kickingandscreaming
PREMIER
Did someone say "masks"?
Trans eligibility rules for girls sports.
- Thread starter dad4
- Start date
kickingandscreaming
PREMIER
Because of COVID?
All respiratory viruses.
plus the teachers found they don’t like schlepping the kids on buses on the weekend but rather stay home and judged the competitions from bed.
Schools don’t have to travel kids for regionals
they still have live ones but they are fewer and further between
choir is the same but band competitions (which are generally outside) are live
The only people who are triggered by any of this are the whiny Karens who are complaining about the existing rules and eligibility requirements set by CIF, ECNL, the NCAA and others. I mean, seriously, you have lost your mind on this issue so thoroughly that you're talking in a kiddie soccer website about your views on abortion, kneeling for the flag, immigration and fentanyl. Talk about triggered.
Also, the only person being intolerant is you. I'm perfectly cool when trans children not being treated like shit, unlike you. I don't make incorrect assumptions that trans children are elite male athletes, nor do I have some pathetic belief that winning and losing at kiddie sports is so important in this world that we need to deviate from free market capitalism to prevent private companies from setting their own participation rules.
Lia Thomas is not the "most singularly appropriate example of Biological Males having physical advantages over Biological Females in sports." In reality, she is an extreme example of a trans woman that you have to rationalize why you support the mistreatment and abuse of children. In the entire history of soccer, there have been a number of trans girls, who are actually representative of trans participation in that sport because, uh, they actually played it. And go figure, never in the history of the entire planet has a trans girl ever dominated elite girls soccer. Never in the entire history of planet earth has a trans girl ever been the best player on her own soccer team. You are so pathetic that you need to point to a college swimmer to rationalize why a 12 year old trans girl not only should be prohibited from playing soccer with girls, but should be forced to be subjected to abuse and harassment playing with boys. You cannot identify a single trans girl or woman in the entire history of soccer to use as an example of unfairness because you don't have one, because there has never been one.
Nor has CIF.
Neither are Sports
thirteenknots
SILVER ELITE
It's CHEATING !
Nothing anyone says can change that.
YOU CANNOT MAKE A MAN A WOMAN !
Born a male, play male sports. Period.
You are facilitating the THEFT of Biological WOMENS
advancements in all SPORTS.
I know. It’s a shame. Maybe SCOTUS will restore Title IX rights in a meaningful way.
It must drive you absolutely crazy that little trans children are running around dominating kiddie sports and ruining the fabric of our great nation. Ha ha ha.
Too bad for you that Gorsuch and Roberts have already ruled that federal protections based on "sex" doesn't just protect whiny Karens, but also trans women.
Doubtful even with a conservative court...at least not without unintended consequences that spill all over the place (such as a serious gutting of Title IX's male/female balance). If you have an "open" division it directly undermines the proposition that female sports have to be treated equally....they are no longer equal...they are a subcategory akin to a disabled category of the larger "open" division". Unintended consequences. If you don't, then you are on the same footing as disabilities: if you extend accommodations for disabilities, it's hard to see how you don't for the trans, even if it's just under a proposition of separate but equal. Hard to predict, but in the US, barring the acceptance of some sort of rational compromise, or the Rs taking both houses of Congress overcoming the fillibuster and getting the Presidency, I think it comes down to a blue state/red state split. Long term, I think Europe leads the way and where they come out on things.
In any case, Title IX and women's athletics may be about to be turned on their head in the event women's football catches on in the next 3-5 years. If it does (I'm not convinced it will but I saw a demonstration in Sherman Oaks Park a few months and the players really seemed into it), soccer and volleyball in particularly are going to be greatly impacted. If I had a DD that was 5 or 6 right now and looking to direct her to a sport, I'd be looking at this carefully to see how it develops because if it takes off (a big if) it's going to turn everything over on its head.
p.s. universities have been looking to kill the equality principle in Title IX for a while now to free up more money for their football and basketball programs. There's been talk about maybe shifting to a salaried system, the chief stumbling block is Title IX since the salaries do not seem to make economic sense for women's athletics, which are generally more unpopular with the general public. Women's football, if it takes off, has been in part pushed by universities (which want consolidated costs and departments) and the NFL (which wants moms pushing their kids into a new generation of viewers). Why you'd hand SCOTUS a knife that could potentially rework Title IX to the benefit of the university interests, in order to kill this flea, is beyond me....
