Women are losers.

Food, recipes, fashion, sport, education, exercise, sexuality, travel.
User avatar
Gob
Posts: 33642
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 8:40 am

Women are losers.

Post by Gob »

A trans swimmer and senior at the University of Pennsylvania, who previously spent three years competing as a man, smashed two US records while competing at a weekend contest, sparking fresh claims of unfairness.


ImageImage

On Sunday, Lia Thomas, 22, put in an astounding performance at the Zippy Invitational Event in Akron, Ohio, that saw her finish the 1,650 yard freestyle 38 seconds ahead of her teammate Anna Sofia Kalandaze.

Thomas's winning time was 15:59:71, with her UPenn teammate Anna Kalandaze coming second with a time of 16:37:44.

Thomas's win was a record for the Zippy Meet, and the pool where the event took place. But she also managed to smash two US women's swimming records during earlier races at the same event.


The first US record was broken on Friday, December 3, when Thomas won the 500-yard freestyle with a time of 4:34:06. She raced to victory 14 seconds ahead of Kalandaze - the swimmer she beat by 38 seconds on Sunday.

And then on Saturday, she won the 200 yard freestyle in 1:41:93 - seven seconds ahead of her nearest rival, giving her the fastest female US time ever for that race too.

It's the first season Thomas, who was formerly named Will, has competed in the swimming meets as a transgender woman. As Will, Thomas competed on the men's team for two full seasons.

This weekend she won three events and set three new school records including two new Ivy League records.
“If you trust in yourself, and believe in your dreams, and follow your star. . . you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy.”

User avatar
MajGenl.Meade
Posts: 20699
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Groot Brakrivier
Contact:

Re: Women are losers.

Post by MajGenl.Meade »



38 seconds in
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts

User avatar
Long Run
Posts: 6717
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 2:47 pm

Re: Women are losers.

Post by Long Run »

Not exactly like when a teenage Clark Kent protested to his dad that he should get to play football because he can score a touchdown every time.

User avatar
BoSoxGal
Posts: 18295
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 10:36 pm
Location: The Heart of Red Sox Nation

Re: Women are losers.

Post by BoSoxGal »

This infuriates me. I guess there is a limit to my wokeness.
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
~ Carl Sagan

Big RR
Posts: 14048
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: Women are losers.

Post by Big RR »

This is something which will have to be dealt with soon if women's sports are going to continue.

rubato
Posts: 14213
Joined: Sun May 09, 2010 10:14 pm

Re: Women are losers.

Post by rubato »

Just eliminate all "women", Wymononds, &c sports and only publish "open" category results. easy

Jarlaxle
Posts: 5370
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 4:21 am
Location: New England

Re: Women are losers.

Post by Jarlaxle »

Big RR wrote:
Wed Dec 08, 2021 4:42 am
This is something which will have to be dealt with soon if women's sports are going to continue.
I figure they won't. Though I am a little surprised that nobody has done something dramatic. Yet.

User avatar
BoSoxGal
Posts: 18295
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 10:36 pm
Location: The Heart of Red Sox Nation

Re: Women are losers.

Post by BoSoxGal »

She doesn’t think she has an unfair advantage because she’s lost some muscle mass on HRT/testosterone blockers. Nevermind that she is a fully developed adult person who went through adult development as a male and thus has a larger heart, larger lungs, larger frame/bone structure, etc. than all her teammates. But of course that is entirely irrelevant who needs a big heart or large lung capacity or long arms/legs to swim fast?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... e-10293487
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
~ Carl Sagan

User avatar
Joe Guy
Posts: 13923
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:40 pm
Location: Redweird City, California

Re: Women are losers.

Post by Joe Guy »

It's wrong and former men should be ashamed of themselves for competing against women. If they feel like they were born in the wrong body, they shouldn't be competing against women who were born in the right body. They were born as men and have an unfair advantage in sports.

ex-khobar Andy
Posts: 5418
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2015 4:16 am
Location: Louisville KY as of July 2018

Re: Women are losers.

Post by ex-khobar Andy »

This one will run and run . . .

IOC has weighed in with new guidance but many sports federations have said that this is based on some wish for inclusivity without bothering with the science.

There is no answer which will suit everyone but if we keep going down this path, especially with the $$$$$ available to the winners, women's sport as we know it will not survive. And while I believe in inclusivity and treating everyone fairly, women who were once men should not compete in professional sport. I don't know if there is a scientifically verified and verifiable testosterone level which would give a level playing field. In any case, if they decide that the cutoff is 10 (random number plucked from the air) will 10.1 mean you are disqualified and 9.9 means you are fine? I've been in testing long enough to know that 9.9 and 10.1 are the same number. And if you train all year at 20 and suppress it down to 9.9 for the event you'll be tested at, is that fair?

