A girls' basketball team forfeited the championship to a team that allowed a male (trans-identified) play on the team, for the safety of the real girls. Refusing to play is the only way forward.

submitted by iamonlyoneman from archive.is

top 100 commentsshow all 104
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]iamonlyoneman[S] 13 insightful - 2 fun13 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 2 fun -  (45 children)

If girls refuse to play against boys, and especially if the adults whose job it is to keep the girls safe refuse to allow girls to play against boys, that's the grassroots way to make the insanity stop.

[–]ActuallyNot 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (44 children)

that's the grassroots way to make the insanity stop.

They're not going to change Vermont law that way.

[–]iamonlyoneman[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (43 children)

If the girls all refused to play, there would be a boys league and an AGP boys league, and vermont would be a laughingstock and lefties HATE to be mocked so it would still work.

[–]ActuallyNot 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (42 children)

If the girls all refused to play

Yeah, but who's going to sign up for that much fear and hatred except Christians?

[–]iamonlyoneman[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

It worked for the cyclists in UK

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

It worked for the cyclists in UK

1) Nope. The girls didn't all refuse to play. The UCI rules that a cyclist who is still registered as a male cyclist cannot compete as a woman.

2) There's very different issues at the professional level compared to the high school level.

[–]iamonlyoneman[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

They didn't even have to refuse to play. They threatened it and the rule changed, which is "worked"

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

What did the rule change to?

[–]iamonlyoneman[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/08/sport/british-cycling-trans-scli-spt-intl/index.html

The new rule was "no dudes"

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

Was that the wording?

[–]VulptexVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (33 children)

Why do you blame everything on Christians? Atheists, Jews, Muslims, and pagans are just as likely to be hateful and whatnot. Why single out Christianity, other than simply because it's an American tradition and you hate America?

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (32 children)

Why do you blame everything on Christians?

This bigotry was specifically from a christian school, raising their "sincerely held belief"

Atheists, Jews, Muslims, and pagans are just as likely to be hateful and whatnot.

A call bullshit on Atheists. They are unlikely to be hateful. Jews are an unusual case: I would guess they'd be less hateful and also less religious in the US. Israel itself seems to collect the more religious and therefore more hateful. Muslims, you're dead right: They're very similar to Christians. (And most of the doctrine is the same.) I don't know a lot of pagans.

Why single out Christianity, other than simply because it's an American tradition and you hate America?

Freedom from religion is an American tradition: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion", remember?

It's been feeding a christian theocracy movement only since the late 40s. Putting "In God we trust" on the money in 1955, was the beginning of the descent away from freedom. Christian nationalists storming the capital to disrupt the transfer of power to the democratically elected president is the middle.

[–]VulptexVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (31 children)

Why are atheists unlikely to be hateful? They believe all morality is relative. They can hate whoever and whatever they want, commit any horrors they want, and have no guilt. Their only motive not to would be to benefit from others. North Korea is atheist and tortures dissidents. They don't believe morality is real; so because they want to torture and have the means to do so without consequences, therefore it is right in their eyes. For an atheist, the only source of morality is nature, whose fundamental principle is "might makes right". That's terrible ethics.

If you don't believe me, Adolf Hitler, the devil for leftists, abhorred Christianity because of its ethics. He thought it weak and fit only for slaves. He disliked it precisely because it was not hateful. It was Christianity he didn't like, and not all Abrahamic religions, seeing as he was fine with Islam. I think he even planned to genocide Christians if he could make them a minority.

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (30 children)

Why are atheists unlikely to be hateful?

They don't have a prescribed ethics based on hate.

They believe all morality is relative.

Not necessarily. But in any case our ethics is considered rather than prescribed. So it tends to avoid the hate based ethics you get from biblical literalists.

They can hate whoever and whatever they want, commit any horrors they want, and have no guilt.

Everyone who is neurologically normal has the natural ethics of guilt and empathy.

God botherers externalise the guilt as much as they can with the belief that god can forgive them. And that their transgressions are due to temptation from a third party. And Christians tend to resist empathising with the outgroup, and show more parochial behaviour, whereas atheists empathise more inclusively. For instance: Religion, parochialism and intuitive cooperation

Their only motive not to would be to benefit from others.

No. We have empathy, and desire the most people to be most happy.

