South Dakota Transgender Bill...

[lilpixieofterror]

Some are separated explicitly by skill levels - some are separated implicitly by skill levels - and pretty much all are separated by sex. The latter is sometimes needlessly done.

In a handful of cases, such as shooting, sure. In most though? Not really.

Golf is certainly not the sport I know the most about. I probably know as much as the "average" American. My sister and her husband are both avid golfers (and Republicans, by the way). So, out of curiosity - based on the feedback I got here - I asked them if they thought there were any ways that the boundary between men's golf and women's golf could be eliminated - or if they thought it should be. In about five minutes they came up with three ways to reduce or eliminate the boundary, and both agreed it "wouldn't be a bad idea."

People that play sports as a hobby are not the same as those that play it as a professional. What were these suggestions and would players and fans accept and like those conditions?

At no point have I denied that men are generally stronger - and faster - then women. At no point have I suggested that the top performing female athlete ever has (or could) defeat the top performing male athlete. I have merely suggested that every sport could benefit from some exploration as to how, and to what degree, this can and should be done. This suggestion appears to bother you for some reason.

It bothers me because you either need to make concessions that will change the game up, angering fans and players alike or you pretty much elimate women from professional leagues all together.

I have said nothing of the sort - nor thought it.

And yet you make suggestions without ever really considering the logic of your suggestions.

Yes. I have never said otherwise.

So what are your suggestions and how will they work?

No - I'm saying that we don't know until we ask ourselves the questions and make the attempt.

So what are they?

I disagree - because I think it has negative ramifications that also need to be considered.

Asserted, not shown.

That is quite likely true. But since what I have proposed is not based on "being even," I'm not sure why this is being brought up.

So your plan for making the competition as fair as possible is...

Yes - a good example of a sport where there is no perceivable (to me) reason for a separation.

There really isn’t and it’s because muscle memory and vision are the most important factors and there’s no real difference between men and women in those categories, but that’s a pretty rare exception. Most other sports strength and size play a more important role.

I have never suggested it wasn't. Note, however, that you are taking about averages. As with most things, averages hide the particulars. Therein lies (I think) our disagreement.

Check out the record books and see what they say, is it men or a women that hold the most sports records?

[carpedm9587]

In a handful of cases, such as shooting, sure. In most though? Not really.

Then we disagree. I think all sports merit some examination to achieve what I suggested: eliminate unnecessary sex-based distinctions, and minimize those that are necessary.

People that play sports as a hobby are not the same as those that play it as a professional. What were these suggestions and would players and fans accept and like those conditions?

Whether or not people "like it" is not my criteria. And I have never claimed to be a professional athlete. I'm curious, though, as to what exactly it is in your background that makes you think you are more qualified to speak about professional sports than I am.

It bothers me because you either need to make concessions that will change the game up, angering fans and players alike or you pretty much elimate women from professional leagues all together.

The former does not concern me. The latter is not something I have suggested or advocated for.

And yet you make suggestions without ever really considering the logic of your suggestions.

That is untrue - so I have no further response.

So what are your suggestions and how will they work?

So what are they?

I've provided several examples of possible approaches. I cannot say any one of them is the "right" approach - merely a possibility. I am primarily arguing that the issue merits thought and exploration. As best I can tell - you don't even want that thought or exploration to occur. I'm not sure why.

Asserted, not shown.

Correct - which is why I said "I think," and am advocating for us to do the work to find how just how much this impacts society and what can be done to change it. Anecdotal information from parallel situations suggests that minimizing/eliminating the messaging that diminishes women and strengthens men can have an effect - possibly a substantial one. You appear to want to take the position "it won't make any difference," but I have not seen any evidence provided (other than your personal experience) that substantiates that position.

So your plan for making the competition as fair as possible is...

Again - I have cited several possibilities. Each sport would need to be examined individually in order to determine what can be done. My position, from the outset, is not that "I have the answer," it has been "I think this needs to be examined and, where/when appropriate changes are indicated, they should be made." As best I can tell, your position is, "everything is the way it's supposed to be and we shouldn't ask any of these questions." It's not clear to me why you hold that position (assuming you do). Personally, I will explore anything that I think has a chance of making things better.

There really isn’t and it’s because muscle memory and vision are the most important factors and there’s no real difference between men and women in those categories, but that’s a pretty rare exception. Most other sports strength and size play a more important role.

