Jump to content


Senior Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by J.C.MacSwell

  1. You might reasonably think that's fair, but officially for elite sport that isn't even close to what they consider fair...to quote a Clint Eastwood character "deserves got nuthin' to do with it!" But I think your comment accurately describes what many think is the best way to find a compromise for transgenders...give them the same chance as anyone else in the gender sport of their choice...except it isn't even close to true for cis-genders so the target is indefinable.
  2. That was just a "back at ya" tongue in cheek...No worries...I still look forward to your comments. "They" are in part those mandated to work this out and set rules for each sport, and include many with clout on both sides of the debate. I think my generalizations and comments were pretty fitting overall, though maybe a little harsh or blunt (but never disrespectful to the transgender athletes themselves). Pretty hard to thread the needle of compromise given that the hole is obviously small (non existent hole for many sports IMO). It seems also that many seem to have decided on erring on the side of fairness to cis-women over inclusion for transgenders, and are slowly accepting that no compromise that is workable to yield both can be found...which is what I have expected all along and I have never considered this experiment to be good for women's sports or the transgender women involved.
  3. Here is one example. Athletics has barred transgender women that went through puberty as males, and tightened restrictions on intersex athletes. (demanded the intersex athletes unnaturally suppress testosterone levels or be disqualified): https://www.cbc.ca/sports/olympics/summer/trackandfield/world-athletics-bans-trangender-women-1.6788581 Every sport will do it differently and even within athletics different events can be ruled differently. Another article Transgender women athletes' future in competition uncertain as sports organizations change rules, issue bans: Subtitle: Experts say not enough research to prove trans women athletes have unfair competitive advantage: (note where those "experts" referred to suggest the onus should be despite much science indicating the contrary) https://www.cbc.ca/sports/transgender-women-athletes-future-swimming-ban-1.6496497 from the article: "Days before FINA made its decision public, the Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) — which oversees international cycling events, including road, track, mountain and BMX — changed its policy for trans women athletes. Rather than banning them from competing, UCI halved the maximum permitted testosterone level from 5 nmol/L — the limit currently in place for a number of other sports, including athletics — to 2.5 nmol/L, and it doubled the amount of time athletes must maintain low testosterone before they can compete, to 24 months." But thankyou INow, for confirming you have no idea what you are talking about.
  4. Actually them as a group. On both sides of the argument that come up with absurdly unhealthy compromises. Changes are happening all the time. There have been considerable changes since this thread started.
  5. Okay. Successfully treated with drugs for the purpose of meeting an arbitrary target not set by their doctors, for the purpose of qualifying for and competing in a sport they would otherwise not be eligible to compete in. Accurate? At a point well before they eliminate all XY advantages entirely, they will have sufficiently harmed the individual to make up the difference. That seems to be their goal. It's a pretty despicable goal IMO. Fortunately they aren't allowed to do that at High School level and below.
  6. Can you suggest a term that means exactly that that you would be more comfortable with? It sounds like your "case" didn't have anything toward attacking my argument.
  7. Yes. Fortunately surgery is no longer required. You're suggesting my post is disingenuous?
  8. I don't do it. So no. The victims here are elite women athletes, those that might aspire to be, and the XY transgenders themselves that are encouraged to compete against XX females at elite levels and told to believe it's healthy and fair. Nice argument though, against my post..LOL.
  9. The counterargument seems to be that if they can be successfully drugged to the point XY chromosome advantage seems to disappear then it would be unfair not to let them compete, the onus should be on anyone wanting to question it to prove any remaining advantage, and that at the same time anyone questioning it should be considered anti-LGBTQIA+.
  10. A moderate Republican (many here would consider that some mythical creature...) would no doubt lose the Trump base, and anyone else might lose most of it...so enabling the most extreme Democrats to make demands of the Democrat agenda and make this much closer than it respectively could be or should be...so yes...it's possible. Trump himself? Can't see it but I was wrong last time.
