@wildgrass said🙄 you’ve got to be kidding??
Why not put a pitbull in boxing gloves mate?
Anything's possible, this is why sports have rules. Politicians shouldn't make the rules..
@no1marauder saidAre you going to start this stupid crap all over again?
What "right" is being violated?
Please be specific.
@Mott-The-Hoople saidNot to mention women’s and little girls safety in locker rooms and restrooms. Google trans with erect penis in women’s restrooms, all you have to say is I self identify?? Many places are actually putting urinals in women’s restrooms, mind boggling.
failure to provide equal athletic opportunity...its sad this needs explained to you
@wildgrass saidIt’s only this way in your miniature brainwashed mind!
We're both talking hypotheticals. Only you appear to think it's a serious argument.
@no1marauder saidEverything’s been answered yesterday with you while you dance around everything with no answers except red Herrings. Your already doing it today, I have no need to waste my time on you today.
It's a simple question that you seem unable to answer.
@wildgrass saidHow stupid are you?
What if we put a female cougar in the octagon with a male but the male had fewer teeth. Would that be discriminatory??? 🤔
@no1marauder saidA can play because they have no Y chromosome, but B can't because they do have a Y chromosome.
I'm not interested in throwing a minority under the bus for political gain.
Don't see how "Woman A can play, but Woman B can't" isn't discriminatory. This is especially true when there is insufficient scientific evidence that Woman B has any unfair advantage compared to Woman A (both being athletes not the average woman).
Anyway, a limited government advocate should say such decisions should be made by sports organizations running the competitions not politicians.
This is not discriminatory unless segregating sports in general is discriminatory.
🙂
We're gonna do a barr body test on 500,000 people to ban 6 of them from college sports? Come on. We did away with these tests 30 years ago and there's only a small handful of examples of athletes gaming the system.
Trans people are estimated to make up 1-2% of the population of the United States; however, trans people make up less than 0.002% (10/500,000) of US college athletes, and even fewer of recent Olympians (0.001 % ) identify as trans.
@spruce112358 saidIt's an arbitrary and capricious division (akin to banning blondes from women's events) where it hasn't been shown that transgender female athletes don't have any significant advantage over cisgender ones.
A can play because they have no Y chromosome, but B can't because they do have a Y chromosome.
This is not discriminatory unless segregating sports in general is discriminatory.
🙂
A few wins in the literally hundreds of thousands of women's sporting events per year doesn't establish that.
@wildgrass saidA while back an organization, I believe the IOC, attempted to limit participation in women's events based on testosterone levels. They found, rather unsurprisingly, that many women's athletes had far higher levels than the average woman and the criteria was abandoned.
We're gonna do a barr body test on 500,000 people to ban 6 of them from college sports? Come on. We did away with these tests 30 years ago and there's only a small handful of examples of athletes gaming the system.
Trans people are estimated to make up 1-2% of the population of the United States; however, trans people make up less than 0.002% (10/500,000) of US college athletes, and even fewer of recent Olympians (0.001 % ) identify as trans.
@spruce112358 saidwell put
A can play because they have no Y chromosome, but B can't because they do have a Y chromosome.
This is not discriminatory unless segregating sports in general is discriminatory.
🙂
1 edit
@no1marauder saidyou might want to get updated on ioc rules criteria
A while back an organization, I believe the IOC, attempted to limit participation in women's events based on testosterone levels. They found, rather unsurprisingly, that many women's athletes had far higher levels than the average woman and the criteria was abandoned.