking weirdos and that being the sole reason for their opinion on the LGBTQ community and policies.

 

[Blazers46]

I know you're able to see Blazers post where he said " A lot of people just see trans people and maybe anyone that falls into the LGBTQ community as a net negative to society rather than a net positive." He agrees with my comment. Do you disagree with him? Curious as to why you didn't challenge him on going there. There's more nuanced ways of saying what he said without outright saying it like he did, referring to them as "men" "dudes without a dick" is pretty insensitive.

Source?

I've constantly stated I agree that the premise of a trans person competing against naturally born women as something that needs better defining and I encouraged people to provide science to back their arguments. The responses? ND - "There's other things than T levels" Bishop "Emotionally based arguments that 1 is too many" Drayer "Same as Bishop, with much less eloquence"

So, I ask you, without emotion, is there scientific specifications that you would like to see implemented to prevent an uneven playing field?

You didn't even challenge that thought. You just cited some rando you could not remember with no original thought or opinion.

 

[ulukinatme]

Besides the sprinter from South Africa (not sure her country, but she was the reason behind the T rules), and this weightlifter how many are there really?

Of course it's not happening? Why would it happen? What is this proving? lmao, I've already stated I can get behind a discussion on T level changes in the Olympics but you're not really making a point? Can you state your point?

How many do there need to be, are a few not enough? What if it was your daughter competing against biological males? What if she had the record in her age bracket in all of Canada only to have a male beat her record? That's not fair to her, and it can affect college opportunities as well.

I took this from Newsweek:

Consider Felix, a contender for the title of fastest female sprinter in the world, who holds more Olympic medals than even Usain Bolt. Her lifetime best for the 400-meter is 49.26 seconds. Based on 2018 data, nearly 300 high school boys in the U.S. alone could beat it.

Take the lesson learned by the Williams sisters, who once claimed they could beat any male tennis player ranked outside of the top 200. In 1998, a male tennis player ranked 203rd took them up on the challenge. He beat both Williams sisters decisively, 6-1 over Serena and 6-2 over Venus. "I didn't know it would be that difficult," said Serena afterwards. "I played shots that would have been winners on the women's circuit, and he got to them very easily."

Managing Testosterone levels isn't going to magically even the playing field. There's too wide a gap that hormones alone don't account for.

 

[TDHeysus]

I'm all for transgenders in sports - a certain political narrative will get utterly destroyed once it gets played out. Megan Rapinoe certainly wont like the results when HS 'girls' displace professional women.

....nearly 300 high schools boys better than the fastest sprinter, most decorated female sprinter in the world? Just wait till one of these indoctrinated kids realize the 'history' they can make being a world record holder while being in high school.

 

[zelezo vlk]

A bit revealing: https://www.thelampmagazine.com/2021...e-tilney-trap/

Of all the male love interests in Jane Austen, Henry Tilney in Northanger Abbey has always seemed to me easily the least impressive. Apart from his pompous habit of giving unsolicited advice and omnidirectional Sydney Smith-style pseudo-witticisms, there is the monologue for which he is probably best known:

Consult your own understanding, your own sense of the probable, your own observation of what is passing around you. Does our education prepare us for such atrocities? Do our laws connive at them? Could they be perpetrated without being known, in a country like this, where social and literary intercourse is on such a footing, where every man is surrounded by a neighbourhood of voluntary spies, and where roads and newspapers lay everything open?​

The joke, lost on most of Austen’s readers today but, one imagines, obvious to her contemporaries (who had read Clarissa) is that forced confinements and domestic murders did take place even in perfectly respectable country houses. Henry’s Whiggish moralism is even more tedious than his frequent helpful hints.

I thought of Henry when I read reports about Britney Spears’s attempts to be released from the terms of the conservatorship in which she was placed at the end of the Bush administration. In testimony given earlier this week, Britney—referring to her by her surname strikes me as absurd somehow—claimed that among other things she is being made to work and to visit psychiatrists against her will (“I don’t owe them to go see a man I don’t know and share him [sic] my problems. I don’t even believe in therapy. I always think you take it to God”). It also appears that she is being forcibly sterilized:

I would like to progressively move forward and I want to have the real deal, I want to be able to get married and have a baby. I was told right now in the conservatorship, I’m not able to get married or have a baby, I have an I.U.D. inside of myself right now so I don’t get pregnant. I wanted to take the I.U.D. out so I could start trying to have another baby. But this so-called team won’t let me go to the doctor to take it out because they don’t want me to have children—any more children. So basically, this conservatorship is doing me way more harm than good.
​

I deserve to have a life. I’ve worked my whole life. I deserve to have a two to three-year break and just, you know, do what I want to do. But I do feel like there is a crutch here. And I feel open and I’m okay to talk to you today about it. But I wish I could stay with you on the phone forever, because when I get off the phone with you, all of a sudden all I hear all these nos—no, no, no. And then all of a sudden I get I feel ganged up on and I feel bullied and I feel left out and alone. And I’m tired of feeling alone. I deserve to have the same rights as anybody does, by having a child, a family, any of those things, and more so.​

