The Beginning of the End: The Lame Duck Period of Joe Biden’s Presidency

[LaceyLou]

4 minutes ago, smr-nj said:

https://sph.tulane.edu/study-finds-higher-maternal-mortality-rates-states-more-abortion-restrictions
 

Fear mongering?  No, actual statistics.
 

Since it seems some can’t make the connection between higher mother mortality stats in states that changed their laws since Roe v. Wade was overturned, perhaps this article can fill the educational void. 

Not to mention that people with backwards beliefs on women are getting closer and closer to those in power-including people who think it was a mistake to give women the right to vote. I believe we heard some of that rhetoric during the campaign, but sadly people chose either to ignore it or not believe it.

 

[mtutiger]

2 hours ago, Archie said:

They are also going to help women in athletics by keeping men out of women’s sports.    

 

Something tells me that the same party that has frequently advocated for radically changing or even ending of Title IX may not be the most trustworthy advocate for women athletes

Edited December 30, 2024 by mtutiger

[mtutiger]

Trump is definitely not going to anything on the issues in which he's unpopular.

Also, I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today lol

[smr-nj]

19 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

Something tells me that the same party that has frequently advocated for the radically changing or even ending of Title IX may not be the most trustworthy on the subject women's sports

2022 statistic - ncaa female athletes approximately 290,000.  Number of transgender athletes - 40.

40/290,000=0.000138.

Just as a personal belief, I do think that for most sports, I don’t believe a transgender athlete competing in women’s sports is fair & equitable… but there are some sports where I don’t see that argument having actual merit.

However, crying, hair-pulling , and gnashing of teeth over 40 athletes out of 500,000 nationally is ludicrous/ laughable/ inane.

 

[mtutiger]

5 minutes ago, smr-nj said:

2022 statistic - ncaa female athletes approximately 290,000.  Number of transgender athletes - 40.

40/290,000=0.000138.

Just as a personal belief, I do think that for most sports, I don’t believe a transgender athlete competing in women’s sports is fair & equitable… but there are some sports where I don’t see that argument having actual merit.

However, crying, hair-pulling , and gnashing of teeth over 40 athletes out of 500,000 nationally is ludicrous/ laughable/ inane.

 

And to my point, it's especially inane when it comes from many of the same folks who would gladly end the protections (via Title IX) that ensure that men and women have equal access to sports at the collegiate level.

That's a big reason why I cannot take conservative histrionics seriously on this.... there's a track record that GOP politicians (and their supporters) have on the subject of women's sports, and to say it's piss poor would be an understatement.

[Archie]

Allowing men to compete against women doesn’t just take away the rewards of their performance when men come in and out perform them.  It puts their safety at risk.  These men competing against them are bigger and stronger and many women have been hurt.  Besides women have enough competition with other women for making teams and getting scholarships.  They shouldn’t have to compete against men too.  Women’s sports are there for a reason. It seems pretty hypocritical when someone says they support women’s rights and they’re concerned for their safety when they support men competing in women sports and sharing their locker room. Democrats have been doing this for a long time and this election it bit them in the rear.

[mtutiger]

As expected, Archie doesn't address that many conservative politicians have a track record of attacking Title IX protections, which again, allows for equal access to sports teams for female athletes at the college level to compete. 

Without these protections, there would likely be less sports offerings for female athletes on college campuses nationwide. Which means less women playing sports at the collegiate sports nationwide. 

So, for me, on the subject of hypocrisy, it seems extremely hypocritical to talk about "protecting women athletes" while supporting a party with this history as it pertains to women's athletics

Edited December 30, 2024 by mtutiger

[Screwball]

How about we not get some girl maimed or killed because some idiot isn't happy with the size of his ****.

[oblong]

7 hours ago, smr-nj said:

It was to stay out of jail. My thought also, but, he will let whomever strokes him the best decide the agenda for the next four years…. And this is dangerous. Very.

And more stacking of judges at state levels is also a horror story. And especially As a woman, I fear for the young women of the country who are in imminent danger of returning to second class citizen status. Childbirth death rates have already risen, and will continue to escalate.

and as for immigration reform, I predict in a very near future, where people will be asked (/required) to confirm their citizenship, whether or not they were born here, but if they look like they might have some other nations blood in them, they will be asked for their “papers“. and if you don’t ****ing see this coming, you’re turning a blind eye to the future. Maybe you’re not afraid for yourself or your children, but you damn well oughta be.

