NCAA - North Carolina

[Orangedogsrule]

The Obama Administration's official position is that, it is a violation of Title IX to discriminate against anyone who "self identifies" as a female even if their birth gender is male. The requirements do not go beyond self-identity. No medical diagnosis, no requirement for hormone treatments, no established pattern of behavior -- just self identity. The Justice and Education Departments issued directives saying exactly that.

For athletes who were born male, but want to compete as female, the NCAA requires they undergo hormone therapy while competing. Under the rules of the Obama Administration, the NCAA is in violation of Title IX.

Let the NCAA get in compliance before they start taking actions against anyone else.

Hypocrites.

NCAA should dump any school's individual team(s) that let men self identifying as women play because that absolutely can be done to gain an edge on the competition. Who could possibly respect a Win under these circumstances? All those teams with men claiming to be women should be dropped to the level of club teams. They can go play on the intermural fields.

 

[utvolpj]

Maybe, but -- unless you're more focused on North Carolina politics than NCAA athletics (and isn't this forum supposed to be about the latter?), that doesn't matter.

It absolutely matters when it's their argument and the claim is the "killed the ncaa" with such nonsense. The statement is screeching penned by an idiot

I already cited the letter for you, PJ. If you chose not to read it, or can't understand its implications in full, say so and I'll try to help you through it. But that is most certainly what it opens the door to.

I've read their opinion and know it's not going to hold up if challenged. You also fail to admit that it states the gender must be declared and there are exceptions given if others are uncomfortable. What it would ultimately lead to is individual locker rooms for all and that model is unsustainable

 

[Orangedogsrule]

I can see it now. Kentucky women's basketball with 3 Men's McDonalds All Americans and 4 other men's blue chip recruits self identifying as women, getting championship rings, waiting on their turn for the 'one-and-done' dudes to get drafted and, lo! They're men again!

 

[VFL-82-JP]

I've read their opinion and know it's not going to hold up if challenged. You also fail to admit that it states the gender must be declared and there are exceptions given if others are uncomfortable. What it would ultimately lead to is individual locker rooms for all and that model is unsustainable

Okay, you continue to rail against North Carolina politicians all you like, you'll have to do it without me. I'm here for the sports.

As for the part of your response that did have to do with sports (the part I quoted):

1. You can't know if it will hold up or not, if challenged. Because that hasn't happened yet.

2. Gender must be declared, but that takes no time and requires no proof. I declare myself a woman. Ta-da! You have no legal grounds under the current interpretation of Title IX to argue otherwise. Not one single word says that I have to prove I felt that way last week, or last month, or last year. No medical diagnosis or treatment can be required. No physical identification can be required. And no one, explicitly no one, can gainsay me. You must immediately begin treating me as a woman:

when a student...notifies the school administration that the student will assert a gender identity, ... the school will begin treating the student consistent with the student’s gender identity...there is no medical diagnosis or treatment requirement that students must meet....

3. You read the part about exceptions and being "uncomfortable" wrong. It says the opposite of what you thought. Here's the quote:

A school’s Title IX obligation...requires schools to provide transgender students equal access...even in circumstances in which other students, parents, or community members raise objections or concerns. As is consistently recognized in civil rights cases, the desire to accommodate others’ discomfort cannot justify a policy that singles out and disadvantages a particular class of students.

It's saying that there are NOT exceptions even if others are uncomfortable. So your understanding of it was 180-degrees out.

This is a mess. It's gonna get messier. You can hate on NC politicians all you want, but their concerns have some validity.

 

[volfanhill]

I can see it now. Kentucky women's basketball with 3 Men's McDonalds All Americans and 4 other men's blue chip recruits self identifying as women, getting championship rings, waiting on their turn for the 'one-and-done' dudes to get drafted and, lo! They're men again!

You strike me as the kind of guy who is scared of his own shadow.

 

[utvolpj]

3. You read the part about exceptions and being "uncomfortable" wrong. It says the opposite of what you thought. Here's the quote:



It's saying that there are NOT exceptions even if others are uncomfortable. So your understanding of it was 180-degrees out.

