Supreme Court rules against LGBTQ

[Fun coupon VOL]

You’ve now had three opportunities and have completely ignored the existence of choice of competitions each time. It’s almost like you didn’t know that was a thing and still can’t account for it.

That market will sort itself out. Just like it has with CrossFit or select soccer/softball and high school sports, or the various soccer leagues or the PGA etc. etc. all of them have controversial rules and competitors weigh the costs and benefits and either choose to continue or compete at other events. Nobody goes around harping about those organization’s rules constantly or tries to turn it into an us vs them. (Although I admit to believing you would if right wing pundits made any effort to make you mad about them).

If you can’t raise your kids or grandkids to not feel shame at being beaten by someone with a physiological advantage, they’ve got a tough row to hoe. The women’s 100M world record is 35 years old and it would have finished no better than 8th at the NAIA championship last year. It’s a half second behind the slowest time at the last Olympic final. If a little girl guns a 10.4 or even an 11 in the 100M and needs affirmation from the TSSAA or whatever because someone with a physiological advantage beat her then there’s shame to go around.

Same with marathons, which are routinely run as a single, mixed-gender heat. Same with basically any individual sport in which men have a physiological advantage.

It’s just people making up dumbassed reasons to stay mad about something trivial.

How do you feel about the special Olympics? Anyone can compete?

 

[RockyTop85]

I’m not saying what they have achieved, for example earning a scholarship and competing at the collegiate level, means nothing. Getting to that level is quite an accomplishment. However, they put in years of hard work and dedication, follow strict diets, etc in order to be the best/win championships/set records, and that opportunity was taken away from them by a man pretending to be a woman. So all those years of training, all of their aspirations of being the best were deemed irrelevant/worthless because a physically superior man was allowed to step in and take that from them. Thats not right, and it shouldn’t just be accepted. It isn’t a difficult concept, and I certainly see no contradiction. Men should compete against men, women against women.

Pretty sure you said it was all meaningless and have now walked it back twice. Don’t see that ass kicking technique used very often.

How do you not see a contradiction? The whole premise behind “women should compete against women” is that “women can’t be expected to beat above average men.”

Surely you agree with that, right?

Of course you do. Even somebody dumb enough to get five posts deep in this discussion and still think we’re arguing about whether men should be allowed to compete with women knows better than that. But if even you know that women can’t be expected to beat men, then a woman beating all other women but failing to beat someone who is genetically masculine does not diminish their achievement of beating all other women.

Anybody that feels differently, whether that’s you or the NCAA, is just wrong.

 

[whodeycin85]

I think RT got into BBs stash... It's funny watching a lefty say out of one side about how the US is male dominated and diversity is needed.... Then out there other side support a man saying he is a women and invalidating ask the hard work she put into her sport... He speaks like a millennial who never had to work hard on a competitive sport. The fact he can't understand why a man taking achievements away from a women is odd

 

[EasternVol]

Not from that particular vendor. But could you provide a single example of goods or services to which anyone would not have access?

Which brings us to the heart ofthe issue. The spurned customer is demanding that the particular business owner serve that customer. The owner cannot demand that the customer patronize his/her business. The customer thus enjoys a freedom of commerce not afforded to the owner.

One would think that enterprising entrepreneurs would rush to fill any hypothetical void left by the recalcitrant owner, taking advantage of the opportunity.

In the highly unlikely event that a truly essential service was not being provided, the sympathetic taxpayers would gladly suggest tax increases to open public, government funded- and -operated florists, bakeries, catering businesses, wedding planning services, etc. After all, taxpayers (including those who homeschool or send their kids to private schools) support public school systems open to all. We have public health clinics funded by taxes, public housing, state and local parks, etc. Why wouldn't we do the same for all goods and services instead of forcing others to do what we won't? The latter seems hypocritical. Besides, we can always open our own business open to all if we are truly concerned.

A win-win for freedom for all!

Right?

So socialism is your solution to discrimination?

 

[RockyTop85]

By that analogy Thomas can compete with women but wouldn't be eligible for the women's championship. Even though men and women run the marathon together, the results are separate. A woman who finishes well back in the overall field will win the women's championship because she was the fastest woman. That didn't happen in swimming, hence the discussion.

I don’t disagree, but my point is the diminution of woman’s achievement if it coincides with a male running the same race. I think it’s incorrect for anyone to recognize any such diminution because of the same expectations that allow the marathons to be run simultaneously without slighting the female runners.

 

[RockyTop85]

How do you feel about the special Olympics? Anyone can compete?

I think, at this point, if you still believe I’m arguing about whether or not men and women can compete on an even playing field then you probably have a shot at qualifying.