They don't believe morality is real

Bullshit. The vast field of ethics is dominated by atheist thought. Prescribed ethics of religion doesn't admit much discussion or development. And, as time has passed, we can see how unethical the standards are.

so because they want to torture and have the means to do so without consequences

Bullshit. If you want to torture, you're sick, and probably have some significant psychological or neurological disorder.

and have the means to do so without consequences

If you're only not torturing people because you fear hell, you're an evil cunt. I do it because I don't want to torture people. Moreover, I don't want you to torture people, because I value their happiness, and I empathise with them.

For an atheist, the only source of morality is nature, whose fundamental principle is "might makes right".

No. We think about it.

If you don't believe me, Adolf Hitler, the devil for leftists, abhorred Christianity because of its ethics.

Adolf Hitler was Christian, certainly early on. He opposed atheism both publicly and privately. His concept of god diverged from the church as time went by, but he abhorred atheism much more than christianity.

[–]VulptexVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (15 children)

I don't know if Hitler was an atheist, but he certainly wasn't fond of Christianity. He may have been a Christian at one time, but he also had a positive opinion of Jews at one time. He was very clear that he detested Christian ethics. He apparently believed religion (excluding Judaism and Christianity obviously) was very valuable to society; but he seems to have viewed it in a utilitarian sense rather than actually believing it himself.

Anyway, all the descriptions you gave of Christians sound exactly like the Pharisees, who were Jesus's most vicious enemies and played a major role in having him executed in the most gruesome way (though the Romans had plenty of blood on their hands too). And you're using that to define Christianity. This doesn't make any sense.

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

I don't know if Hitler was an atheist, but he certainly wasn't fond of Christianity.

He started as a christian, and appealed to Christianity to achieve power. He was certainly less fond of atheism than he was of Christianity.

He was very clear that he detested Christian ethics. He apparently believed religion (excluding Judaism and Christianity obviously) was very valuable to society; but he seems to have viewed it in a utilitarian sense rather than actually believing it himself.

He was a lot like Trump, in these respects, wasn't he?

Anyway, all the descriptions you gave of Christians sound exactly like the Pharisees, who were Jesus's most vicious enemies and played a major role in having him executed in the most gruesome way

Very little is known about Jesus's life. Most scholars believe that he existed, but the evidence of that is equivocal. "[T]he Pharisees, who were Jesus's most vicious enemies and played a major role in having him executed in the most gruesome way" is highly speculative.

And you're using that to define Christianity.

Nope. Just people who consider themselves to be Christian is my definition of Christians.

[–]VulptexVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

For an atheist worldview, read the Ring of Gyges. The "good" person becomes incredibly villainous once given the ability to get away with it. So not only does power corrupt, but many were only faking being good while they needed to, but once they're in power they can take the mask off. Those we think are the best people may not really be, but rather merely the best actors. Because with natural selection as law, where might makes right because might wins the game of life, why shouldn't you be evil if you have the might? But if the world is below greater things, it is no longer that simple.

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

For an atheist worldview, read the Ring of Gyges.

I have an atheist worldview. I don't need to read fiction to grasp it.

But you should know that the ancient greeks had many gods. They were not atheist.

Because with natural selection as law, where might makes right because might wins the game of life, why shouldn't you be evil if you have the might?

At the lowest level, because you have guilt and empathy.

But most people also think about ethics, and try to help others where we can. Atheists are better at this than Christians, because we think better, so we can act better. We're not told "Whoever spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him is diligent to discipline him", and so think "well I'd better hit the shit out of my kids, because god said so". We look at the psychology and have learned that corporal punishment is linked to anxiety, depression, substance abuse and antisocial behaviours in adulthood. So we are able to decide not to do it. Because our ethics are considered, not prescribed.

We're not fucking idiots, enabling us to not be fucking evil. Christians don't have the same basis. They must believe what they're told no matter how evil or patently stupid it is.

[–]catfishrising 9 insightful - 4 fun9 insightful - 3 fun10 insightful - 4 fun -  (1 child)

Strange game. The only winning move is not to play.

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

nice reference.

[–]clownworlddropout 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

A good step forward, but we really need to push their gender ideology nonsense out of the classroom.

[–]ActuallyNot 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

A good step forward

One team of 12 forfeit their chance to make the semi finals of the division 4 of the Vermont high schools girls basketball.

