Are you the pot or the kettle with this reply?
Nice back-handed compliments too. Bravo counselor!! (Slow sarcastic clap ensues.)
5 biological men roster wins Australian women's soccer league title & also undefeated this season
- Thread starter Veritas
- Start date
Nice back-handed compliments too. Bravo counselor!! (Slow sarcastic clap ensues.)
Again that’s not a person attack. It’s calling the argument dumb, which is what it is….what he said is incredibly stupid. It’s a boneheaded stupid argument that only a stupid person could actually believe. And he’s not stupid (I specifically said so) so
where does that leave him???? Is he acting in bad faith??? Because it’s one or the other. By contrast his last argument is a good one that makes some good points but he still has the level playing field problem and he still has the hammer problem. Until he can address those it doesn’t work but that one is better…it’s intelligent and actually makes sense.
Further I guess you are joining the hypocrisy train because I have yet to hear you can out a single personal attack by slobi. Care to explain yourself on that one? Or are you going to duck that question too like the one I asked you previously and ask you again: would you tell my cousin 20 years post transition to get out of the rest room? Of course you’ll duck it again.
With a lie. I already refuted that. I told you of course I care. I care about all of them. What I’m doing is balancing the conflicting rughts and sometimes the cis f prevails and sometimes the t prevails. What I object to is “f the t person, they deserve it and always lose”
Again that’s another lie. You are either acting stupidly and don’t understand that’s a hypothetical counter factual or are acting in bad faith and know that but are trying to use it anyway. So insults are bad, unless they come from slobi against posters or trans people, but that garbage is ok? Nice.
Of course not. I’ll keep replying to you guys as long as dom keeps the thread open or you keep posting to me. Want it to stop? Put me on ignore. I did it with covid so you don’t think I’ll do it here????
Btw your true colors are beginning to show. Careful. The hypocrisy on the slobi stuff including the slurs (you don’t get to cry personal insult and then applaud the slurs), the ducking the cousin question, mischaracterizing positions in bad faith after they’ve already been clarified (unless you care to admit you just don’t understand and can’t follow it). So which is it???? You’ve been coy about it. So let’s have it out once and for all. Say what you mean with clarity and conviction:
1. What about slobi and his slurs…approve or disapprove?
2. Would you tell my cousin to get out of the bathroom and threaten her with violence if she didn’t leave the ladies room?
3. How do you really feel about trans peopld
Put up or shut up time.
It's a stupid argument because YOU said so right? Notice you're the only person beating the drum on this? How noble of you.
I think I did earlier when you talked about the whole "granny" thing. But again, you are too blinded by your BS to even pay attention to what others are posting, especially if it's counter to what you believe. You're like the cat chasing the laser pointer around the room.
You obviously don't. Again you've been called out on this. By multiple members. But of course you argue that point (shocking..said nobody) because well..that's what you do. Deserve? I'll tell you what trans MTF don't deserve..that's a spot on the field where everyone else is a biological female.
And to echo a similar sentiment that @Slobodan said..if my kid was to play in a game where a trans player was already known to have sent players off the pitch, court, field, etc, then my kid isn't going to play. I'll double down and say if I was the coach, the game isn't happening. Now if that player is taking the field...if..and that's a big IF..I was unaware of the MTF until my first player gets injured, game is ending there. Want to call me transphobic? Go right ahead. I don't give a rat's ass what you think. I'll still sleep just fine at night. My job is to protect these biological females from the biological male who couldn't cut it playing with the other boys so he decides to call himself female and proceeds to smash records AND faces. Not this time.
[This is your quote that I botched while trying to separate your Gestapo interrogation.]
Again that’s another lie. You are either acting stupidly and don’t understand that’s a hypothetical counter factual or are acting in bad faith and know that but are trying to use it anyway. So insults are bad, unless they come from slobi against posters or trans people, but that garbage is ok? Nice.
[My reply]
How funny that you can hurl insults when people don't agree with you and it's cool. But @Slobodan used the word "tranny" and the world is suddenly coming to a halt.
Why would I put you on ignore? I've got nothing better to do than come in here and watch you chase your tail.