Yes - different sports have different characteristics. If the sport differentiates by strength, then I would advocate differentiating the competition based on "strength" - not on "sex." We have models where this is done. Boxing is a good example. Nobody finds it odd to have boxers classified by weight because there is a clear correlation between weight, strength, and size. No one I know of complains that there are more than 15 boxing weight classes - and no one I know of complains that it is "unfair" or that "lighter boxers are being discriminated against because they can't will the heavyweight title." I suspect there are many places in sports - especially individual competition sports - where a similar form of classification could erase the sex-based distinction. I think the idea merits exploration. Apparently, you don't think we should even ask the question. Again - I am not sure why you have that position.

Check out the record books and see what they say, is it men or a women that hold the most sports records?

Again - you appear to be arguing against a position I have not taken - when you have done from the outset of this discussion. I have no response except to note that I am aware that world records tend to be higher/more/better for men than for women. That distinction is not at issue.

[lilpixieofterror]

Then we disagree. I think all sports merit some examination to achieve what I suggested: eliminate unnecessary sex-based distinctions, and minimize those that are necessary.

Sounds like an opinion with no factual bases what-so-ever.

Whether or not people "like it" is not my criteria. And I have never claimed to be a professional athlete. I'm curious, though, as to what exactly it is in your background that makes you think you are more qualified to speak about professional sports than I am.

The former does not concern me. The latter is not something I have suggested or advocated for.

Running sports leagues into woke business models without understanding the politics involved sounds like a pretty bad idea to me.

That is untrue - so I have no further response.

Yeah it is.

I've provided several examples of possible approaches. I cannot say any one of them is the "right" approach - merely a possibility. I am primarily arguing that the issue merits thought and exploration. As best I can tell - you don't even want that thought or exploration to occur. I'm not sure why.

No, you gave your opinion and opinions are as numberous as sand on the beach. Backing those opinions up though is a different story.

Correct - which is why I said "I think," and am advocating for us to do the work to find how just how much this impacts society and what can be done to change it. Anecdotal information from parallel situations suggests that minimizing/eliminating the messaging that diminishes women and strengthens men can have an effect - possibly a substantial one. You appear to want to take the position "it won't make any difference," but I have not seen any evidence provided (other than your personal experience) that substantiates that position.

Ironic that you admit that you have zero evidence for your opinion while attacking me for mine. Too bad I have the data that backs mine up, I again ask, how many records of strength to men hold to vs women?

Again - I have cited several possibilities. Each sport would need to be examined individually in order to determine what can be done. My position, from the outset, is not that "I have the answer," it has been "I think this needs to be examined and, where/when appropriate changes are indicated, they should be made." As best I can tell, your position is, "everything is the way it's supposed to be and we shouldn't ask any of these questions." It's not clear to me why you hold that position (assuming you do). Personally, I will explore anything that I think has a chance of making things better.

No, you have opinions that you have yet to back up or explain. The reality is that you will find little change since few women athletes are even close to the running in professional leagues. Simply put, your plans will change little to nothing.

Yes - different sports have different characteristics. If the sport differentiates by strength, then I would advocate differentiating the competition based on "strength" - not on "sex." We have models where this is done. Boxing is a good example. Nobody finds it odd to have boxers classified by weight because there is a clear correlation between weight, strength, and size. No one I know of complains that there are more than 15 boxing weight classes - and no one I know of complains that it is "unfair" or that "lighter boxers are being discriminated against because they can't will the heavyweight title." I suspect there are many places in sports - especially individual competition sports - where a similar form of classification could erase the sex-based distinction. I think the idea merits exploration. Apparently, you don't think we should even ask the question. Again - I am not sure why you have that position.

Again - you appear to be arguing against a position I have not taken - when you have done from the outset of this discussion. I have no response except to note that I am aware that world records tend to be higher/more/better for men than for women. That distinction is not at issue.

[carpedm9587]

Sounds like an opinion with no factual bases what-so-ever.

I have a hard time understanding why anyone would be against the position, "look at it, and minimize/eliminate sexism whenever/wherever possible." What facts do you think someone needs to have a position that "sexism is not a good thing?" What evidence do you require to defend the position, "I think we should look at it and identify any places where change is warranted?"

"Money" is not my highest priority. And I have no idea what a "woke business model" is.

Yeah it is.

Yet another Twebber telling me what I do or do not think, and have or have not considered. Color me surprised.

No, you gave your opinion and opinions are as numberous as sand on the beach. Backing those opinions up though is a different story.

Ironic that you admit that you have zero evidence for your opinion while attacking me for mine. Too bad I have the data that backs mine up, I again ask, how many records of strength to men hold to vs women?

No, you have opinions that you have yet to back up or explain. The reality is that you will find little change since few women athletes are even close to the running in professional leagues. Simply put, your plans will change little to nothing.