User avatar
BoSoxGal
Posts: 18295
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 10:36 pm
Location: The Heart of Red Sox Nation

Re: Women are losers.

Post by BoSoxGal »

The cutoff should be if you went through puberty as a male you don’t get to compete in girls’/women's amateur or professional sport as a female, testosterone blockers and current testosterone levels notwithstanding you have still developed the larger heart/lung capacity of a male etc. by going through that process. This is so simple a child can grasp it.

Life isn’t fair and we don’t all get to be and do all things. The disabled or differently abled or whatever is now the PC term have their own sports leagues. That’s a level playing field. Even Michael Phelps has weighed in on this controversy stating that the playing field should be level. Trans women need their own competition space or they will end up destroying women’s sport and I don’t want to hear how they are small in number so it’s not a big deal it’s a big deal if you are the girl or woman losing opportunities for competition and scholarships because a post puberty transitioned transgirl/transwoman has demanded a place on your team.
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
~ Carl Sagan

Burning Petard
Posts: 4048
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 5:35 pm
Location: Near Bear, Delaware

Re: Women are losers.

Post by Burning Petard »

What is an unfair advantage? All those NBA pros who are 7 feet tall -- that is certainly an advantage over someone who is 5"5" Why is that fair?

Why is NOT an unfair advantage to not use a wooden pole in the pole vault?

Those people with eyesight that lets them see the stitches on a baseball as it comes toward the batter's box at 95+ mph certainly have an advantage over me -- who cannot even see a golf ball as it rises against the sky.

Why can't we play sports for the joy of playing? Why is 'a personal best' such a disappointment, barely above the trophy for just showing up?

This gender-bender stuff in sports? For me it demonstrates the silliness of many of the traditions of sport. Is it unfair for cis-females to pilot drag racers because they are generally smaller, lighter, and faster reflexes than most cis-males?

snailgate

Big RR
Posts: 14048
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: Women are losers.

Post by Big RR »

I have to disagree; competition in sports, especially at the advanced and elite levels, present a lot of benefits to the participants, and women's sports are an important part of that. There are legitimate reasons why women and men compete in different divisions, and Title IX assures that women will get those benefits as well as men . I think it is shortsighted (If not outright silly) to pretend there are no gender differences or that cis women will be disadvantaged if this is not addressed.
Last edited by Big RR on Wed Jan 19, 2022 1:15 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Long Run
Posts: 6717
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 2:47 pm

Re: Women are losers.

Post by Long Run »

Not sure what SG is arguing. Kind of sounds like he thinks sports are frivolous so why care, but also stating that because people have a variety of talents what difference does it make to allow a clear biological advantage. Any one who cares about sports, and cares about the benefits it has provided to women knows that allowing trans to compete against women is bad for sport and bad for women in sport.

Burning Petard
Posts: 4048
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 5:35 pm
Location: Near Bear, Delaware

Re: Women are losers.

Post by Burning Petard »

LR you remind me of Satchmo's well-known description of jazz--if I have to explain it, you will never understand it. I will never understand sport.

I don't think sports are frivolous. I do not define as frivolous doing an activity with no hope of a million dollar paycheck. What is the educational rationale for the Head football coach to be paid multiples of the pay for the head of the Engineering department at a major University? I love to watch somebody doing well something very difficult. However, you are right in that I fully do not understand your idea of things being good or bad for sport, or bad for people in sport.The gentlemen who worked together to create the first modern olympics thought it would be bad for sport if the participants did it in costume rather while naked. I see that concept is retained as nearly as is legal for women's gymnastics and beach volleyball.

Or from another perspective. Observe the general American society in the work up to the Super Bowl. It has all the trappings of a national religion.
It is no oxymoron to say many Americans watch football religiously.

snailgate

Big RR
Posts: 14048
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: Women are losers.

Post by Big RR »

Perhaps, but then sports (far apart from the commercialism around them) can teach important things to a participant much as music and arts can. Things like dedication and hard work, joining of the physical and mental states, being part of a team, pursuing an ideal, ... This goes beyond the high paid coaches and multi million dollar pro salaries (for a very few), and helps develop well rounded and confident men and women. That is the ultimate value of sport. And IMHO, that opinion should be available to women as well as men.