1) I think I already covered that above. I think he used "tranny" once at the beginning of the thread. Is that all you got? That word gets thrown around pretty losely these days. But gay people say all kinds of stuff to other gay people and it's cool. And Black people use the N-word with an "a" on the end and it's cool, but nobody else better. But White people are B-A-D people. People can talk all kinds of crap these days about White people and nobody says a thing. My wife is White. So I'm pretty much over the whole trash-talk from Liberals regarding "White Privilege" etc.
And I'm going to go out on a limb here and say you NEVER use any kind of slur do you? Unless you're in the car alone where nobody else can hear you right? I'm Hispanic btw. So can I go around using the WB term for all the illegal border-crossers flooding this country? Seeking your guidance and approval on this one before I continue.
2) I don't quite remember if your cousin is MTF or FTM. Not that it matters. And not that I care. But for arguments sake we'll start with FTM. If your biological female cousin has been wishing/pretending SHE was a HE all these years and looks like it and proceeds to walk into the Men's Restroom to take a squat, (which is what SHE will have to do since SHE really isn't a HE) if your cousin looks like a man, I'm most likely not going to notice.
Now if your cousin is MTF and looks very much like a biological male despite whatever HE has done to make his appearance look female but still
looks like an obvious man walking into the Female Restroom, there's going to be some questions/concerns before HE goes in there.
3) I already gave you my take on trans people in my first post in this thread. You can do your own homework and go find it. I'm not doing the work for you if you can't keep up with the conversation because you are so blind with vitriol against those who don't agree with you. That's a you problem.
Dumb post of the day. Every player gets their rating by Coach Grace. Sounds like @Slobodan and I aren't classy though.
We are the Minions and you are Gru.
What normal biological male doesn't like to be touched by other men beyond a handshake or a bro-hug?
(@crush is the rare exception when it comes to his masseuse.)
I said, "the best massage I ever had was from a male masseuse, who happen to be gay in his private life." I never said "I like" being touched by mens. Troy got out my knots. I didn't "like" it bruh, I needed it. And for the record, I have not had another man masseuse my back.
It was not a dig at you Your Grace. Just saying that you were cool with another man touching you beyond a handshake or hug.
I see your point. Veritas feels the same way as you. I was not cool with it, as the word "cool" might mean different type of cools. I was desperate and this guy Troy came highly recommended, so I put my fears aside and let Troy do his thing. Back to the whole MTF thing. If you, me and Veritas went to a massage place and a MTF came out to do the "walk on the back" deep Thai massage, we would be pissed off because of the deceit aspect. I am not cool with a MTF and probably will never have another man give me a massage.
1. You didn’t answer the question whether you approve of his use of the slur and he used it more than once. All you’ve done now is complain why can’t white people use slurs even though you yourself are Latino. And yes everyone uses a slur at some point in there lives but few people decide to go around on a public forum and use it repeatedly and proudly…most tend to say “yeah I messed up and it wasn’t good”. So do you think use of that slur is acceptable or not?
2. You danced around that one too. I already told you my cousin is MTF and post op 20 years. SHE is very much like the Thai masseuse where it’s hard to tell unless you are looking for it but if you do yes you can. So is the test whether YOU notice that she’s trans and if YOU do you’ll threaten violence if she doesn’t leave the women’s restroom? Yalls so sensitive about words in the mouth so I want to be very precise with this question…yay or nay?
3. I remember. It was filled with a bunch of falsehoods and assumptions which I pointed out to you were incorrect and ignorant. No revision of your priors despite the information having been supplied? No “I didn’t know that maybe I was wrong…let me go check other sources”? Not even a “well maybe I shot my mouth off before checking”?
We’re really really close to the answer here but you don’t want to say it do you? I’m very close to the answer too but have wanted to give you every benefit of the doubt before accusing you of something. The only thing worse than being a bigot is one who is secretly ashamed of his positions and unwilling to embrace them…I think a word for that was used when it came to the uswnt…that actually would make you worse than slobi. So thoughts? Going to quit dancing?
Grace, let's say your cousin is part-time Thai masseuse. Veritas walks in looking for "walking on the back" Thai Special and specially requests a female. Out comes your cousin and Veritas seems happy and lays on his tummy for "walking on the back" Thai Special. Is this ok with you on a ethical point of view?