I don’t want to give the impression I am dismissing those concerns. They are very valid. I’m just expressing some hope that it won’t be as bad as we fear…. Meaning much worse than it is now.  It is bad now in several states but I don’t know how much better they would have gotten it Harris had won.  Still need to win at the ballot boxes and in the courts and without more Dems in the senate then national protections for women’s health care will be in jeopardy.  I’m not saying things will be great. Just that it may not develop into what we are thinking.  

[oblong]

25 minutes ago, Screwball said:

How about we not get some girl maimed or killed because some idiot isn't happy with the size of his ****.

Right.  That’s exactly why “men want to compete in women’s sports” 

 

[smr-nj]

6 minutes ago, oblong said:

I don’t want to give the impression I am dismissing those concerns. They are very valid. I’m just expressing some hope that it won’t be as bad as we fear…. Meaning much worse than it is now.  It is bad now in several states but I don’t know how much better they would have gotten it Harris had won.  Still need to win at the ballot boxes and in the courts and without more Dems in the senate then national protections for women’s health care will be in jeopardy.  I’m not saying things will be great. Just that it may not develop into what we are thinking.  

Nope, wasn’t attributing a dismissive notion from you.

Just sharing the things that are making my heart, my stomach, and my head hurt.

[mtutiger]

3 hours ago, oblong said:

I don’t want to give the impression I am dismissing those concerns. They are very valid. I’m just expressing some hope that it won’t be as bad as we fear…. Meaning much worse than it is now.  It is bad now in several states but I don’t know how much better they would have gotten it Harris had won.  Still need to win at the ballot boxes and in the courts and without more Dems in the senate then national protections for women’s health care will be in jeopardy.  I’m not saying things will be great. Just that it may not develop into what we are thinking.  

The biggest thing I see from the aftermath of the election is that Trump either doesn't understand or (more likely) doesn't care about *why* he most likely won... it's inflation. I don't think it's a coincidence that the topic has suddenly disappeared into the ether post-election.

The focus on literally everything else since the election suggests he's going to overreach, which isn't uncommon among Presidents after they take office.

[Tiger337]

4 hours ago, Screwball said:

How about we not get some girl maimed or killed because some idiot isn't happy with the size of his ****.

Transgender athletes competing in womens sports is sometimes a safety issue which is a valid reason to address it.  

However, transgender people don't participate in womens sports because they are unhappy with the size of their dicks.  Males generally choose to become transgender because they actually feel as if they are females in every aspect of their lives, not just sports  This makes their lives very difficult as they are typically ostracized by society.  Transgender people suffer more from their gender indentity confusion than people who are uncomfortable with transgender.  

[Tigeraholic1]

12 hours ago, mtutiger said:

As expected, Archie doesn't address that many conservative politicians have a track record of attacking Title IX protections, which again, allows for equal access to sports teams for female athletes at the college level to compete. 

Without these protections, there would likely be less sports offerings for female athletes on college campuses nationwide. Which means less women playing sports at the collegiate sports nationwide. 

So, for me, on the subject of hypocrisy, it seems extremely hypocritical to talk about "protecting women athletes" while supporting a party with this history as it pertains to women's athletics

I have pointed here to a number of examples were women are the ones unhappy with men in women NCAA sports. 

[chasfh]

On 12/29/2024 at 12:48 PM, oblong said:

I truly think he has no interest in governing or doing anything. He ran to stay out of jail and get rich. He doesn’t need maga votes anymore. I predict 4 years of nothing.  He will tweet stupid stuff. People will over react. His people will try some **** in government that will get bogged down in courts and the House GOP fighting among themselves. We may not even have a speaker.  The worst that will happen is the senate confirming his crazy judges and we might see Alito or Thomas retire. 

Or Sotomayor. That one will hurt.

[chasfh]

13 hours ago, Tigeraholic1 said:

I have pointed here to a number of examples were women are the ones unhappy with men in women NCAA sports. 

They’re not men. That’s why they’re allowed to play women’s sports.

[gehringer_2]

22 minutes ago, chasfh said:

They’re not men. That’s why they’re allowed to play women’s sports.

The general public has this idea that nature is cut and dried black/white male/female and it just isn't so. Chromosomes  do lots of out of the ordinary things and there are other occurrences were nature decides not to play to simple cultural boxes, like  embryos that are genetically male that end up with a hormone receptor block and you get a female phenotype with a male genotype. Nature is pretty sloppy actually.

I don't remember which sports org it was, but their rule was which ever sex you went through puberty in was where you were assigned. That actually makes some sense because development of secondary sexual strength characteristic probably ties closer to testosterone in puberty than anything else. Maybe there are downsides to that criterion as well but it seemed like a fair starting point. That does rule out adults who transition (the cases that generates most of the heat)  but allows a place for those whose genetics happen not to be bowtie neat.