 

[BigOrangeMojo]

If @McDad has the maturity of a 12 year old, can he play in the Little League World Series?

 

[RockyTop85]

Is there an appropriate level of outrage over Lia in the pool with girls? And I’m not trying to be snide here.

Is the problem in your view the disagreement with it, or the level of disagreement with it?

Probably belongs about on par with steroids, does it not? What’s the difference?

 

[85SugarVol]

Probably belongs about on par with steroids, does it not? What’s the difference?

I think a juiced girl in the pool is a fine comparison. There is hardly any difference with regards to competitive impact.

I think there would be much greater outrage over steroids if they let them play and left their records up.

 

[whodeycin85]

Probably belongs about on par with steroids, does it not? What’s the difference?

There was huge outrage about steroids in baseball....

 

[allvol123]

I think RT got into BBs stash... It's funny watching a lefty say out of one side about how the US is male dominated and diversity is needed.... Then out there other side support a man saying he is a women and invalidating ask the hard work she put into her sport... He speaks like a millennial who never had to work hard on a competitive sport. The fact he can't understand why a man taking achievements away from a women is odd

I think he blocked a girl’s shot in a pick up game one time and walked away with swagger. Then heard all the guys laughing at him.

 

[Carl Pickens]

The point is pretty obvious: Businesses exist to serve customers. You don't quiz customers on who they are or what they believe before agreeing to serve them. And you don't present customers with a list of your beliefs and tell prospective customers that some of those beliefs may prevent them from doing business with you. If you're a baker and someone wants a cake, make the freakin' cake and stop with all the religious nonsense. I'm pretty sure there's been a universal rule in business for ages: If a customer walks through the door and wants to avail himself or herself of your product or service, you provide the product or service, get paid and wait for the next customer. Leave it to wacky American religious freaks to challenge this fundamental principle of business. Businesses have a right to refuse service to people who are being disruptive or potentially breaking laws, of course--but that's not what this is about.

Some people actually have strong beliefs and a moral code….. and some are common street whores

 

[RockyTop85]

I think a juiced girl in the pool is a fine comparison. There is hardly any difference with regards to competitive impact.

I think there would be much greater outrage over steroids if they let them play and left their records up.

Like this? When is the last time you saw a PF thread where there are like 2 dozen people who are irrationally angry about baseball?

 

[85SugarVol]

View attachment 561684
Like this? When is the last time you saw a PF thread where there are like 2 dozen people who are irrationally angry about baseball?

You got me there.
But Baseball held them to account, Bonds and Clemens got left out of the Hall. Their records are struck in all the conversations that matter.

And more importantly imo, they don’t let them play.

Going back to the analogy - they’re letting the juiced swimmer compete. And they’re not setting aside the results. Lia was the All-American, and the girl who finished #11 wasn’t.

 

[82_VOL_83]

Pretty sure you said it was all meaningless and have now walked it back twice. Don’t see that ass kicking technique used very often.

How do you not see a contradiction? The whole premise behind “women should compete against women” is that “women can’t be expected to beat above average men.”

Surely you agree with that, right?

Of course you do. Even somebody dumb enough to get five posts deep in this discussion and still think we’re arguing about whether men should be allowed to compete with women knows better than that. But if even you know that women can’t be expected to beat men, then a woman beating all other women but failing to beat someone who is genetically masculine does not diminish their achievement of beating all other women.

Anybody that feels differently, whether that’s you or the NCAA, is just wrong.

This is just ****ing stupid. It's a little early in the day to be this ****ed up.

 

[McDad]

If @McDad has the maturity of a 12 year old, can he play in the Little League World Series?

I'd rather Ump.

 

[hog88]

Is there an appropriate level of outrage over Lia in the pool with girls? And I’m not trying to be snide here.

Is the problem in your view the disagreement with it, or the level of disagreement with it?

RT85 must have some eligibility left and is thinking of a comeback.

 

[RockyTop85]

This is just ****ing stupid. It's a little early in the day to be this ****ed up.

I’m glad you finally sacked up and responded to me directly. Disappointed this is the best you could do, but not surprised.

 

[RockyTop85]

You got me there.
But Baseball held them to account, Bonds and Clemens got left out of the Hall. Their records are struck in all the conversations that matter.

And more importantly imo, they don’t let them play.

Going back to the analogy - they’re letting the juiced swimmer compete. And they’re not setting aside the results. Lia was the All-American, and the girl who finished #11 wasn’t.

Baseball was also huge. And, yes, to @whodeycin85, there were people mad but it was baseball fans and it still wasn’t inserted into conversations like this, nobody tried to make a political issue of it, and people didn’t just fly into a blind rage and ignore what was actually being discussed.

