I have a question for you watty. I have shared my life on here openly and I would like you to share yours. Would you allow another mans touch outside of a bro handshake or a hug, like a male masseuse give you rub down? Veritas and pewpew are 100% a no. I'm not cool with it or down with it, but if my back is twisted in knots, I want the best masseuse out there, male or female, right?
5 biological men roster wins Australian women's soccer league title & also undefeated this season
- Thread starter Veritas
- Start date
Yeah it gets dicey. But that's a feature not a bug. It allows both sides to argue over what is reasonable in the particular circumstances. It's why it works. Because otherwise, everyone would have been required to remodel their homes to include handicapped stalls (and at their expense), all books would be printed side by side with braille, and all movies you go to would have subtitles under them. That's the clean world you'd be stuck with (or you can always say F the disabled, let them cope, but are you willing to say that? Is anyone here?).
Again, you may disagree with it, but there is nothing magical about sports that require an exception. As far as the courts are concerned it's a widget. The courts are concerned with people as individuals, because that's ultimately what our democratic society is about....rights....because democracy without rights becomes Venezuela, or Russia (remember both Putin and Hitler were democratically brought into government).
Again, you lost your firm line decades ago...and if you insist on a firm line it's just going to be whoever has the power to enforce one of the 4...every court decision and every election becomes existential because otherwise dad4's hammer is just going to start swinging away.
I addressed the level playing field question. Here it is again:
MTF athletes don't have a level playing field with ANYONE. They are too weak for the men, too strong for the women, and too few to compete amongst themselves.
Even an international trans league would not be a level playing field, because the transitions themselves are athletically dissimilar.
Your complaint: "no level playing field at the highest level" applies equally to every single available option, including yours.
Noticer
SILVER
If the skill/quality difference in masseuses you're talking about is something like kobe vs michael or messi vs cr7 , then I'm taking a female (actual female) every time.
Since you're asking, I will answer.
I have no problem with a man giving me a massage. I've had many a PT massage done by a man, but I can't recall if I've ever had a "regular" massage done by a guy. Is that apples and oranges? IDK. KInda one in the same to me.This is another great argument from you. It's a fair one. My rebuttal: 1. "too few"...again it's the title IX starting out problem....you offer scholarships, you offer prize money, assuming they get over the entire we want what we want issue (which is a them problem, not a you problem), they will come....will it be as exciting as the men's competition? No, but then as professional athletic revenues show, neither are the women...the women's are by definition "lesser".
2. As FINA recognized, offering the option at least gets you a road out of the legal trouble. Again, the 4 simple solutions are all imperfect (which I readily acknowledge). If a disability law rubric is established, the accommodation merely needs to be reasonable (it may work, it may not, it ma work in some sports like running which are easy, it won't work in soccer).
3. No playing field is ever perfectly level. If it were we wouldn't do year long age lines (there's nothing level about that). Then there is a question of what is "level" such as the discussion we've been having about women with errant t readings. If you wanted a perfect level, remember at one point private trainers were not allowed in Olympic competitions (it's a plot point of "Chariots of Fire") Sometimes, you have to do "as good as it gets" because that's what's "reasonable" under the circumstances...not perfect....there's a "Rick and Morty" where Morty finally gets to experience perfect level....it does not go well for Morty.
@Grace T. I think may be understanding why you are so gun-ho on this issue with inclusion for trans MTF. Can I ask you one thing though. What is your definition of a woman? Literally what does it mean to be a woman ? I need to know your exact definition of what is a woman before I conclude with my final argument.
Love this answer…If the skill/quality difference in masseuses you're talking about is something like kobe vs michael or messi vs cr7 , then I'm taking a female (actual female) every time.
I think it's irrelevant for these purposes since what we are discussing is individual rights. The gender status of an individual is irrelevant....they all have rights that need to be balanced. For other things like marriage it's also irrelevant since we've decided gay marriage is legal so it's completely beside the point...it used to be a question that was relevant. For bathrooms, again I think a penis no penis rule is appropriate (with an effort for single stalls for those undergoing changes). On your driver's license, it's irrelevant....let people declare whatever they want to present. For biological purposes, it's xx and xy but there are individuals that don't fit neatly into either category. For birthing purposes, well there are plenty of women who are sterile and we know how that went for Henry VIII. In horses, we actually classify them into 3 because the 3 act very differently for purposes of riding: stallions, geldings and mare's. But for these purposes, it's a completely and totally irrelevant question....the law is concerned with rights, and legally in sports there are 4 concerns: level playing field, safety, efficiency, participation.
