I honestly think that very, very few people are truly ok with this sort of thing. However, they put their objections aside because they know how much they'd get ripped if they were vocal about them. Hell, It's like a grown man playing Little League and breaking a bunch of records and having people cheer him on as though it was a fair contest.
Another Squader, Tlaib, wants us to pay her law school debt of 200k I wonder what the blue collar workers in her party think?
Quitting is now a virtue. THIS IS LIBERALISM. This is what Seattle and bubba can't dodge. It's real. Trump is gone. But the cancer of Liberalism is metastasizing. That is what voting for Liberals do. Simone Biles named Time's Athlete of the Year for 'raising the volume' on mental health
I'm sure she will be happy to hire dunces who can barely read and write and have a 2.0 GPA. I'm sure of it.
Eventually enough women will be losing in sports in this manner that they'll start to speak up en masse. But will it be too late to change?
The problem faced by those in athletics is the fear of being ostracized from their own sport FOR speaking out...some with concerns about the swimmer have ALSO noted their concerns about being blacklisted from careers in their chosen degree field. The potential for consequence is very real. We have, as a society, allowed a small group of perverted males to continue putting their boots on the neck of professional women who won't allow the males to be perverted in public.
I agree on the first part. I don't know anyone who's OK with this. I don't understand how it's even possible. I take heart that it happens just slightly less than pigs taking flight...but still.
If it was that infrequent, the governing bodies of sport would not have taken up the issue across the past decade. The wokeness movements have help hastened the introduction of the nonsense into the mainstream. I've been talking about it for more than a decade...this is NOT a new issue.
Coach, for something that's so rare, you guys really care a lot about it. You pass state laws, push for federal laws, and try to force it through state and federal courts. For something so rare, you sure put a lot of effort into it.
You're certainly right about today. My point was future stating. Society will get to a point where women will feel safe to complain about it. The question is will it be too late? That means, will transgenders have been competing in women's sports for so long that it would be hard to undue - say as one example they own the records in nearly every US state at the high school and college levels? Or have transgenders only been competing for a few years so it's relatively changeable?
Yeah, I've heard some people say women should just refuse to compete so long as these guys are competing, and I agree in principle. However, let's be honest about what would happen. First, those women would be judged horrifically by at least many of their teammates, their classmates, their coach (who likes winning and dudes usually can easily beat women at sports) university officials, and the media. They'd be labeled as hate-mongers and monsters. Furthermore, they would be isolated. Conservative commentators would defend them, but very few that they personally know and interact with at school would - not because they wouldn't be sympathetic but because they wouldn't want to catch the same flack. Second, they might be subject to discipline by the university for hateful conduct. Third, they'd likely lose their scholarships. The bottom line is that though these women could fight back, it would be incredibly painful for them and would cost them a hell of a lot.
Women have been getting deplatformed and threatened for more than a decade for speaking out about this nonsense. It is only now becoming headline material in the State-side mainstream media because more and more people are seeing it happen. When it was isolated to the EU, we were called 'phobic' and 'fear mongering' over something that could NEVER happen in the United States. I know one attorney in another State who saw her position on a Bar committee threatened by her online comments in this matter and where the EU wokists actually got her banned from a pub that catered to the gay and lesbian community. Imagine that...a lesbian banned from a gay and lesbian pub. All for daring to know males cannot be women.
Your example is why I believe we'll eventually get to a point where women will feel safe to complain about it. Just will it be 5 years or 50 years from now?
It definitely wasn't, but keep in mind a few things. First, they had less to lose. Being quiet meant living as second class citizens forever. They had no where to go but up. That isn't true of female college athletes. Second, though the southern culture and institutions were obviously hostile to Parks and MLK, big pieces of the national culture were favorable to them including the media, most of academia, the federal courts, large numbers of members of Congress (and solid majorities by the mid '60s), and the White House. They had plenty of enemies and some very dangerous ones, but they had a lot more allies with power. These girls have nobody but conservative media. That's better than nothing, but it's not a 100th of what civil rights leaders had. Hell, they got the US-friggin-Supreme Court to effectively make it ok for the media to lie and defame to advance the civil rights agenda. If anything, the Court is doing the in opposite for these girls.
I'll never understand how gays and lesbians got lumped in with transgenderism. All core assumptions and values that support rights for gays and lesbians (personal privacy, personal liberty, the right to be romantically involved with and marry whomever you choose, the idea that sexuality is innate and not chosen, etc.) are completely turned on their heads for transgenderism. Under the gender ideology, you have no right to privacy even in friggin shower, much less your bedroom. You can't even take a dump without a guy in the room. You have no liberty. The government can bar you from having separate spaces and in some places, charge you with a crime for saying something that threatens nobody. You can't only date women. You have to be willing to date a man so long as he claims to be a woman. Furthermore, not only do you have a choice in your sexuality, all a guy has to do is put on some makeup and a dress and call himself a woman and you become a bad and bigoted person if you sexually reject him for it.
Sadly, the cocks in frocks are like that guest of a guest of a guest that shows up to a party. Next thing you know, they put in a change of address and the other residents figure SOMEONE extended an invite. Then, like any other pest, damned near impossible to clear from the room... Admittedly, in the beginning of the coat-tailing, you basically only had the 'transsexual' contingent that was not being demanding. And they were adamant that they were NOT like the cross-dressers. Then the cross-dressers, now known as 'transgender,' decided to colonize all things trans. Some of the 'true trans' who wanted nothing to do with the perverts got caught up in the crossfire despite just trying to live their life in an unassuming manner. It has been in the past 25-30 years that we have seen all of these changes for the worse...and that begat a movement to Get the L out. We saw some of the politics up close here in Texas because of the aggy freak that now sits on a bench as a magistrate judge in Houston (P. Frye). And yes, as we see here...all things idiotic apparently DO come back to aggy.
Video shows Biden judicial nominee Dale Ho attacking Senate, Electoral College: They are 'anti-Democratic'
He isn't totally wrong. The problem is that he views that as a bad thing when it isn't. Like the federal judiciary, the electoral college and the US Senate are supposed to be potential checks on pure democracy. If we wanted a pure democracy, the entire country would be run entirely by the US House. And this nomination is indicative of how Democrats view judicial nominations and the double standard. Ho (like RBG) is a ACLU lawyer - very clearly a partisan and ideological advocate. It's as if a Republican nominated Jay Sekulow or some activist lawyer for Pat Robertson. All we'd hear about is that he was a radical and activist who would be unfair to litigants. Hell, Amy Barrett was told that the "dogma lives loudly in her" just because she is an observant Catholic.
True. For some reason democracy has come to mean "things I like" or "policies that put my team in power." It completely ignores history and the particular system of government we have. There are undemocratic aspects to it for good reason. It is to protect political minorities from democratic tyranny. The other point is that it is an aspect that the Federal Government is in fact a federation of states, not a unitary national government. Electoral college and Senate are in place because it is the states who were supposed to wield the power. The states are individual political entities that get a say so in Federal decisions. All states are equally states, therefore they get equal vote in the Senate.
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Cliff Notes version - if a power isn't specifically given to the federal government in the Constitution, then it's reserved for the individual state to exercise (or not exercise, if they determine). It's a check to prevent a potentially unlimited power grab by the federal government.
