Non-Binary Divisions in Sports

[League Champion 1,911]

3 hours ago, Pimpadeaux said:

I'm OK with that. I don't carrot all.

Lettuce talk about something else, and perhaps we'll turnip some fresh perspectives. It's bean a long time we had a reaonable, produce-tive discussion about anything around here.

Yes, I can be a laughing stalk, but I'm ready to not beet around the bush.

Peas be respectful moving forward, and I'm sure we'll have an a-maize-ing conversation!

That's good stuff right there, well done

[Fireballer 2,642]

This fuker has just got to be trolling at this point. 
 

 

[Strike 5,532]

This seems like as good a place as any for this:

https://journals.lww.com/acsm-tj/fulltext/2023/10130/the_biological_basis_of_sex_differences_in.5.aspx

[EternalShinyAndChrome 4,087]

2 hours ago, Strike said:

This seems like as good a place as any for this:

https://journals.lww.com/acsm-tj/fulltext/2023/10130/the_biological_basis_of_sex_differences_in.5.aspx

Can't wait for our resident leftard science deniers to weigh in on this.  This is gonna' be epic.

[BuckSwope 654]

40 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

Can't wait for our resident leftard science deniers to weigh in on this.  This is gonna' be epic.

Has there honestly been people on these boards who don't understand there is a difference in the biology? 

[EternalShinyAndChrome 4,087]

10 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

Has there honestly been people on these boards who don't understand there is a difference in the biology? 

Yes.

[BuckSwope 654]

4 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

Yes.

Who is that?  I've never seen it, that's why I ask.  

[EternalShinyAndChrome 4,087]

2 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

Who is that?  I've never seen it, that's why I ask.  

the usual suspects - GutterPedo, Pimpadouche and WadeGarret/BeachGal23 or whatever alias he's using today, to name a few.  

Squizzy is also another one.

[BuckSwope 654]

5 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

the usual suspects - GutterPedo, Pimpadouche and WadeGarret/BeachGal23 or whatever alias he's using today.

Gotcha.  I'll believe it when I see it.    Never saw that being posted on the super libby FBGs, so I was surprised at the claims that it was posted here. 

ETA:  I have squis on ignore, so I'll admit he could have said some stupid sh1t like that and I didn't see it.  

[Strike 5,532]

Another one:

https://local21news.com/news/nation-world/nj-transgender-swimmer-breaks-womens-college-record-inciting-outrage-new-jersey-ramapo-meghan-cortez-fields-kaitlynn-wheeler-lgbt-ncaa

[League Champion 1,911]

 

[BuckSwope 654]

Unfortunately it looks like it's going to take one of those clowns to seriously hurt or kill a woman in the ring.     At the very least it needs to be disclosed so the women can make a choice, but let's be honest - we know what that choice would be.  Not fight somebody born a man.  

 

Now, on a less serious note I did have to look at the name to verify which pic was which.  

[Strike 5,532]

Don't worry everyone.  It's not widespread:

https://www.news3lv.com/news/nation-world/un-study-reveals-transgender-athletes-have-won-nearly-900-medals-in-womens-competitions-united-nations-sports-lgbt-gender-identity-title-ix-athletics

[TimHauck 2,850]

47 minutes ago, Strike said:

Don't worry everyone.  It's not widespread:

https://www.news3lv.com/news/nation-world/un-study-reveals-transgender-athletes-have-won-nearly-900-medals-in-womens-competitions-united-nations-sports-lgbt-gender-identity-title-ix-athletics

Here is the paper:

https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/2024-09/sr-vawg-ga79-report-auv_0.pdf
 

And here is the quote in question (page 3):

The replacement of the female sports category with a mixed-sex category has resulted in an increasing number of female athletes losing opportunities, including medals, when competing against males.  According to information received, by 30 March 2024, over 600 female athletes in more than 400 competitions have lost more than 890 medals in 29 different sports

 

This isn’t talking about losing opportunities to trannies, it’s talking about losing opportunities to actual men because they combined men and women together.  It doesn’t even say this happened because of trannies.