Sure, sports have been made commercial to encourage viewership, but then so have the arts and other endeavors. It doesn't completely take away from the individual pursuits or benefits to the participants in the myriad of opportunities offered.

If you don't buy there's any benefit, then fine; but I have seen young people develop into confident, successful adults, due, in part, to their participation in sports, and I think the opportunity to participate should be retained.

Burning Petard
Posts: 4048
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 5:35 pm
Location: Near Bear, Delaware

Re: Women are losers.

Post by Burning Petard »

Unhappily, opportunity to participate is far from the topic of this thread. It is about choosing who one participates with. If the swim meet at the head of this thread was 'unfair' what is the criteria for fairness? There were requirements for participation published in advance and Lia Thomas met them. Would it have been 'unfair' if Lia had finished 4th? This is discussed because winning, not participation, is everything in sports.

snailgate

User avatar
Guinevere
Posts: 8989
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 3:01 pm

Re: Women are losers.

Post by Guinevere »

Big RR wrote:
Tue Jan 18, 2022 6:52 pm
I have to disagree; competition in sports, especially at the advanced and elite levels, present a lot of benefits to the participants, and women's sports are an important part of that. There are legitimate reasons why women and men compete in different divisions, and Title IX assures that women will get those benefits as well as men . I think it is shortsighted (If not outright silly) to pretend there are no gender differences or that cis women will be disadvantaged if this is not addressed.
I agree with this pretty much 100%. I feel empathy for the trans women who have faced so much discrimination and so many barriers, to be able to live their lives authentically. But I don’t think that’s enough to let them demolish women’s sport.

I thought about a separate category for trans athletes (also mentioned somewhere above), but would need to think that through a bit more before I’m ready to recommend/endorse that course of action.
“I ask no favor for my sex. All I ask of our brethren is that they take their feet off our necks.” ~ Ruth Bader Ginsburg, paraphrasing Sarah Moore Grimké

User avatar
Econoline
Posts: 9555
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 6:25 pm
Location: DeKalb, Illinois...out amidst the corn, soybeans, and Republicans

Re: Women are losers.

Post by Econoline »

BoSoxGal wrote:
Tue Jan 18, 2022 1:38 pm
The cutoff should be if you went through puberty as a male you don’t get to compete in girls’/women's amateur or professional sport as a female, testosterone blockers and current testosterone levels notwithstanding you have still developed the larger heart/lung capacity of a male etc. by going through that process. This is so simple a child can grasp it.
This is the most sensible suggestion I've seen on this subject. (The only exception might be if ALL the other participants in a particular event UNANIMOUSLY agreed to the participation of the trans athlete(s) on an individual one-at-a-time basis.)
BoSoxGal wrote:
Tue Jan 18, 2022 1:38 pm
Life isn’t fair and we don’t all get to be and do all things. The disabled or differently abled or whatever is now the PC term have their own sports leagues. That’s a level playing field. Even Michael Phelps has weighed in on this controversy stating that the playing field should be level. Trans women need their own competition space or they will end up destroying women’s sport and I don’t want to hear how they are small in number so it’s not a big deal it’s a big deal if you are the girl or woman losing opportunities for competition and scholarships because a post puberty transitioned transgirl/transwoman has demanded a place on your team.
:ok Well said.
People who are wrong are just as sure they're right as people who are right. The only difference is, they're wrong.
God @The Tweet of God

Big RR
Posts: 14048
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: Women are losers.

Post by Big RR »

Burning Petard wrote:
Wed Jan 19, 2022 8:19 pm
Unhappily, opportunity to participate is far from the topic of this thread. It is about choosing who one participates with. If the swim meet at the head of this thread was 'unfair' what is the criteria for fairness? There were requirements for participation published in advance and Lia Thomas met them. Would it have been 'unfair' if Lia had finished 4th? This is discussed because winning, not participation, is everything in sports.

snailgate

Come on BP, I thin it's beyond dispute that, at the elite level (and probably a bit below it, men will beat women in most (perhaps all, I am not certain) sports contests. This is why we have women's and men's sports divisions. Unless we want to do away with women's sports where women can fairly compete, we cannot have transexual women compete against cis gendered women. This is not a matter of "fairness" or "unfairness", it is a matter of whether women will be able to compete or not at all.

FWIW, I do think we will have to come to terms of how to deal with trans athletes and not deprive cis gendered women of their chance to compete, and the discussion should begin now; but I do not think we should jettison women's sports and the opportunities they present.

Post Reply