Most women’s collegiate athletics are more on par with professional CrossFit.

 

[85SugarVol]

Baseball was also huge. And, yes, to @whodeycin85, there were people mad but it was baseball fans and it still wasn’t inserted into conversations like this, nobody tried to make a political issue of it, and people didn’t just fly into a blind rage and ignore what was actually being discussed.

Most women’s collegiate athletics are more on par with professional CrossFit.

Again, I think the big difference is that steroids was in the shadows. And they don’t let them play - it’s against the rules.

The outrage would have been much greater if they had openly used and been allowed to compete. The outrage today would be huge if steroid users were allowed to compete.

 

[615vols]

Pretty sure you said it was all meaningless and have now walked it back twice. Don’t see that ass kicking technique used very often.

How do you not see a contradiction? The whole premise behind “women should compete against women” is that “women can’t be expected to beat above average men.”

Surely you agree with that, right?

Of course you do. Even somebody dumb enough to get five posts deep in this discussion and still think we’re arguing about whether men should be allowed to compete with women knows better than that. But if even you know that women can’t be expected to beat men, then a woman beating all other women but failing to beat someone who is genetically masculine does not diminish their achievement of beating all other women.

Anybody that feels differently, whether that’s you or the NCAA, is just wrong.

Coming from the dope who has already once had to backtrack after leaving out key details. Oh that’s right, you “just missed it”. Well to no surprise, you missed it again. From my post explaining my stance : “All of the women’s hard work and dedication that they put in for years and years is now somewhat squandered.” Apparently your reading comprehension sucks as bad as your arguments in this thread. Need me to type it out in crayon like colors for you? I can’t understand this for you, it’s been broken down and explained in simplest terms and for some reason you’re the only one who can’t grasp it. Your idiotic argument is that the backlash is overblown, and that women’s achievements aren’t being diminished by men in women’s sports. My argument is that men don’t belong in women’s sports, and it deserves all the backlash we can give. We have real life examples now, which I’ve already given. Women who have trained and worked for years and years lost out on being the national Champion because a man pretending to be a woman walked right in and took it from them due to being physically superior. That does take away from their accomplishments. They could’ve been the national champ, could’ve been the Ivy League record holder. Now they can’t. There’s zero contradiction there, you are just either too stupid to understand or you refuse to admit it because you want to play along in fantasy land where everyone gets to pick their gender and be whatever makes them “feel” better. Like I said, you are embarrassing yourself.

 

[82_VOL_83]

I’m glad you finally sacked up and responded to me directly. Disappointed this is the best you could do, but not surprised.

Sober up and we can talk. You are obviously trippin.

 

[RockyTop85]

Coming from the dope who has already once had to backtrack after leaving out key details. Oh that’s right, you “just missed it”. Well to no surprise, you missed it again. From my post explaining my stance : “All of the women’s hard work and dedication that they put in for years and years is now somewhat squandered.” Apparently your reading comprehension sucks as bad as your arguments in this thread. Need me to type it out in crayon like colors for you? I can’t understand this for you, it’s been broken down and explained in simplest terms and for some reason you’re the only one who can’t grasp it. Your idiotic argument is that the backlash is overblown, and that women’s achievements aren’t being diminished by men in women’s sports. My argument is that men don’t belong in women’s sports, and it deserves all the backlash we can give. We have real life examples now, which I’ve already given. Women who have trained and worked for years and years lost out on being the national Champion because a man pretending to be a woman walked right in and took it from them due to being physically superior. That does take away from their accomplishments. They could’ve been the national champ, could’ve been the Ivy League record holder. Now they can’t. There’s zero contradiction there, you are just either too stupid to understand or you refuse to admit it because you want to play along in fantasy land where everyone gets to pick their gender and be whatever makes them “feel” better. Like I said, you are embarrassing yourself.

So the women who had to swim against that dude calling himself Leah, all of their years of hard work/training/dedication doesn’t matter.

That was backtrack #1, asskicker. Here’s the original. I heard they’ve started clinical trials on a new Alzheimer’s drug. You enroll yet?

 

[C-south]

That was backtrack #1, asskicker. Here’s the original. I heard they’ve started clinical trials on a new Alzheimer’s drug. You enroll yet?

They need to add Abilify to your lexapro.

 

[615vols]

That was backtrack #1, asskicker. Here’s the original. I heard they’ve started clinical trials on a new Alzheimer’s drug. You enroll yet?

Explaining what I mean isn’t backtracking. I’ve stated the same thing to you repeatedly, and you have confirmed that you are indeed too stupid to understand. You ever figure out why everyone else in the thread is calling you Luther, embarrassing, stupid, etc?