Your Mom must be so proud…..
Why a serious gutting of the male/female balance? Perhaps it goes from 50/50 to 49/49/2. That's drift, not gutting. Sounds like a reasonable compromise to me.
The bigger risk is if money sport athletes win the right to be paid a salary. That would definitely mean fewer scholarship opportunities for women athletes. But it would be a fairer system.
Stanford Tackles The Pejorative, "Karen"
Stanford's Harmful Language Initiative discourages the use of the term "Karen" because it is "Imprecise Language" but fails to acknowledge that it also is sexist and racist.
www.injusticeatwork.com
Biden Admin Replaces 'Mothers' With 'Birthing People' in Maternal
"Why does Biden want to cancel mothers?" one critic of Biden's budget said of the linguistic change.
www.newsweek.com
Having different beliefs and opinions is not intolerance. Not respecting, listening, and considering others perspectives is. You obviously have a reading comprehension issue. I have said I am against it in competitive sports where the physiology does matter with Biological Males against Biological Females. In young youth sports where physiology does not matter yet, I don’t have any issue at all. Let them all play.
Biological Males have a advantage over Biological Females in competitive sports…based on their physiology. That is a fact and you choosing not to believe it, does not make it untrue. IF, there was a way to level and equal the playing field and Biological Males did NOT have advantages over Biological Females I would not have a problem with direct competition. As long as the advantage exists I am against it. That does not mean I am anti Trans. I am all for everyone doing what they want unless it infringes on the opportunities of others. Which again, the Lia Thomas situation certainly did. I respect your opinions, beliefs, and perspectives, but do not agree with you.
BTW….How many stickers on your Subaru…I’m taking bets on the over under at 5.5?
I agree the bigger risk is the paid salary but the Title IX argument would be that it's still ancillary to attending school. That's assuming Title IX remains in tact. While the science has been moving in the direction that you cannot balance, legally the opponents have been increasingly painted into a corner.
As ETOL pointed out, the Supreme Court has already ruled for Title VII purposes LGTBQ is a protected category. In addition, several circuits that have ruled on it have additionally ruled gender dysphoria is a disability for which accommodations need to be extended. So it's not as legally simple as just waiving our hands and say dump them into the men's category (which we know they can't compete against....plus there's the ticking time bomb of the FTMs that's been neglected for a while). It's been established they have rights. So, if you have an open division, the division does not necessarily have to be 49/49/2. If women are a subclass, akin to the disabled, unable to compete in the open division, then it blows up the equality principle en total...it could be 56 open/44 women's or 60 open/40 women's....there's no principle it has to be proportionate because of another painting into the corner: the argument was already used that more men played but the courts didn't buy it at the inception of title IX. If there's not an open division, then you have to extend reasonable accommodations to the extent practical. You can't just ignore it because it's been established already they have legal rights, and neither the FTMs or MTFs can compete in a cis male division. The argument then becomes what those accommodations look like. Hypothetically, for example, in a race it could be a "head start" of so many minutes if you keep them in the men's division on track....so much for the meritocracy....another hypothetical is separate but equal....another is it doesn't make a difference in the team sports. What that accommodation looks like (from fig leaf to one that has teeth) in part depends on the court composition, but there will be something. An "open" division, by contrast, would be disastrous for women's sports and completely gut the equity principle in title IX.
Did you think that up all by yourself? It must be so hard losing sleep that ECNL, CIF, the NCAA, and also Neil Gorsuch, John Roberts, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson (aka a majority of SCOTUS) agree with me.
thirteenknots
SILVER ELITE
Just because you cite EVIL doesn't make it Fair/True.
MTF in Women's sports is CHEATING.