It's certainly a step sideways around anti discrimination laws. It looks like a slight step backwards marking the christian school as the bigots. Maybe that is a step forwards.

[–]thomastheglassexpert 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I have been a proponent of this exact idea for some years. If the opposition has a Male on their team, all of the girls simply step back and let the boy compete all by himself. I am an old man my own daughter is already grown and a mother but I guarantee you there would be no boys in the girls locker room with me around.

[–]Bigs 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

"We're all equal" lol

[–]dicknipples 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (23 children)

“As a religious organization, the school has a statutory and constitutional right to make decisions based on its religious beliefs

But this is not the problem, and it should be avoided in all discussions of this kind. The problem they should ephasize is that high testosterone levels in trans players should automatically prohibit them from playing women. They should appeal to the school board for testosterone regulations, which are considered in women's sports: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Testosterone_regulations_in_women%27s_athletics The school board is otherwise ruining opportunities for women in sports.

[–]DirewolfGhost 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

They aren't allowed to decide what the problem is, only you are allowed to decide what counts as a problem. So progressive.

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

It's much more than just testosterone levels.

[–]bucetao6969 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

I aggre. It's completely bullshit the reason they gave was a religious one.

It also sets a precedent. What if they refuse to go against someone because of their race or religion? That would be stupid!

[–]DirewolfGhost 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Believing people are born with a soul that doesn't match their body's sex is a religious belief. Believing men and women are not fundamentally different creatures is a religious belief.

[–]bucetao6969 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I don't care, you shouldn't have religion dictate how the general population sports are run, the general population wouldn't want a guy fighting girls in a woman sport

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

The only way a "general population" can exist in harmony is with an agreed upon set of truths. The new woke religion cannot agree with other religions on the truth of what a female is. Any institution that says that boys and girls are interchangeable is a religious institution, by that very declaration. A separate religion declining to participate on religious grounds is being courteous and respectful to the host institution's religion, aka Wokism.

[–]bucetao6969 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

It's funny you're calling the woke virus the "woke religion". I like to call it the "rainbow cult" since it fits more the terms. These guys by no means like religion. They love hating on christianity, but they also don't like islamphobes, even if Islam is the most anti-left religion ever which is just so funny.

Whoever decides the rules of the game one is playing is the rulemakers of the sport, and the rulemakers are only allowing it because they would get cancelled by the woke crowd if they didn't. The thing is, especially now after hogwarts legacy fiasco, more and more people are fighting back against this. The final barrier for the rainbow cult is trans rights, which for them requires changing the definition of what a woman is. But even the LGB took a stance against that, as we saw with groups such as the LGB Alliance.

I disaggre with you that the woke virus is a religion. But the only reason for that is our definition of religion is different.

Let me ask, do you consider Church of Satanism a religion? I'm still on the fence about that. It seems more of a community than a religion at least for me.

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

A culture developed around a set of unfalsifiable beliefs is my off the cuff definition of religion.

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

Testosterone is only one of THOUSANDS of ways boys grow differently to girls. Otherwise, yeah. Focus on how boys are bigger/stronger/more dangerous to the girls, because that point transcends all religions.

[–]Alienhunter 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The problem is simply that a boy pretending to be a girl and playing on the girls team is cheating.

It doesn't really matter what the excuse is. I might be sympathetic to some confused kid that really thinks he is actually a girl in the same way I think we should be sympathetic towards anyone struggling with mental illness. But at the point where they begin to demand that they be allowed to essentially cheat and ruin the game for everyone you can't really let them in. You don't know if they are pretending to be a girl to win or if they are actually crazy. But it doesn't matter.

What if someone who didn't have a disability wanted to play on the disabled team. What if a professional baseball player identified as a little leaguer and went to dominate the world of children's baseball.

There are open sports leagues out there and plenty of places where mixed groups of men and women are allowed to play together. I'm sure that gay people are welcoming if they are gonna make a gay sports group or whatever as they seem keen to make gay groups about hobbies where being gay is irrelevant. There's simply no compelling reason to allow men to play on the women's team. "It hurts their feelings to be excluded" well tough shit it hurts my feelings to be excluded from the presidency of your organization, what you gonna do about it? Keep up with your bullshit gatekeeping? I said I wanna be in charge and you aren't letting me be in charge, that's genocide silly.