Btw the entire forfeit thing is a better answer than the “target” thing slobi said. Forfeit and take your punishment (which when some teams have done it has been substantial) but at least you’ve had the courage of your convictions. You are making an assumption that it will be unsafe: as dad4 pointed out not all trans people are created equally. Though somehow would you have the same reaction and you coached a bunch of f3 boys u12 boys (who being f 3 tend to be on the mean in height or slightly less) and a 6 ft 160 pound mammoth of a player steps on the field opposite side (I’ve seen that happen twice). Still forfeit? Or is just the trans person the safety concern?
I don’t know the answer to this. I’d have to think about it and know more about massages (I’ve only had a few in my life time, almost all pt related). For example, I think a trans person definitely has an obligation to be honest about their status while dating.
That said, jeez you guys are all really sensitive about the whole gay thing in being touched by a man. Again in Northern Europe men massage men because (outside of a Thai walking massage) they tend to give better massages. Your male egos really that fragile? No reason to be embarrassed or to defend yourself about Troy.
If I was lied to I would feel ripped off, like a used car salesman selling me a lemon.
Again there are ways to discuss this issue without resorting to be a bigot. Like my friend you can believe mtf trans do not belong in womens sports. That’s fine but some of you have come beyond that and it’s not cool. Dad4, watfl and veritas have, so far, not done that. It’s a question of motivation: are you really motivated by protecting women (again it’s the men here and we can do without certain types of protection….see the radical Islam post) or are you motivated by disgust and hatred?
My closing argument is as follows…
Grace makes a compelling case for equal participation, but I think we need to acknowledge a key distinction: there’s a difference between the right to participate and the right to compete at the highest level. Everyone has the right to participate in sports, but when it comes to elite competition, it’s about fairness, not just inclusion. If we start making exceptions for one MTF athlete based on appearance or meeting certain weight criteria, we open a door that’s impossible to close. If one MTF athlete competes, it sets a precedent, and suddenly, we're back at square one, where biological advantages come into play.
That’s why I stand firm in saying there has to be a clear line, MTF athletes can participate in lower-level or coed competitions, but at the highest level, where fairness is paramount, they shouldn’t compete against biological women. When these athletes were competing as men, they didn’t have the right to join women’s competitions. The biological advantage doesn’t disappear with transition, and giving them access to women’s sports at the highest level now feels inherently unfair to the women who’ve trained their whole lives under different conditions.
The essence of elite competition is about fairness, performance, and equality within clear biological categories. Once we start bending the rules for one group, we risk compromising the very foundation of that fairness.
Grace makes a compelling case for equal participation, but I think we need to acknowledge a key distinction: there’s a difference between the right to participate and the right to compete at the highest level. Everyone has the right to participate in sports, but when it comes to elite competition, it’s about fairness, not just inclusion. If we start making exceptions for one MTF athlete based on appearance or meeting certain weight criteria, we open a door that’s impossible to close. If one MTF athlete competes, it sets a precedent, and suddenly, we're back at square one, where biological advantages come into play.
That’s why I stand firm in saying there has to be a clear line, MTF athletes can participate in lower-level or coed competitions, but at the highest level, where fairness is paramount, they shouldn’t compete against biological women. When these athletes were competing as men, they didn’t have the right to join women’s competitions. The biological advantage doesn’t disappear with transition, and giving them access to women’s sports at the highest level now feels inherently unfair to the women who’ve trained their whole lives under different conditions.
The essence of elite competition is about fairness, performance, and equality within clear biological categories. Once we start bending the rules for one group, we risk compromising the very foundation of that fairness.
Exclusion ant the highest level isn’t inherently bad, it’s a part of the process that defines elite sports. Biological women are excluded all the time from the highest levels of competition because they don’t meet the performance standards. That’s the nature of elite competition: not everyone qualifies, and that’s what makes it competitive. So, if we’re comfortable excluding biological women based on their performance, why should it suddenly be an issue when it comes to MTF athletes who have a clear biological advantage?
Excluding MTF athletes at the highest level isn’t about denying participation altogether it’s about maintaining fairness in a space where biological differences matter. If we allow MTF athletes to compete at the highest level with women, we’re effectively creating an uneven playing field, and that’s where the unfairness comes in. It’s not just about inclusion for the sake of inclusion; it’s about ensuring that the competition remains fair for the athletes who have been training and competing within a certain biological framework their whole lives.
