I’m not a prescriptivist in general, but I draw the line when it doesn’t make any sense AND makes it harder for people to understand each other/meaningfully communicate what they actually mean to say.
You can have opinions on two completely separate, entirely unrelated issues at the same time. And it’s not an either/or topic of conversation. We can have both.
But yes, the conservative mainstream attack on Trans is definitely intended to distract from all of their monumental failings.
That doesn’t mean it doesn’t warrant some discussion, though. Just not the amount it’s getting.
What you’re saying doesn’t constitute a strong argument. My position is that we should notinclude trans people in those categories because, later on, we cannot remove them (which would be much worse). You, on the other hand, seem to opt for ignoring that and, through ignorance, place people with views similar to mine in the position of oppressors trying to remove those people from that category. That’s malevolent.
You’re either a fed or a bot, I don’t care to find out for either. Trans people make up 1% of the United States and within that 1% barely any trans people play sports. The news has hyper actively focus on the ones that do.
If you want to make an entire section of sports for less than 1% of the United States pick your self up by your bootstraps and go nuts. Other wise, who cares.
Trans people make up 1% of the United States and within that 1% barely any trans people play sports.
As I mentioned, you don’t need to have 10% of people with an unfair advantage in sports; you just need a few on the podium. You completely ignored that because it’s easier for you to fight with an imagined bot than an actual argument.
If those athletes’ performance would align with others, that wouldn’t be an issue. What I’m raising as an issue is that they could build muscle differently, and even bone density can be different for men and women. It’s impossible to eradicate all those characteristics. That’s what trans people are trying to do and they have made progress, but some things stay, especially for those who began transitioning late after puberty.
This is also dumb as fuck. This isn’t a courtroom or a debate stage. No one owes every dumbass with a phone and a lemmy account a well reasoned response. Say some dumb fucking shit and you’ll get a dumb fucking response.
yeah, gonna second that counter point. this is not worth the government’s time… it’s sports, it doesn’t actually matter. let the leagues or whatever figure this out for themselves.
People without legs participate in runs in the Paralympics, and some of their prosthetics are quite bouncy. I wouldn’t be surprised if at some point they beat runners with legs using those prosthetics.
I would prefer for them not to compete with “regular” runners because the balance between having legs and bounciness of the prosthetics shouldn’t be the deciding factor when determining the winner.
Letting people with prosthetics compete with each other and not with people with legs is fair for both groups.
Removing categories in sports would result in podiums filled with men, which is a root of that problem.
It is fine if you don’t mind it.
I prefer categorization for men, women, trans men, trans women, paralympics, and I would even leave that amusing category of not-tall-man basketball because they in fact cannot compete with tall players but they still can compete among themselves.
I’m not a native speaker, and it seems like you hear what you want to hear. My responses were polite, but please continue with your whistle-blowing, it’s evident that argumentation is not your strong suit.
Absolutely nothing you said is new or novel though, that was their point. It’s the same line the right has been using for the last… 10 years or so? Idk, whenever they decided they were mad about it. You’re repeating talking points whether you know it or not.
You’re literally falling for the republican wedge issue
not falling, ‘literally’. figuratively, yes.
One valid and recognized definition of literally is “figuratively”. Words and usage changes overtime in a society.
Recognised but never valid.
I’m not a prescriptivist in general, but I draw the line when it doesn’t make any sense AND makes it harder for people to understand each other/meaningfully communicate what they actually mean to say.
You haven’t drawn any lines, God, you’re typing words.
I meant figurative lines, not literal ones.
You can have opinions on two completely separate, entirely unrelated issues at the same time. And it’s not an either/or topic of conversation. We can have both.
But yes, the conservative mainstream attack on Trans is definitely intended to distract from all of their monumental failings.
That doesn’t mean it doesn’t warrant some discussion, though. Just not the amount it’s getting.
You can, but you have mistaken opinion from distraction.
What you’re saying doesn’t constitute a strong argument. My position is that we should notinclude trans people in those categories because, later on, we cannot remove them (which would be much worse). You, on the other hand, seem to opt for ignoring that and, through ignorance, place people with views similar to mine in the position of oppressors trying to remove those people from that category. That’s malevolent.
You’re either a fed or a bot, I don’t care to find out for either. Trans people make up 1% of the United States and within that 1% barely any trans people play sports. The news has hyper actively focus on the ones that do.
If you want to make an entire section of sports for less than 1% of the United States pick your self up by your bootstraps and go nuts. Other wise, who cares.
As I mentioned, you don’t need to have 10% of people with an unfair advantage in sports; you just need a few on the podium. You completely ignored that because it’s easier for you to fight with an imagined bot than an actual argument.
If those athletes’ performance would align with others, that wouldn’t be an issue. What I’m raising as an issue is that they could build muscle differently, and even bone density can be different for men and women. It’s impossible to eradicate all those characteristics. That’s what trans people are trying to do and they have made progress, but some things stay, especially for those who began transitioning late after puberty.
Counterpoint, this is dumb as fuck
Wow, such a thoughtful and well-reasoned argument.
This is also dumb as fuck. This isn’t a courtroom or a debate stage. No one owes every dumbass with a phone and a lemmy account a well reasoned response. Say some dumb fucking shit and you’ll get a dumb fucking response.
If you can’t respond constructively, maybe you shouldn’t respond at all.
I am so tired of people making bigoted, ignorant, and stupid arguments and then whining about decorum. Shut the fuck up.
yeah, gonna second that counter point. this is not worth the government’s time… it’s sports, it doesn’t actually matter. let the leagues or whatever figure this out for themselves.
Do you even listen to yourself?
I advocate for the creation of separate categories for those people.
Separate…but equal?
People without legs participate in runs in the Paralympics, and some of their prosthetics are quite bouncy. I wouldn’t be surprised if at some point they beat runners with legs using those prosthetics.
I would prefer for them not to compete with “regular” runners because the balance between having legs and bounciness of the prosthetics shouldn’t be the deciding factor when determining the winner.
Letting people with prosthetics compete with each other and not with people with legs is fair for both groups.
Fairness in any kind of competition is a weird illusion people are obsessed with maintaining.
Removing categories in sports would result in podiums filled with men, which is a root of that problem.
It is fine if you don’t mind it.
I prefer categorization for men, women, trans men, trans women, paralympics, and I would even leave that amusing category of not-tall-man basketball because they in fact cannot compete with tall players but they still can compete among themselves.
“Those people” Sounds familiar. What were you saying about malevolence and being the oppressors, again?
I’m not a native speaker, and it seems like you hear what you want to hear. My responses were polite, but please continue with your whistle-blowing, it’s evident that argumentation is not your strong suit.
I’m not a native speaker either, buttercup. That’s no excuse to be the bigot that all your comments on this thread show you out to be.
Call me whatever you want but you’re shit at arguing your own points and you’re anything but polite. Keep yapping.
Absolutely nothing you said is new or novel though, that was their point. It’s the same line the right has been using for the last… 10 years or so? Idk, whenever they decided they were mad about it. You’re repeating talking points whether you know it or not.