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

I agree wholeheartedly

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

I agree at the professional level.

But in division 4 high school basketball, the inclusion or exclusion of a child based on their gender identity will have more lasting effects than whether the last sub made the bench.

[–]VulptexVoluntaryist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

No, that's not fair. If we got rid of sexism kids wouldn't identify with gender and having sex-based teams wouldn't be distressing. But we won't, because we fetishize gender.

[–]ActuallyNot 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

If we got rid of sexism kids wouldn't identify with gender and having sex-based teams wouldn't be distressing.

I think your belief that kids only behave as males or females because of sexism is faulty. Testosterone has a very real and measurable effect on behavior, including approach to conflict, sex drive, risk taking as well as the secondary effects due to size and strength difference.

[–]VulptexVoluntaryist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

But whole point of separating male and female athletes in the first place is because of how huge of an advantage the males have. So if we're going to base it on "gender identity", we might as well not split them up at all. Unless, of course, you're a sexist who thinks genders should be segregated.

[–]ActuallyNot 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

It's just not important enough at that age and level, compared to the value of inclusion for trans kids.

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

Then let's just have one team and forget about separating boys and girls.

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

That doesn't follow. More than half the kids at school are males. There's is probably a lot less than 1%, but certainly no more.

The former allows the domination of the sport away from girls if they have a disadvantage. The latter makes fuck all difference.

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

Even one MtF athlete can easily crush the cis women. Especially when all they have to do to get in the girls' competition is declare their gender, with no evidence of actually transitioning. Entire teams have lied about being trans women so they could cheat and win all the championships. And they get away with it and no one dares question it.

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

Even one MtF athlete can easily crush the cis women.

Didn't in this case.

Especially when all they have to do to get in the girls' competition is declare their gender, with no evidence of actually transitioning.

If that's was the case in this case, show me where you got this information.

If it wasn't then its irrelevant. (As well as not proven).

Entire teams have lied about being trans women so they could cheat and win all the championships.

Really? Name two.

Hell, name one.

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

It's a very interesting point, which I appreciate. And I can appreciate the interests of the state to reduce discrimination, and as you know I normally agree with you, but here's my main concern: although it's not always the best excuse, I argue that the rights of the 98% (.eg) biological girl group outweigh the rights of the biologically male or intersex kids who identify as girls and thus wish to play on girls' teams. This is mainly because of the physical advantages of male and intersex kids. And as you know - re. 'the higher professional level' - this has been a problem in the olympics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caster_Semenya . High schools already prohibit players who are a year older than their current class's age. In the present case, the team with the stronger former male student had an obvious advantage over all other teams. It was not fair to the majority of players that this naturally stonder player was allowed to compete against them. Moreover, many of those girls will now lose opportunities to play with a College scholarship because they do not have competitive numbers, due to losing matches against a team with a much stronger player.

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I certainly agree that Olympics should have "Female" and "Open" divisions for sports where they have male and female events because a female would be uncompetitive against males. At that level it's certainly clear. College sports already has careers at made and lost, and should be separated. But you can care too much about one spot in division 4 high school girls basketball, in a team knocked out in the quarter finals.

High schools already prohibit players who are a year older than their current class's age.

There's three salient differences here.

1) The need for camaraderie for the trans kid.

2) The education about trans kids that the team-mates get

3) The vastly different numbers. I am reminded of Utah Governor Cox's veto of the anti-trans bill:

Here are the numbers that have most impacted my decision: 75,000, 4, 1, 86 and 56.

  • 75,000 high school kids participating in high school sports in Utah.
  • 4 transgender kids playing high school sports in Utah.
  • 1 transgender student playing girls sports.
  • 86% of trans youth reporting suicidality.
  • 56% of trans youth having attempted suicide.

Four kids and only one of them playing girls sports. That’s what all of this is about. Four kids who aren’t dominating or winning trophies or taking scholarships. Four kids who are just trying to find some friends and feel like they are a part of something. Four kids trying to get through each day. Rarely has so much fear and anger been directed at so few.

