This Economist has it right

[Sactowndog]

On 12/2/2024 at 2:15 PM, BYUcougfan said:

At some point you just have to go with the old adage that hard cases make bad law.  If you are down to how genetic abnormalities impact sex or sexual development then you are just not willing to concede the larger point.

No you are talking by what standards a person should be disqualified from competing as a woman.  At the collegiate level genetic abnormalities are the norm not the exception.  
 

You are the one claiming some standard without putting any fucking thought into it.   

[Sactowndog]

On 12/2/2024 at 2:17 PM, AztecAlien said:

I don't know if you noticed that you're not doing very well in your ridiculous arguments about what a woman is. A man that feels or wants to be like a woman still doesn't make that man a woman. You do have the support of the spazhole, though. So you got that going for you. 

You are such a moron you can’t even discern I have made no such distinction of defining a woman.  I merely said you should have a testosterone threshold and a person above that threshold could not compete in the women’s division.  
 

you and your “buddies” are the ones struggling with defining a women and ignoring the fact those genetic “anomalies” are in fact all to frequent at the higher levels of sports.  In fact the higher you go the more frequent they become.   

[Sactowndog]

On 12/2/2024 at 2:14 PM, bornontheblue said:

The core is the traditional/biological definition of a woman which is XX. Keep the argument at the core for now. 

The question is simple, yet apparently difficult for you. So let's try again. 

Can an XY person with no abnormalities be a woman, or can they become a woman?  It is a yes , no question with a brief explanation if you want add it. 

 

I don’t care.  The question is by what standard can a person compete in women’s sporting events.  Full stop.   Your question is irrelevant to the question at hand.  

[The Barber]

On 12/1/2024 at 5:17 PM, Chile_Ute said:

I have no problem with MTF or FTM.  But I’ve always had a hang up with saying now that (for you) hormonally they are a woman they can step into women sports. 
 

Swimmer is a great example…developed hormonally as a man then transitioned.  One year of suppressive therapy does not offset the years “she” was developing predominantly testosterone driven.

Ive seen enough of this volleyball player that tells me there is a reason she plays at SJSU and not Nebraska, Texas, et al (aside from politics).  The blue chip players are more talented and hit harder than the Spartan chick.

I'm just not as black and white as your position…there are and will be situations where male to female athletes would be appropriate to include in female sports….with that said, this brand new territory.  I get your beliefs with male-female roles in society.  Not wrong or right for me.  Also not my place to figure out to how to “fix it”

 

I agree with that.

the size different between the highest level of college swimmers can't be denied. 

 

 

 

[bornontheblue]

On 12/2/2024 at 5:09 PM, Sactowndog said:

I don’t care.  The question is by what standard can a person compete in women’s sporting events.  Full stop.   Your question is irrelevant to the question at hand.  

But it’s relevant to what the discussion has evolved to and that you contributed to. 
 

It is lunacy that you can’t , or refuse to answer a basic question 

[AztecAlien]

On 12/2/2024 at 5:09 PM, Sactowndog said:

I don’t care.  The question is by what standard can a person compete in women’s sporting events.  Full stop.   Your question is irrelevant to the question at hand.  

The standard of actually being woman  

[bornontheblue]

On 12/2/2024 at 4:58 PM, SalinasSpartan said:

A quick google shows 1 out of 500 newborns classified as males have XXY chromosomes.

https://www.nichd.nih.gov/health/topics/klinefelter/conditioninfo/risk

In 2022 in Utah, 4 out of 85,000 high school athletes were trans.

https://www.newsweek.com/how-many-transgender-athletes-play-womens-sports-1796006

Just for context. Sorry to interrupt, go ahead and handwave this post and get back to the talking points.

You didn’t answer the question either 

[SalinasSpartan]

On 12/2/2024 at 5:09 PM, bornontheblue said:

You didn’t answer the question either 

I did not give a single shit about your question, so I didn’t answer it. To draw my point out in crayon for you, I was just bringing to your attention that if XXY people are “edge cases”, so are trans athletes. 
 

Now run along and pretend you never saw this. 

[halfmanhalfbronco]

On 12/1/2024 at 8:11 PM, Sactowndog said:

No I said set a level of Testosterone and leave it at that. 

You have biological advantages if you go through puberty as a man.  Period.  Full stop.  And if you did not because of endocrine therapy you were a victim of medical malpractice and child abuse.

