Reddit reacts to Gavin Newsom criticizing the idea of men in women's sports

submitted by xoenix from old.reddit.com

all 9 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]xoenix[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

Fascinating comment in this thread about how this shouldn't be a hill to die on... but for some reason thinking it's the right that's dying on this hill...?

Then leftist infighting ensues.

[–]Jiminy 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

BS aside but I feel like letting young girls play sports and not have to play against men is unironically a good hill to die on. Parents with daughters would agree.

[–]Nonbinaryandroid 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

The American left, the more reasonable side at least and not the online crazies, think in terms of "this is such a minority issue that only effects a few people, why is it such a big deal" and so they think the right is essentially dregging it out and exaggerating it in the culture war for political wins.

To some extent that's correct, for sports especially there's only a few trans women playing in women's leagues, but there's more than there used to be.

What they don't understand is that the leftist tend towards tolerance and acceptance (which in general I agree with) if taken to the extreme can be taken advantage of by bad actors. So someone who say, wants to win by cheating, has a big loophole to do so if everyone is too accepting. (This bleeds into other aspects of the lefts inability to grapple with systemic abuse of their systems, such as welfare fraud, immigration fraud, etc, because they are too concerned with the emotional state of people falsely getting caught up with accusations of abuse to the point where they are unable to take action against it until it drags down the whole system and provokes a knee jerk right wing response to gut the systems entirely as you are seeing in the US now.)

Ultimately it doesn't matter that the trans issue is such a minority issue that most people don't see or experience. What matters is you've got instances of very clear violations of a basic precept (no men in women's sports) and rather than taking the position of the majority of women and their feelings on the matter they've opted to be more concerned for the very small minority of trans peoples feelings instead to the point they don't care if women's sports just ceases to be as a consequence. Of course they will lose on the issue.

It's all about balance or rather a lack of it that happens as political parties tend to retreat into purely emotional ideological arguments about certain things rather than have any sort of robust discussion. Immigration is a good example of an issue that has been used that way by both sides for years. Most of the loudest voices say things on the news that if not totally untrue absolutely fails to capture the complexities of the issue that it might as well be. (Don't get me started on the use of terms like "open border" what does that even mean?)

[–]xoenix[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

It was actually the left exaggerating the trans issue to warp all of the sciences, history, curtail free speech, gaslight people to go along with idiocy. Perhaps worst of all was dropping the "LGBTQ+" issue into just about every aspect of public life - where it might not actually affect you, but merely commenting or reacting to it in the wrong way could get you purged from whatever group this was happening in, whether workplace, social, media, academia or even the courts.

[–]Nonbinaryandroid 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Exaggerating the trans issue to totally ignore all science history and the like is more like it. But you have to remember a lot of this was very online and a lot of the American left is very much not "online" in the same sense we are. It's mostly boomers and older people who maybe know or know in passing like one trans person who is halfway normal or otherwise not a troublemaker and so default to the "general tolerance" mindset. With a defent amount of blind faith in authority tossed in.

I think that's one of the reasons why there is so much effort but into shut down any discussions of the issue because it's one of those "the more you know about it, the less you can support it" sorts of things imho.

I think it's important though to differentiate between the "left" and the "woke left" or radical left or whatever you want to call it in American politics same as you have to differentiate between the right and the "evangelical right" as while they often find themselves on the same side of certain issues, the degree of how far they will take it differs considerably.

Most Americans trend more towards the center of most issues but the extremes tend to set the terms if debate as it were.

At this point the trans issue has gone from fringe online discussion to a mainstream culture war issue, so the numbers of how many trans people there actually are is irrelevant (just as with the black lives matter movements the number of black people killed by police was just assumed to be much higher than it actually was)

The issue becomes more emotional than anything and about the morality of the issue rather than the numbers or actual effect on society. The left is just completely broadsided by it as they assumed they were part of the working class and the voice of the common people and they are quickly finding out that they are not and are clueless to address what the common people actually think.

It is common in American politics for the political parties that are not in power to rally the common folk. Once they gain power they tend to focus more on partisan interests over time and lose that focus which gives the other party a chance to address them and flip the balance again.

The purging is a consequence of increased partisanism. As of course one of the best ways to get ahead is to eliminate your competition. And if you aren't able to win in a straight debate it's far easier and more expedient to discredit your opponent in some way to avoid the debate entirely. It's much easier to paint someone as a Nazi keep them defensive than to discuss economics. It's much better in elections as well as we assume the average voter responds more strongly to Nazis than a tariffs or tax rates. Assuming the Americans know what any of those are of course. The Nazis at least are one of Hollywoods most represented groups so Americans recognize them.

[–]HugodeCrevellier 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I wonder how these pro-castration imbeciles would feel about removing gender categories altogether:
Neither men's nor women's, just 'sports'.
This would, of course, end up making most sports into an exclusively male thing,
right back to how sports began in Ancient Greece.

[–]xoenix[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Then they would need to de-legitimize winning; it would be about participation and inclusion only.

[–]HugodeCrevellier 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Or perhaps ... "We need sports DEI to combat Speed/Strength Privilege"!

[–]soundsituationQueer woman of penis 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

That would be consistent with their philosophy.