At the highest level, exclusion happens based on ability, not identity. By drawing a line with MTF athletes, we’re ensuring that the essence of competition fairness remains intact. Otherwise, we’re not just excluding biological women who don’t meet the cut; we’re putting them at a disadvantage against athletes who may have inherent physical advantages.
Excluding MTF athletes at the highest level isn’t about denying participation altogether it’s about maintaining fairness in a space where biological differences matter. If we allow MTF athletes to compete at the highest level with women, we’re effectively creating an uneven playing field, and that’s where the unfairness comes in. It’s not just about inclusion for the sake of inclusion; it’s about ensuring that the competition remains fair for the athletes who have been training and competing within a certain biological framework their whole lives.
At the highest level, exclusion happens based on ability, not identity. By drawing a line with MTF athletes, we’re ensuring that the essence of competition fairness remains intact. Otherwise, we’re not just excluding biological women who don’t meet the cut; we’re putting them at a disadvantage against athletes who may have inherent physical advantages.
This is a well reasoned argument and one which doesn’t resort to bigotry. I have a few bones to pick.
i agree that the threshold gets different the higher you go up in the sport. If you are enforcing a level playing field by testing for peds and hgh, there’s a sound argument for the level playing field. If you are enforcing height and weight restrictions, there’s a sound argument for safety concerns. But again then it’s incumbent to the extent feasible come up with alternatives. In some sports protocols (the rules we’ve had from 1960-about 2008) might be able to get you there and in others you’ll need separate divisions. I disagree with one exception sets a precedent: that’s why we have standards and protocols and despite your desire for simplicity every sport may well wind up different with the toughest standards for running and swimming and who cares for equestrian and shooting. I understand the desire for clear lines but sometimes life is messy as illustrated by the moroccan boxer. The most persuasive argument to your point is “excluding biological women that don’t make the cut”
Grace, I get where you're coming from, and I respect that you're trying to find a balanced approach here, but I think there are a few cracks in your logic we need to look at. Let's break it down:
First off, comparing PED and HGH testing to the biological advantages gained from male puberty doesn't quite hold water. You can test for PEDs and regulate height/weight, sure, but hormone therapy for MTF athletes doesn’t reverse things like bone density, muscle mass, or lung capacity that are developed during male puberty. Those advantages stick around, and that’s where the issue lies. It’s not like reducing testosterone levels magically puts everyone on the same playing field. While PED testing can level certain aspects, you can't undo the biological foundation that gives an edge in competition and that is a fact.
Then, you mention separate divisions as a possible solution in some sports. In theory, sure, but in practice? hmm
It’s a logistical nightmare. You’d have to create new divisions for every potential category, which complicates things and could water down the competition. Are we really going to create multiple divisions just to accommodate everyone? Sports are about competition, and too many divisions dilute that. The more categories we create, the less meaningful the victories become. Plus, it becomes a bureaucratic mess...who’s going to fund and organize all these separate divisions?Now, the big one imo which you don't agree with is setting a precedent. If you let one exception through, you’re opening the door for more. Sports run on rules and consistency. If one MTF athlete gets to compete, others will expect the same, and it becomes a slippery slope opening the activist door which spells trouble. We have rules to keep things fair, and once we start bending them, it’s hard to stop. It’s not about denying participation bit about ensuring that fairness isn’t compromised across the board.
You also mentioned different standards for different sports. Sure, some sports might not rely on the same physical traits, like equestrian or shooting, but that’s where consistency is key. You see, If we start applying different rules across the board, it chips away at the overall integrity of sports. Athletes could end up choosing sports based on where the rules are more favorable, rather than based on their talents. Which could also lead to erroneous transitions like in the case of Lia Thomas who didn't go all the way and kept his pistol thinking he had all the rights as biological women. Well he lost in court...
And finally, you acknowledge that biological women get excluded when they don’t make the cut. That’s my exact point. Exclusion is a natural part of elite competition as it happens because not everyone qualifies. Allowing MTF athletes with inherent biological advantages puts women, who are already fighting to make the cut, at an unfair disadvantage. So, if exclusion happens based on ability, we should apply that same logic across the board to protect fairness.