  11. Was that directed at my post? (much of it intended as sarcasm) I consider the US Women's Soccer Team elite (and deserve pay based on their ability to generate revenue, not on their eliteness...as high as it is...otherwise they would deserve no more than any other, say, Olympic Champion in other sports that generates considerably less) And for some that might have missed it...no the xy chromosome 15 year olds that can beat them are not elite athletes (but they could become one with equal dedication)
  12. That comment, right there, demonstrates the threat to elite women's sports. Which I guess is fine if you consider them less than elite in any case, and that they should compete against other non elite athletes that, for one reason or another (including controlled drug use, whether healthy or not), happen to be at that same performance level overall, as arbitrarily judged by "experts" that think that is possible and reasonable. They've come along way baby! And high time they went back? Male sports are the real elite sports afterall...and as long as that's not threatened I guess everyone else should just take a seat and applaud...and of course enjoy the other more recreational levels that lesser athletes such as pretty much all with XX chromosomes can reasonably aspire to. Well done!
  13. I guess the Russian Military and Wagner PMC can get back to normal..after all neither is to blame...NATO must have been behind it...
  14. Why would I think Putin had the winning position vs Prigozhin? I don't think Prigozhin had enough support to take on the whole Russian military and political establishment without substantial defection to his side.
  15. Putin likely had the winning position but wasn't absolutely sure, so offered him a draw thinking that should be enough to win the tournament? Of course...in chess you can generally trust your own pieces...
  16. By that time though...might have to add Prigozhin He's probably halfway to Moscow already...(how long did it take him to take Bakhmut again?) Now...I certainly hope news of this doesn't discourage any Russian troops on the front lines in Ukraine, LOL.
  17. Depending on how this goes, I can see the Chechens and other ethnic groups reconsidering why they want to remain as part of Russia...and of course China may want to get involved in "protecting" ethnic Chinese in Russia's East...an excuse Putin should well understand...
  18. Russian Civil War? One can only hope... Prigozhin on his way to Moscow? Careful what you wish for... https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/23/europe/russia-mod-wagner-yevgeny-prigozhin-intl/index.html
  19. He seemed to like to point that out. It's quite possible for him to have scored that on a test...almost impossible for that to have been his IQ...even given the limitations of IQ as a measurement of intelligence.
  20. Some (certainly not all) trans athletes would consider what I think you are suggesting to be outright exclusion. But I would agree that it's a reasonable way forward. (But would the US Women's Soccer Team share their gate receipt driven pay with them? They would be doing the same job...or better)
  21. Noone has come up with a demonstrably fair and safe way to include trans females in the vast majority of elite female sport. (even in principle without insistence on and allowing harmful use of drugs to do so, arbitrary targets set for them and their doctors notwithstanding) The would be true of trans males, if for some reason they weren't allowed in female sports. They can't compete at elite level against males, in the vast majority of male sports. When it can be demonstrably done fairly and safely is the time to include them at elite level (unless they want to compete without a fair chance to win). To do otherwise is inviting a disaster for female sports, even if you think few trans athletes will take up the invitation. It wouldn't be, and wasn't, a healthy situation for anyone, trans athletes included. Again note that wheelchair athletes have their own divisions. Their inclusion in sports is not analogous to trans females wanting inclusion in elite female sports.
  22. Frankly, unless you are advocating for a system to allow those in wheelchairs to compete with a "fair and reasonable" chance of winning against elite athletes at the highest level in any sport of their choice, including allowing and encouraging drug use whether healthy or not, you are falling short of the extreme advocates for transgenders. So you pick a side, and you overcorrect. Sports fans include most all of transgender athletes. Do you look down on them as well, or just those on the side of the argument you didn't pick? The extremely small subset of humans may not be as small as you think. Without restrictions the female (born male) versions would dominate most female sports. Many XX chromosome individuals have the temerity of wanting to sport at elite levels as well. They need a separate division to do so, unless you exclude or place unhealthy restrictions on XY individuals that want to compete directly with them.
  23. Any objection to my comment based on logic is of course not relevant given that my comment was not written within any logically rigorous framework.
  24. If as the title of the thread suggests "whiteboards are racist"....then surely suggesting someone is, to their detriment, "stained" could have racist implications... Now...obviously you didn't mean it that way, and you will no doubt be forgiven...for now...though bets are off down the road if someone more woke than anyone here manages to find it... All tongue in cheek...of course
  25. More of a stain? What exactly are you subliminally implying by that Phi? (I kid...)
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.