[–]dicknipples 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Excellent stats. It would seem that the trans kid would have no other way to play baseketball, unless playing on a boys team. Recommending this would depend on a number of difficult factors, not least of which would be the issue of the trans kid not being a boy, in her view. I wonder if it would set a difficult precedent if this trans person wanted to continue at college level in girl sports, or if there are many more who will want to compete on the girls basketball teams. But with those reservations in mind, I completely agree with you that there is a case here - and this issue should be dealt with on a case-by-case-basis IMO - to potentially allow the ONE trans kid on the girls team, depending on a proper assessment of fairness in the High School system. If for example she's 6'6", 250 lbs, can bench 350, and dunk whenever under the basket, I'm not sure that would be fair on the girl's team. Otherwise, sure, perhaps there's a reason for her to be on the team that does not negatively impact High School basketball 4th division sports. Utah is an interesting example, but for ages 13-17, there are 22,200 transgender youth in California. source; (this will download a PDF, however). Not intending to drag the duscussion onward - just thinking....

[–]agent_pecan 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Good for them

[–]bucetao6969 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (12 children)

/s/LGBdroptheT will love this

[–]VulptexVoluntaryist 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (9 children)

That sub has every single saiditter other than a select few shadowbanned.

[–]dicknipples 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Yep - ironic how that's one of the most intolerant subs on Saidit

[–]bucetao6969 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

Ironic? The whole point of their group is literally exclusion from their own group

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

yes, ironic

the main argument of LGB+ groups is for inclusivity

[–]bucetao6969 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Not really? You're confusing LGB groups with LGBT groups

LGB groups = gay rights

LGBT+ groups = inclusivity for all

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

No - there's no confusion

People in these groups want to be 'included' (rather than traditionally excluded) in society. When they want to be picky about what should be included or excluded, that's the irony.

[–]bucetao6969 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

Really?

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

Yep. Almost everything is removed automatically.

[–]bucetao6969 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

You mean... submissions are restricted. They can't remove what you can't post lol.

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

Comments are shadowbanned

[–]iamonlyoneman[S] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

feel free to crosspost it there

[–]bucetao6969 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

I cant lol

[–]ActuallyNot 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

At professional level, there's a point to be made about unfair advantage. At high school inclusion is way more important.

But the school is christian and therefore bigoted. Self-exclusion is a fine way to keep them out of the quarterfinals.

[–]VulptexVoluntaryist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

High schoolers want fair competition just like professionals.

[–]ActuallyNot 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

They also want the fun and comeraderie of playing a sport with their teammates.

More importantly they should be given an education whether they want it or not.

Fairness is less important when they're growing so fast, as players born early in the year after the cutoff date are already at significant advantage. And those born late, or premature are at significant disadvantage. See: https://www.ncaa.org/sports/2013/11/19/the-birthday-effect-in-college-athletics.aspx for instance.

Trans athletes are so rare that they're not going to dominate.

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

None of those things are impacted by being on one team or the other. But if there's even one MtF in the girls' competition, s/he will easily win. I say s/he because a lot of "trans" athletes declare themselves for this exact purpose, so they can win by cheating.

If the athlete can't actually beat everyone then I suppose it doesn't matter. But when a MtF athlete coasts along and easily kicks the shit out of everyone, that's unacceptable.

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

But if there's even one MtF in the girls' competition, s/he will easily win. I

Nope. The team in the OP were knocked out in the quarters.

And the trans girl only made the 4th division.

[–]VulptexVoluntaryist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

But there are plenty of cases where the MtF has an obvious advantage and easily blows the girls away. There are plenty of times when the rest do not even stand a chance against the MtF. Sure they may not have as big of an advantage as men do, but there's still a marked difference.

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

But there are plenty of cases where the MtF has an obvious advantage and easily blows the girls away.

Really?

Name three actual cases from High School sports.

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

username

[–]ActuallyNot 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Nope. It did keep the Bigot school and only the Bigot school out of the semis. (And the competition for that matter).

A good outcome.

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

Anyone else see the hypocrisy?

Commie agenda: "For the good of everyone."

Tranny agenda: "For the good of the few."

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

Is this a pro commie argument lol

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

The vaccine mandates are very communist, "For the good of everyone, like it or not." Meanwhile, in the very same breath they demand we protect the chosen token minority, ignoring and excluding other minorities with more serious issues than gender dysphoria.

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

Worse: it's a men's rights movement, to the detriment of women's rights. The radfems are VERY salty about that.

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

As they should be.