Actually it states

however, the Student may request access to private facilities based on privacy, safety, or other concerns;

If equal protection is the goal then this applies to every student. Put one male in the women's locker room and they will all request private facilities

This is a mess. It's gonna get messier. You can hate on NC politicians all you want, but their concerns have some validity.

It's not a mess because it is addressing an issue that is so unlikely to happen that it's a true waste to worry about. There are not thousands of guys just waiting to join the women's teams. Once to get past high school they won't be recruited anyways or there will be boycotts. As always, the market will correct itself

 

[VFL-82-JP]

So PJ, you have been reduced to this as your entire counter-argument: "all the real girls are going to ask for their own bathroom when the guy-girl walks in, and that's gonna reverse this whole problem, and everything will be ok because that is unsustainable."

No one believes that, PJ, not even you. You're just looking for one shred of your original argument to cling to.

 

[Godfatha]

I have a real problem with sports entities like the NCAA getting involved in politics.

 

[utvolpj]

So PJ, you have been reduced to this as your entire counter-argument: "all the real girls are going to ask for their own bathroom when the guy-girl walks in, and that's gonna reverse this whole problem, and everything will be ok because that is unsustainable."

No one believes that, PJ, not even you. You're just looking for one shred of your original argument to cling to.

Yes I believe if you put a male in a HS girls locker room that they will request alternative space for safety or privacy concerns. That's simply common sense

You believe something that is not even legally binding is going to lead to the downfall of every women's sport. Explain again how mine is ridiculous and yours is rational

 

[VFL-82-JP]

Explain again....

Not going to explain again, but the entire conversation is in the thread already; you go back to it as often as you like.

 

[utvolpj]

Not going to explain again, but the entire conversation is in the thread already; you go back to it as often as you like.

You haven't explained anything. You simply took my argument directed at another line of discussion and used it to prove your point.

This will not be an issue because equal protection will make it unsustainable. I even used the letter you linked, like you requested, to prove that was definitely a probable outcome yet you ignored it.

You've yet to explain how an opinion that's not even legally binding will lead to the downfall of women's sports. I'm guessing that's on purpose

 

[Jxn Vol]

All this is stupid. Politicians are stupid. NCAA is stupid. Confused people are stupid. Posters that defend all this stupid political crap are stupid. Having a fraction of a fraction of a percent of the population dictate policy is stupid. I'm stupid for thinking anyone has any common sense anymore. Good day.

 

[FatherVol]

Of course it does nothing to stop that from happening in the men's restroom where my boys are does it? Seems pretty short sighted to not protect all children

Do you think a law removing restrictions for men entering women's bathrooms increases or decreases the risk to your wife and daughters? Would you, perhaps, call it short sighted?

You've yet to explain how an opinion that's not even legally binding . . .

Why do you keep saying this? The law is Title IX (20 U.S.C. § 1681(a) to be exact). Schools and other entities that violate this law are subject to loss of federal funds and may be sued in civil court and forced to pay fines, damages and attorney's fees. The Education Department and the Justice Department are the ones charged with interpreting and enforcing the law.

You also fail to admit that it states . . . there are exceptions given if other are uncomfortable.

VFL-82-JP is absolutely right. You are completely misreading this portion of the DOJ/DOE opinion. It clearly states that schools are not prohibited from providing separate accommodations for those who are uncomfortable, but they are under no obligation to do so.

An issue that really wasn't one anyways.

Truer words were never spoken. But, the peacocking "progressives" in Charlotte decided they needed to pass a law to solve a problem that, as you state, didn't exist. The peacocking of the GOP predictably followed. The peacocking of the NCAA is contemptible.

 

[utvolpj]

Do you think a law removing restrictions for men entering women's bathrooms increases or decreases the risk to your wife and daughters? Would you, perhaps, call it short sighted?