So, again - what evidence do you think I need to provide for the base position "sexism is bad and should be minimized/eliminated wherever possible?"

And again - all I have advocated is making those distinctions the differentiating criteria whenever/wherever possible - rather than what genitalia are or are not between one's legs.

Sports have survived many changes over time. You have provided no evidence that minimizing sexism in sports will make the money go away. If you have such evidence, please feel free to present it.

And in most cases the tiers are separated by capability AND sex. I am advocating for a model that eliminates the latter wherever and whenever possible.

I would like to see the evidence for this claim. You repeated complain that I am "making claims without evidence." My claim is "sexism is bad and should be minimized/eliminated whenever/wherever possible." You, on the other hand, without any evidence whatsoever, appear to be ready to assert that "it would make no difference," "it would cost tons of money," and "it would turn fans away." Yet you have provided no evidence for any of these positions except your personal sports history.

You are not being consistent in your argumentation.

As for this discussion, I believe it has run its course. If you ask a question I have not already answered, or provide an opinion not already expressed (with supporting evidence), I'll be happy to respond. Otherwise, I'll leave the last word to you.

[lilpixieofterror]

I have a hard time understanding why anyone would be against the position, "look at it, and minimize/eliminate sexism whenever/wherever possible." What facts do you think someone needs to have a position that "sexism is not a good thing?" What evidence do you require to defend the position, "I think we should look at it and identify any places where change is warranted?"



"Money" is not my highest priority. And I have no idea what a "woke business model" is.



Yet another Twebber telling me what I do or do not think, and have or have not considered. Color me surprised.



So, again - what evidence do you think I need to provide for the base position "sexism is bad and should be minimized/eliminated wherever possible?"



And again - all I have advocated is making those distinctions the differentiating criteria whenever/wherever possible - rather than what genitalia are or are not between one's legs.



Sports have survived many changes over time. You have provided no evidence that minimizing sexism in sports will make the money go away. If you have such evidence, please feel free to present it.



And in most cases the tiers are separated by capability AND sex. I am advocating for a model that eliminates the latter wherever and whenever possible.



I would like to see the evidence for this claim. You repeated complain that I am "making claims without evidence." My claim is "sexism is bad and should be minimized/eliminated whenever/wherever possible." You, on the other hand, without any evidence whatsoever, appear to be ready to assert that "it would make no difference," "it would cost tons of money," and "it would turn fans away." Yet you have provided no evidence for any of these positions except your personal sports history.

You are not being consistent in your argumentation.

As for this discussion, I believe it has run its course. If you ask a question I have not already answered, or provide an opinion not already expressed (with supporting evidence), I'll be happy to respond. Otherwise, I'll leave the last word to you.

[lilpixieofterror]

I have a hard time understanding why anyone would be against the position, "look at it, and minimize/eliminate sexism whenever/wherever possible." What facts do you think someone needs to have a position that "sexism is not a good thing?" What evidence do you require to defend the position, "I think we should look at it and identify any places where change is warranted?"



"Money" is not my highest priority. And I have no idea what a "woke business model" is.



Yet another Twebber telling me what I do or do not think, and have or have not considered. Color me surprised.



So, again - what evidence do you think I need to provide for the base position "sexism is bad and should be minimized/eliminated wherever possible?"



And again - all I have advocated is making those distinctions the differentiating criteria whenever/wherever possible - rather than what genitalia are or are not between one's legs.



Sports have survived many changes over time. You have provided no evidence that minimizing sexism in sports will make the money go away. If you have such evidence, please feel free to present it.



And in most cases the tiers are separated by capability AND sex. I am advocating for a model that eliminates the latter wherever and whenever possible.



I would like to see the evidence for this claim. You repeated complain that I am "making claims without evidence." My claim is "sexism is bad and should be minimized/eliminated whenever/wherever possible." You, on the other hand, without any evidence whatsoever, appear to be ready to assert that "it would make no difference," "it would cost tons of money," and "it would turn fans away." Yet you have provided no evidence for any of these positions except your personal sports history.

You are not being consistent in your argumentation.

As for this discussion, I believe it has run its course. If you ask a question I have not already answered, or provide an opinion not already expressed (with supporting evidence), I'll be happy to respond. Otherwise, I'll leave the last word to you.

[Sparko]

Liberals get upset when a white person pretends to be black and call it racial appropriation. Yet they don't get upset when a white male decides he wants to be called a female and compete with natural women in sports. Why don't they call that gender appropriation and claim that this is another incidence of White Male Patriarchy dominating society by trying to replace women? The men aren't happy just being the top of the food chain in a patriarchal society, they have to dominate the female gender too! Toxic Masculinity!!!