Well can you answer my question ? I believe that all of these legality issues with trans mtf even being considered to compete in biological women sports stems from this root issue. If your answer is a biological female with xx chromosomes then there is no court argument. If not then you are also part of the problem for supporting this ridiculous narrative of gender identity. This made up science of biological sex being a spectrum is the problem. It’s male or female and anything outside of that is an outlier. Simply an error in the genetic code is anything outside of binary. Non binary is the biggest joke in human history. It simply does not exist in reality
@Grace T. Here is the reality Grace and I respect all your arguments and pov’s but if you can’t provide us with a simple definition of the meaning of the word woman, then we will never come close to a resolution but continue in an endless infinite mathematical loop. Because if we can’t come to terms in agreement to what that means then we are talkng apples 
to oranges.
to oranges.Because your wrong. That's not the issue. It's IRRELEVANT. The factors looked at are level playing field, safety, efficiency, and participation. It's the standard which was established in Title IX (again, you lost that fight decades ago when they went all in for equality in Title IX....this is to some extent getting hoisted by your own petard....had the conclusion been men and women like sports differently so it's o.k. if men have more access to scholarships and there are more men's sports, then this argument could now hold water, but it was already conceded to get Title IX into place). The law is concerned with individual rights, not chromosomes and certainly (except for Scalia's lone dissent) the integrity of the sport.
As for the "gender identity" narrative, again I don't buy into the idea that gender is a spectrum. In fact, all the science is contra. At least with respect to true transpeople (e.g., not the nonbinary who are just uncomfortable with the expressions of their birth gender, or a cross dresser doing a drag show), all the evidence points to it being a neurological condition, though dad4 is quite correct to point out we don't know yet exactly the nature of that condition.
My question back to you is again, for what purpose? For what context? If it's purely biological, it's xx, xy, but a. not everyone fits into that definition (there are those with errant chromosomes), and b. it's irrelevant for purposes of the law which is concerned with rights, not chromosomes and certainly not the integrity of the sport.@Grace T. Here is the reality Grace and I respect all your arguments and pov’s but if you can’t provide us with a simple definition of the meaning of the word woman, then we will never come close to a resolution but continue in an endless infinite mathematical loop. Because if we can’t come to terms in agreement to what that means then we are talkng apples
You may have addressed this before, but where do you stand with an XX with masculine features and excessive testosterone, should they be allowed to compete against women?
Noticer
SILVER
and you're not a leftist. Riiiiiiiight.
If I was my leftist credentials would be revoked for a. suggesting that gender is NOT a spectrum, and b. disagreeing that trans (whether MTF or FTM) can play in whatever sports category they want without limitation for the sake of participation and everyone else has to suck it.
Again my voting record is Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush, Obama, Romney, Didn't Vote, Trump, and don't know what I'm doing now (hate both of them). I'm the elusive undecided voter that is as center as they come and will be pushed one way or another by the side that disgusts her least (and y'alls on BOTH sides are making it hard....real hard....like how is every election I ever participated in worse than the one that came before it).
I think we have and I agree that they should be allowed to compete with biological woman because they are just that. But there is a big BUT in this…
Due to the fact there is no clear-cut way to distinguish between natural high testosterone levels and doping, I believe they need to be given the options to adjust their T levels if they wish to enter the biological arena.
Grace, let me break this down. A trans woman (MTF) is, by definition, a trans woman not a biological woman. We can't ignore this distinction because, biologically, they can never be real women. This matters for one simple reason... the entire argument for including trans women in women's sports is based on treating them as if they are the same as biological women, but they aren’t. They have a different biology, and that’s the crux of the issue imo.
When trans women were men, they were excluded from women’s sports, and no one batted an eye. They competed where their biology placed them. But now, because they've transitioned, we're suddenly expected to act like they’ve become women in every sense? They still carry the biological advantages that came from male development like greater muscle mass and bone density, advantages that don’t just disappear with hormone therapy. The fact remains though... they are trans women, not biological women. So, if they were excluded as men, why should they now be allowed to compete against women? The biological facts haven't changed right Grace?
This is where we can’t start handing out special rights. Being trans should not give someone a pass to override the biological distinctions that protect fairness in sports. We can’t create a separate set of rules just because someone transitions... this clearly undermines the entire structure of competitive categories. If we start making special exceptions for trans women, then we’re erasing the very point of having women’s categories to begin with. They’re there to ensure fair competition among biological equals only.
And here's why we’re even in court over this... smh... because we’ve changed the definition of something that used to be objective. It used to be simple... man, woman, based on biology. But now, with shifting definitions, we’re treating something subjective (gender identity) as though it overrides biological reality. This is why we’re in a mess of legal battles, because we’ve taken what was once clear-cut and muddied it with exceptions and redefinitions. The courts are involved precisely because we’ve tried to change the rules to fit a narrative that biology doesn’t support.
So to conclude this argument, trans women aren’t biological women period. And they shouldn’t be given special rights in sports just because they’ve transitioned or have been placed in a special group. Especially in sports at the highest level... We can’t ignore biological reality for the sake of inclusion. That’s why fairness in competition demands we hold the line. Really how can anyone with common sense argue this fact? The fact that trans women are NOT WOMEN. This has been proven by biology and it’s the fundamental flaw in all courts entertaining this ridiculous argument. Mic Drop...
Last edited:
Thanks for being open. PT is where I was going with the whole male therapist, just FYI but like I said, thanks for being open with the group. By the way, f you had a "regular" massage by a male, you would most likely remember that time bro.Since you're asking, I will answer.