It does nothing. I have sons and this does absolutely nothing to make them safer. Why does no one care about the little boys? They don't because they know it's a useless argument. My wife thinks it's pretty stupid too

Pro tip: men were already there *gasp*

Why do you keep saying this? The law is Title IX (20 U.S.C. § 1681(a) to be exact). Schools and other entities that violate this law are subject to loss of federal funds and may be sued in civil court and forced to pay fines, damages and attorney's fees. The Education Department and the Justice Department are the ones charged with interpreting and enforcing the law.

I say it because it is true. This letter is not law. The judicial interprets laws not the legislative. Check your sources

VFL-82-JP is absolutely right. You are completely misreading this portion of the DOJ/DOE opinion. It clearly states that schools are not prohibited from providing separate accommodations for those who are uncomfortable, but they are under no obligation to do so.

That is not what it said. Equal protection would dictate they are obligated

 

[LouderVol]

Does title IX apply to HS?

 

[FatherVol]

It does nothing. I have sons and this does absolutely nothing to make them safer.

Pro tip: men were already there *gasp*

Let's be clear. The law I was referring to was the Charlotte law (the one that was later overridden by the NC legislature). But, let's agree that both the Charlotte law and the NC law did nothing to endanger or protect your sons (or unicorns, for that matter). However, if the Charlotte law did anything at all, it put women at increased risk. Do you disagree?

Thanks for the pro tip, but as I have made clear, I agree that men were already there and *gasp* there were no problems. So why did Charlotte feel the need to poke this hornet's nest?

I say it because it is true. This letter is not law. The judicial interprets laws not the legislative.

I would say that the DOJ interprets the law every day of the week. But, this argument is simply a distraction. The gist of your argument is, the DOE/DOJ interpretation is not enforceable and therefore much ado about nothing. Great! But, if that's true, then why is the NCAA making much ado and pulling all of their events?

That is not what it said. Equal protection would dictate they are obligated

Feel free to cite at a single reliable source for this interpretation. I can't find one.

 

[FatherVol]

Does title IX apply to HS?

Title IX applies to preschools, elementary schools, middle schools, high schools, and every other type of educational institution or program that receives any sort of federal funding.

And, if they receive any support from federal agencies, it applies to prisons, businesses, unions, hospitals, and much, much more.

 

[vols4sure]

Yes I believe if you put a male in a HS girls locker room that they will request alternative space for safety or privacy concerns. That's simply common sense

Maybe a girl's only bathroom? Oh wait, we have gone full circle.

 

[C1500]

Maybe a girl's only bathroom? Oh wait, we have gone full circle.

Common sense is not so common.

 

[RollinVol]

I need to eat a bunch of Taco Bell and chipotle. Then drive to ncaa headquarters and just go on in the lady restroom. I think guys should do this

 

[LouderVol]

Title IX applies to preschools, elementary schools, middle schools, high schools, and every other type of educational institution or program that receives any sort of federal funding.

And, if they receive any support from federal agencies, it applies to prisons, businesses, unions, hospitals, and much, much more.

i was going to say its one thing if it was only college where you had adults dealing this, but with the minors involved its a much different animal.

 

[VolStrom]

I've just skimmed this thread and don't have anything to add, but I will make a comment. I'm damn glad I only have another 20 years or so to live, because this is one F'd up country.

 

[appvol]

And, the NC GOP didn't start it. Charlotte did, when they passed a law that would have prohibited me, as a store owner, from stopping a bearded man from hanging out in the women's restroom -- even if my female customers or children were frightened by "his" presence.

 

[appvol]

Our Country this day and age.

 

[UT_Dutchman]

All this is stupid. Politicians are stupid. NCAA is stupid. Confused people are stupid. Posters that defend all this stupid political crap are stupid. Having a fraction of a fraction of a percent of the population dictate policy is stupid. I'm stupid for thinking anyone has any common sense anymore. Good day.

I agree, but I also believe if you are born with boy parts you are a male if you are born with girl parts you are a female. It's simple and no matter how much someone thinks or wants to be the other sex they just aren't. Jeez this country is getting so messed up.