Now, to your point about biological women with natural advantages like height, lung capacity, or wingspan etc... Yes, some athletes are naturally gifted, but they’re competing within the same biological category. They’ve developed under the same biological conditions as their peers, and their advantages fall within the normal range of female biology. That makes it fair...That’s the nature of elite sports some people are just naturally more talented, but they’re still operating within the same framework. The same framework being the key here.
MTF athletes, however, bring in advantages from male puberty like I've mentioned before increased bone density, muscle mass, and lung capacity that's largely driven by testosterone. Even after hormone therapy, those physical traits remain, and that’s where the imbalance lies. It’s not just natural variation within a category, it’s a different category altogether.
So yes, natural variation exists, but everyone is still competing within the same biological framework. That's why it is fair. MTF athletes bring an entirely different set of advantages that hormone therapy can’t fully mitigate, and that’s where fairness breaks down. It’s not about limiting participation; it’s about maintaining a fair competitive landscape for everyone involved.
So @Grace T. can we agree on MTF being a big NO in biological female sports? The only case left to argue about is the female XX with high T levels. Because they were developed within the same framework as biological women XX they should be allowed to compete given the option to reduce T levels. Aside from that there should be a hard line drawn for any XY in XX category.
Your arguments are well reasoned and it's a good well thought out argument. My objections are annotated here. We don't disagree on this point. We know that because FTM athletes on high testosterone don't catch up with the men in most sports. But the thing YOU fail to acknowledge is that hormone therapy, eliminating testosterone from the testes post surgery, and estrogen are all performance inhibitors. So the level playing field for the MTF no longer exists with the men. The reality is they can't compete on a level playing field there either. My only objection to this point of your answer is that it is incomplete. There's another problem you fail to acknowledge.
As all discrimination law states, your logistical nightmare is not my problem. They said the same thing when they put handicap accessible stalls into the restrooms. That was a too bad so sad. Who's going to fund it? Well that money gets taken from the others (The same as handicapped accessible stalls were a hidden tax on businesses and the public). You want your exclusion, that's the price. TANSTAAFL.Then, you mention separate divisions as a possible solution in some sports. In theory, sure, but in practice? hmm
As I stated there are 3 possible legal rubrics here and these are the only 3 you can really fit them into:
-Discrimination law. That means the protected class is entitled to full protection and there two ways to do it. Include them with the women. Include them with the men but handicap the men (such as with start times) to make up for the drop in performance to maintain a level playing field.
-Disability law. Which means making accommodations to the extent within reason. It's messy. You don't get your clean line. It means there will be different results in different circumstances, in this case by athlete or by sport.
-No protection. It means trans people should not be entitled to a protection as a protected class. The issue here is no one has articulated an argument for why they aren't protected beyond bigotry ("mental illness...they don't deserve it").
As to the rules, hey every once in a while you are going to get it wrong. Soccer can't settle on a handle ball rule (the game is fundamentally broken because of it like basketball was before the shot clock rule). You adjust until you get it right, but that adjustment requires specifics which means it's going to have to be sport by sport, and it's going to take time.
The precedent v. slippery slope argument is a valid one. It pops up in numerous fields. I'm just not overly concerned with it because in sports it's easy to change guidelines and rules...something doesn't work, you adjust it. Soccer is doing that all the time with its handball rule. And as I stated, the concept of "fairness" is elusive in sports. Part of it is preordained by genetics reducing it to little more than a dog show competition. Part of it is a function of the rules. This argument is the same as the dog show breeders make that a "labrador must only be a labrador". As someone else pointed out, that's fine, but then take the merit and money out of it....especially for college...switch to an entirely academic based system like they do in Europe, stop the fuss with the Olympics and recognize between the doping and things like the PRC does, it's just a farce built for entertainment. The fights over merits occur because they are societal merits, as Aristotle pointed out.
Now you are mission creeping from the highest level to any category. Again, the fundamental issue with you is that you want it clean. Unfortunately , given the precedents (yes precedents...I know) set first on race, then with women, and then with LGB, your hands are tied legally. There's nothing about discrimination and disability laws, given the precedents set, that's clean You may want clarity but there's no way legally to give you clarity beyond the trans MTF play with the women, the trans FTM play with the women, and screw the women, which is a result neither you nor I likes. The other way to get clarity is to chuck the entire discrimination and disability law structure (and just say humans should associate with whoever they want and just prohibit government discrimination) but the ship has sailed on that one and I sincerely doubt anyone on the boards (even Slobi) would say that's ok.