After years of condescending jokes about #FreeBritney, who would have guessed that there was something to her years of semi-public complaints? This case is a perfect illustration of what I have occasionally referred to as the “Tilney trap.” For some reason we find it difficult to imagine that in a country which sanctions the murder of hundreds of thousands of infants each year women could be legally forced to work and coerced into using contraception. This is, in fact, exactly what life is like for millions of women on Medicaid, who are routinely misled about unnecessary quasi-medical interventions when they give birth by public health authorities that would prefer to see them infertile and have increasingly invasive contraceptive devices foisted upon them as a matter of course. Surely nothing of the kind might take place here in our hospitals (or in our immigrant detention facilities), we tell ourselves; for-profit nursing homes cannot possibly be dens of misery and abuse; no American school would lock a child with special needs in a de-facto torture chamber in order to undergo what bureaucrats refer to as “seclusion/restraint”; no responsible physician would give a teenaged girl a double mastectomy with or without consulting her parents on the advice of a quack blogger.

In the United States, one of the most famous women in the world says that she is being robbed of her considerable earnings from concerts in which she would prefer not to appear (“In California, the only similar thing to this is called sex trafficking,” as she put it in her testimony). If this sort of thing can happen to the singer of “Oops, I Did It Again,” it can happen to anyone. And it does.

Britney herself put it best: We’re not that innocent.

 

[Bishop2b5]

For a laugh from The Babylon Bee...

Watch the inspiring story of one motorcyclist who identifies as a bicyclist -- and went on to shatter every cycling record.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipvesqJP1e4

 

[Irish#1]

For a laugh from The Babylon Bee...

Watch the inspiring story of one motorcyclist who identifies as a bicyclist -- and went on to shatter every cycling record.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipvesqJP1e4

Funny

 

[Blazers46]

https://mustreadalaska.com/san-francisco-gay-mens-chorus-sings-were-coming-for-your-children/

San Francisco Gay Men’s Chorus sings ‘We’re coming for your children’

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrGyHev4KFY

Anyone watch this video. Its sickening.

 

[TorontoGold]

https://mustreadalaska.com/san-francisco-gay-mens-chorus-sings-were-coming-for-your-children/

San Francisco Gay Men’s Chorus sings ‘We’re coming for your children’

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrGyHev4KFY

Anyone watch this video. Its sickening.

https://consequence.net/2021/07/well-convert-your-children-san-francisco-gay-mens-chorus/

A satirical song by the San Francisco Gay Men’s Chorus has awakened the conservative rage machine.

It's a joke meant to upset the simpletons that can't see it.....apparently it's working.

 

[TDHeysus]

https://consequence.net/2021/07/well-convert-your-children-san-francisco-gay-mens-chorus/



It's a joke meant to upset the simpletons that can't see it.....apparently it's working.

because joking about coming for children is always funny...in any context.

 

[TorontoGold]

because joking about coming for children is always funny...in any context.

Aren't conservatives supposed to be the big tough guys and liberals the snowflakes? Or has that changed?

 

[TDHeysus]

Aren't conservatives supposed to be the big tough guys and liberals the snowflakes? Or has that changed?

just because millennials and certain liberals are snowflakes, doesn't mean conservatives are big tough guys. Who ever said that? I would ask you to explain your logic, but your explanation would only make sense to another indoctrinated snowflake. (lefty logic)

 

[TorontoGold]

just because millennials and certain liberals are snowflakes, doesn't mean conservatives are big tough guys. Who ever said that? I would ask you to explain your logic, but your explanation would only make sense to another indoctrinated snowflake. (lefty logic)

l o l

 

[TDHeysus]

l o l

One of the many youtubers I like alot is named Jericho Green; dont check him out, you'll view him as a big tough guy. But he calls the squad, 'the four whores of the apocalypse'.

 

[Blazers46]

https://consequence.net/2021/07/well-convert-your-children-san-francisco-gay-mens-chorus/



It's a joke meant to upset the simpletons that can't see it.....apparently it's working.

It’s not a joke or satire. It’s like singing a song about defunding police, or trans in the Olympics. Not one word of their song was exaggerated or wrong in the context of their messaging or motives.

I see it more of a victory lap than anything. It may have been made to upset people but nothing about it was satire.

satire - the use of humor, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people's stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues.

The song is basically admitting and saying out loud what most won’t.

 

[Blazers46]

https://consequence.net/2021/07/well-convert-your-children-san-francisco-gay-mens-chorus/



It's a joke meant to upset the simpletons that can't see it.....apparently it's working.

Let’s see conservatives make a song mocking gays sword fighting... or how the community is infested with AIDS... call it satire so Toronto and the left won’t be upset.

 

[TorontoGold]

One of the many youtubers I like alot is named Jericho Green; dont check him out, you'll view him as a big tough guy. But he calls the squad, 'the four whores of the apocalypse'.

Same guy who said this, right? "because joking about coming for children is always funny...in any context."