@Strike wrong again.

[seafoam1 3,014]

On 4/18/2023 at 12:20 PM, Pimpadeaux said:

I'm going to identify myself as a tomato plant, take legal action to get that division created and then go out there and win the motherfocker.

If an actual tomato plant entered, you would not win. 

[Strike 5,532]

12 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Here is the paper:

https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/2024-09/sr-vawg-ga79-report-auv_0.pdf
 

And here is the quote in question (page 3):

The replacement of the female sports category with a mixed-sex category has resulted in an increasing number of female athletes losing opportunities, including medals, when competing against males.  According to information received, by 30 March 2024, over 600 female athletes in more than 400 competitions have lost more than 890 medals in 29 different sports

 

This isn’t talking about losing opportunities to trannies, it’s talking about losing opportunities to actual men because they combined men and women together.  It doesn’t even say this happened because of trannies.

@Strike wrong again.

Are you focking high?   Here is the full paragraph that you cherry picked to try for one of your "gotchas."  I read your post and was like WTF that is confusing.  It's confusing because you cherry picked a couple of sentences from a full paragraph.  Here is the full paragraph:

Quote

Policies implemented by International Federations, national governing bodies, along
with national legislation of some countries, allow males who identify as women to compete
in female sports categories.28 In other cases, this practice is not explicitly prohibited and is
thus tolerated in practice. The replacement of the female sports category with a mixed sex
category has resulted in an increasing number of female athletes losing opportunities
including medals when competing against males. According to information received, by 30
March 2024, over 600 female athletes in more than 400 competitions have lost more than
890 medals in 29 different sports

The meaning of this paragraph is so clear, and you are so wrong, I'm not even going to waste time telling you why you're wrong.  Any other posters who read this can form their own conclusions.  God you're a 'tard.

[TimHauck 2,850]

7 hours ago, Strike said:

Are you focking high?   Here is the full paragraph that you cherry picked to try for one of your "gotchas."  I read your post and was like WTF that is confusing.  It's confusing because you cherry picked a couple of sentences from a full paragraph.  Here is the full paragraph:

The meaning of this paragraph is so clear, and you are so wrong, I'm not even going to waste time telling you why you're wrong.  Any other posters who read this can form their own conclusions.  God you're a 'tard.

Lol at accusing me of cherry picking after you posted this garbage article.  The article (as well as others on this subject including NY Post and Fox News) are the ones cherry picking and in this case outright lying by inserting words that were not there.

The article (again similar to others I’ve seen) includes both of the two sentences I did, but lists them in different parts of the article, and even puts the second sentence ahead of the first! And again this article adds words that were not there:

Quote from article: more than 600 biologically female athletes have lost at least 890 medals to transgender competitors

Actual quote in paper: over 600 female athletes in more than 400 competitions have lost more than 890 medals

Yes, the paper (not a study as the article claims) is clearly against trans women participating in women’s sports, but it’s obvious that the numbers cited are referring to where women’s divisions were removed in favor of mixed gender.  Both to anyone that understands the English language, as well anyone that understands simple math.  It says over 890 medals were lost in over 400 competitions, which if this were only referring to medals lost to trannies, would mean that there was an average of more than 2 trannies medaling in each of the competitions.

And even if that was a real number, which it’s not, the paper gives no frame of reference for the timeframe, geography, age group, or level of competition. 

@Strike wrong again, and then doubles down on being wrong, lol.

I’ve said before that you need to do a better job vetting your sources and this is yet another example.  I prefer to use primary sources and not news articles. But since I’m a nice guy unlike you, I’ll try to help you out.  If an article cites a “study,” but doesn’t link to said study as was the case here, there’s a decent chance the article is misinterpreting what the study actually said. If it was a “study” at all which this one wasn’t.

HTH and have a good day.