[Sactowndog]

On 12/2/2024 at 4:48 PM, AztecAlien said:

The standard of actually being woman  

Fine if that is your standard again how do you define being a woman?  

[Sactowndog]

On 12/2/2024 at 6:24 PM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

You have biological advantages if you go through puberty as a man.  Period.  Full stop.  And if you did not because of endocrine therapy you were a victim of medical malpractice and child abuse.

I am aware of the issues.  There are no perfect solutions I gave you how I would define it.   Now I would apply some time period to it as in a number of years.   

[USUrobert]

https://youtube.com/shorts/eHxVvqzEtmc?si=CbmQ84x7gVcX78os

[Sactowndog]

On 12/2/2024 at 4:37 PM, bornontheblue said:

But it’s relevant to what the discussion has evolved to and that you contributed to. 
 

It is lunacy that you can’t , or refuse to answer a basic question 

I answered it clearly.  You said you wanted to define it as being a woman then refused to provide a definition.  Most of you would fail a basic logic class.  

Providing a definition like “able to have children” is not an encompassing definition of a woman.  Using set terminology all people who can have babies are women but that does not mean all women can have babies.  

Same with an XX chromosome.  Yes all people with XX Chromosomes are Women but it is equally true not all physiological women have XX chromosomes.  

and while you dumbfucks say you can’t make rules with exceptions when it comes to D1 athletes and above just about everyone of them is a damn exception.  Women over 6’ tall are .7% of the population and yet they are 50% of a D1 college basketball and Volleyball team.  

[bornontheblue]

On 12/2/2024 at 8:08 PM, Sactowndog said:

I answered it clearly.  You said you wanted to define it as being a woman then refused to provide a definition.  Most of you would fail a basic logic class.  

Providing a definition like “able to have children” is not an encompassing definition of a woman.  Using set terminology all people who can have babies are women but that does not mean all women can have babies.  

Same with an XX chromosome.  Yes all people with XX Chromosomes are Women but it is equally true not all physiological women have XX chromosomes.  

and while you dumbfucks say you can’t make rules with exceptions when it comes to D1 athletes and above just about everyone of them is a damn exception.  Women over 6’ tall are .7% of the population and yet they are 50% of a D1 college basketball and Volleyball team.  

You are purposefully muddying the waters of the conversation to avoid having to give an answer to an easy question. 
 

Forget genetics. What is a human woman as defined by cross cultural similarities since humans were in rival clans living in caves. 

[Sactowndog]

On 12/2/2024 at 4:10 PM, The Barber said:

I agree with that.

the size different between the highest level of college swimmers can't be denied. 

 

 

 

You do know top swimmers for women average 5’9”.  Thomas at 6’1” is tall but not out of the norm.   She would have been disqualified by other metrics.  

[bornontheblue]

On 12/2/2024 at 8:08 PM, Sactowndog said:

and while you dumbfucks say

Free advice: 

You can’t definitively say what a woman is. I’d be careful who you call dumb. 

[Sactowndog]

On 12/2/2024 at 7:19 PM, bornontheblue said:

You are purposefully muddying the waters of the conversation to avoid having to give an answer to an easy question. 
 

Forget genetics. What is a human woman as defined by cross cultural similarities since humans were in rival clans living in caves. 

Dude I am not muddying anything.  I am pointing you couldn’t pass a logic class if your life depended on it.   
 

just because XX% of a class is Y does not necessarily imply a 1 - 1 relationship.  In humans almost nothing is a 1-1 logical relationship.  This point is especially true in athletics. 

[Sactowndog]

On 12/2/2024 at 7:25 PM, bornontheblue said:

Free advice: 

You can’t definitively say what a woman is. I’d be careful who you call dumb. 

Free advice.  If you can’t pass a basic college logic class don’t advertise your school of matriculation. 

[bornontheblue]

On 12/2/2024 at 8:28 PM, Sactowndog said:

Free advice.  If you can’t pass a basic college logic class don’t advertise your school of matriculation. 

What is a woman ? 

[Sactowndog]

On 12/2/2024 at 7:28 PM, bornontheblue said:

What is a woman ? 

You tell me.  You are the one obsessed with that point.  I am concerned by what standard an athlete should be allowed to compete in a women’s athletic grouping.