Grace, I get it that you’re telling me I’m looking for too much clarity... I really do. But here is the thing...sports need clarity, especially when it comes to categories as basic as biological sex. You’re right, it’s not always clean, and I’m fully aware of the precedents with race, gender, and LGB issues. But just because the legal framework is messy doesn’t mean we should keep making it messier. If anything, this is exactly the point where we should be drawing some hard lines to protect the integrity of competition.
Now, about this "mission creep" you mentioned... let’s be clear. I’m talking about elite sports here. These aren’t fun runs or weekend leagues where participation is the main goal. We’re talking about top-tier athletes, where fairness is everything. And yes, I’m advocating for a hard line when it comes to MTF athletes in women’s sports. Why? Because we’re no longer comparing apples to apples. A biological woman with high T levels (who is still XX) developed within the same framework as other biological women, same hormones, same reproductive anatomy, just with a slight genetic boost in testosterone. If they need to reduce those levels it's fine. But they’re still playing in the same sandbox, with the same toys. And that is my point so they belong in the biological female category.
MTF athletes, on the other hand, were playing in a totally different sandbox, one where male puberty gave them a head start. It’s like having a sprinter trained at altitude running against someone trained at sea level, you follow me? Sure, you can limit their testosterone later, but those years of male development still give them an advantage you can’t undo with hormone therapy. I think we agree on this part.
And about FTM athletes, here’s the thing, I think we can agree that they’re actually at a disadvantage when they compete with biological men. Even with testosterone treatments, they can’t fully catch up to men who’ve gone through male puberty. Why? Because they developed as females. No male puberty means no extra bone density, muscle mass, or larger lung capacity. So yeah, they may be in the ring, but they’re not dominating men’s sports by any stretch. If anything, their struggle in men’s competition highlights exactly why MTF athletes do have a massive advantage when competing against biological women. Which totally proves my point.
I get that you’re bringing up legal precedents, but let’s not ignore the biological realities here. FTM athletes can compete with men and, while they may be at a disadvantage, they aren’t skewing the competition. Meanwhile, MTF athletes are stepping into women’s sports with physical advantages that just can’t be leveled out with a few years of hormone therapy. The symmetry isn’t there. And the possibility of skewing the competition is quite high, especially if we open the dam and the water pours in like a roaring rapid. We won't be able to control it.
And yes, I understand your point about the legal side of things. We’re tangled up in discrimination and disability laws, and it feels like our hands are tied. But if we keep going down this road, it’s not just about making room for more inclusion Grace but it’s about slowly erasing the competitive distinction in women’s sports altogether. You said it yourself: we both don’t like the idea of “screwing the women,” but isn’t that exactly what we’re doing by allowing biological males with XY chromosomes, who’ve reaped the benefits of male puberty, to compete in categories meant for XX women? That's why we must draw the hard line in this specific case. And if they want to participate, they can but not at the highest level of competition. They needed to understand that when they decided to transition, that this decision came with consequences especially when referring to elite level of sports. That's life and the price we must pay for going against nature and society norms.
If we keep moving the goalposts, soon enough, we won’t have women’s sports left, it’ll just be a coed free-for-all where the women lose out. And that’s the slippery slope we need to avoid. You mention precedents, but let’s be real, Grace, precedents can be changed, rules can be adjusted, and sports should be no different. After all, we didn’t stick with the original basketball rules forever; we added the shot clock, adjusted the three-point line, and adapted over time. So why can’t we do the same for gender categories in sports? Just because the legal framework is messy doesn’t mean we should throw our hands up and say “Well, too bad.”
At the end of the day, sports are built on fairness, not participation for the sake of it. The women’s category exists for a reason, and when XY athletes start stepping into that space, we’re no longer protecting that fairness. So yeah, I’m drawing a hard line. We need to start acknowledging that some rules, like keeping MTF athletes out of women’s elite sports, aren’t just necessary but essential to maintaining what’s left of competitive balance.