Edited December 31, 2024 by gehringer_2

[oblong]

1 hour ago, gehringer_2 said:

The general public has this idea that nature is cut and dried black/white male/female and it just isn't so. Chromosomes  do lots of out of the ordinary things and there are other occurrences were nature decides not to play to simple cultural boxes, like  embryos that are genetically male that end up with a hormone receptor block and you get a female phenotype with a male genotype. Nature is pretty sloppy actually.

I don't remember which sports org it was, but their rule was which ever sex you went through puberty in was where you were assigned. That actually makes some sense because development of secondary sexual strength characteristic probably ties closer to testosterone in puberty than anything else. Maybe there are downsides to that criterion as well but it seemed like a fair starting point. That does rule out adults who transition (the cases that generates most of the heat)  but allows a place for those whose genetics happen not to be bowtie neat.

That goes along with my theory that conservatives don’t want to deal with anomalies.  People that are born this way go thru hell and sports provides an outlet for them.  A chance to be “normal” but god forbid your little Bella has to face a challenge.  

[mtutiger]

On 12/30/2024 at 8:12 AM, Tigeraholic1 said:

I have pointed here to a number of examples were women are the ones unhappy with men in women NCAA sports. 

And I have pointed out that Republicans, historically, have been hostile to Title IX more generally... Title IX is the thing that guarantees that collegiate institutions must provide equal opportunity (ie. equal sports offerings) for female athletes on campus relative to men.

Anything on this at all? Or are you (and Archie) just going to continue evading this point because it's inconvenient?

[mtutiger]

9 hours ago, oblong said:

That goes along with my theory that conservatives don’t want to deal with anomalies.  People that are born this way go thru hell and sports provides an outlet for them.  A chance to be “normal” but god forbid your little Bella has to face a challenge.  

People are just scared of stuff that they don't understand. It's not even exclusive to conservatives, honestly, but this is a prime example.

My point here is that while there are questions that arise from transgender participation in sports, we are talking about an infinitesimal amount of cases (Sue ran the math above), and the people doing the crowing have generally been hostile to the idea of women's sports or equal protection for women athletes to date. There is very little reason to trust their motivations.

Edited December 31, 2024 by mtutiger

[Tigeraholic1]

24 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

And I have pointed out that Republicans, historically, have been hostile to Title IX more generally... Title IX is the thing that guarantees that collegiate institutions must provide equal opportunity (ie. equal sports offerings) for female athletes on campus relative to men.

Anything on this at all? Or are you (and Archie) just going to continue evading this point because it's inconvenient?

Title IX was implemented for women. Not for men who want to be women.

[mtutiger]

17 minutes ago, Tigeraholic1 said:

Title IX was implemented for women. Not for men who want to be women.

Again, Title IX has historically been a subject of a lot of scorn and hostility from Republican politicians. There are probably members of Congress who would gladly do away with it entirely. The effects of which would lead to less opportunity for female athletes on college campuses nationwide.

Do you believe that politicians that wish to significantly alter or even remove Title IX are "pro female athlete"?

Edited December 31, 2024 by mtutiger

[Tigeraholic1]

 

21 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

Again, Title IX has historically been a subject of a lot of scorn and hostility from Republican politicians. There are probably members of Congress who would gladly do away with it entirely. The effects of which would lead to less opportunity for female athletes on college campuses nationwide.

Do you believe that politicians that wish to significantly alter or even remove Title IX are "pro female athlete"?

I am not looking at it from a political side. I was listening to the women who do not want men playing in their sports.

[mtutiger]

5 minutes ago, Tigeraholic1 said:

I am not looking at it from a political side. 

This was the post where you began engaging:

On 12/29/2024 at 8:02 PM, mtutiger said:

As expected, Archie doesn't address that many conservative politicians have a track record of attacking Title IX protections, which again, allows for equal access to sports teams for female athletes at the college level to compete. 

Without these protections, there would likely be less sports offerings for female athletes on college campuses nationwide. Which means less women playing sports at the collegiate sports nationwide. 

So, for me, on the subject of hypocrisy, it seems extremely hypocritical to talk about "protecting women athletes" while supporting a party with this history as it pertains to women's athletics

If you aren't "looking at it from a political side", why did you engage in the first place?

[CMRivdogs]

1 hour ago, Tigeraholic1 said:

Title IX was implemented for women. Not for men who want to be women.

How do you feel about women who want to be men. Basically the same issue but the MAGA's only seem to gripe about one side of the issue. 
 

In other words are you ok with a chromosomal woman using the men's room if they desire?