Thread: Executive Order: Women are Adult Biologically Female Humans

Originally Posted by beachbound

what do you think about your Trans issue?

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

I don't give a shit

Originally Posted by bsnub

take your trans shit to the other thread

Still no answer from any of Harry, Molle, Snubs, Beachbound

Molle asked me to come with 1 Trump policy that most people could probably agree was good.

I have come with 1 issue: The presidential order that should bring about some resolution to the Trans issue and see Trans-women barred from competing in female sport.

I think it should be possible for you to say whether you agree or do not agree with the policy position.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

It would have been simpler to let the sports associations and schools sort it out of themselves

So are you saying here that you do actually agree that Trans-women should not be allowed to compete in Women's sport?

Originally Posted by bsnub

Not all of us want to obsess over it like a perverted old man

What is perverted about thinking that Trans-women should be excluded from women's sports?

Originally Posted by Looper

What is perverted about thinking that Trans-women should be excluded from women's sports?

Do you think trans-men should be allowed to compete in men's sport?

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Do you think trans-men should be allowed to compete in men's sport?

That is a good question.

Personally I think Women's sport is a handicap category. I don't think we need such a thing as Men's Sport with an exclusion on non-males. I think there should be just open category top level sports that any human can participate in, and then Women's sport as a handicap level. I imagine that this would not have much impact on Men's Sport, as the competitive gulf that exists between men and women in sporting prowess is so huge.

The political benefit of having an open category is that it would do away with the complaining from women's lobbying groups about disparity between men's and women's prize-money. If the category were 'open' instead of 'men' it justifies having premium prize money that does not have to be matched with the women's handicap prize money level.

It would also be nice to be able to return to referring to The Ashes and The World Cup, instead of the politically woke Men's Ashes and Men's World Cup renaming garbage. So ironically a non-traditional revision in category definition would allow us to return to a traditional naming format.

I have only give this brief thought so I am sure there are many flaws to be found in my suggestion. What do you think?

I think your full of shit loopy.

Originally Posted by Looper

That is a good question.

Personally I think Women's sport is a handicap category. I don't think we need such a thing as Men's Sport with an exclusion on non-males. I think there should be just open category top level sports that any human can participate in, and then Women's sport as a handicap level. I imagine that this would not have much impact on Men's Sport, as the competitive gulf that exists between men and women in sporting prowess is so huge.

The political benefit of having an open category is that it would do away with the complaining from women's lobbying groups about disparity between men's and women's prize-money. If the category were 'open' instead of 'men' it justifies having premium prize money that does not have to be matched with the women's handicap prize money level.

It would also be nice to be able to return to referring to The Ashes and The World Cup, instead of the politically woke Men's Ashes and Men's World Cup renaming garbage. So ironically a non-traditional revision in category definition would allow us to return to a traditional naming format.

I have only give this brief thought so I am sure there are many flaws to be found in my suggestion. What do you think?

It's a load of wind and piss just to say "that's different, because they're not trannies".

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

It's a load of wind and piss just to say "that's different, because they're not trannies".

If you want a shorter answer then the answer is 'Yes', I think Trans-men should be allowed to compete in male sport, since they would not be threatening men with injury and would be unlikely to be taking any trophies from any biological males. Male sport is not a handicap category, whereas, female sport is so.

Since I have answered your question, are you able to answer my question: Should Trans-women be allowed to compete in female sport?

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

I think the mechanisms they had in place, and the measures that were being developed should have been allowed to be finished

That is not the question. The question is whether YOU think Trans-women should be allowed to play in women's sports? Almost everyone has an opinion on this. I find it hard to believe that you do not have an opinion.

As a second question. What mechanisms and measures are you referring to?

We have been waiting a long time for any movement from sporting bodies on this stuff. They seem to be too scared of the Trans-lobby woke mob. And with good reason as that lobby has shown itself to be quite vicious in its tactics.

I think the best first step for resolving this is a rules-based definition of woman from a senior authority.

The US was the first out of the traps with the presidential executive order. This has since been followed by a UK Supreme court ruling along the same lines. Do you disagree with the UK ruling also?

The problem is that you have no fucking idea that this is barely worth mentioning and is simply, like "caravans of illegals", a fairy story to scare up dumb trumpanzees.

In mid-December, the president of the N.C.A.A., Charlie Baker, appeared before a panel during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing about federal regulations on sports gambling. As often seems the case these days in politics, the subject turned to the participation of transgender people in sports. “How many athletes are there in the United States in N.C.A.A. schools?” Dick Durbin, a senator from Illinois, asked Baker. “Five hundred and ten thousand,” Baker answered. “How many transgender athletes are you aware of?” Durbin continued. “Less than ten,” Baker said. That’s less than .002 per cent. In October, a spokesman for the Michigan High School Athletic Association told the Detroit Free Press that, out of the hundred and seventy thousand high-school athletes in the state, only two are transgender girls—or roughly .001 per cent.

Put simply, like all trumpanzee fuckwits that have swallowed the Fox News Koolaid, you think there is a major problem - there isn't.

It's all fabricated nonsense for bigoted chimps.

Originally Posted by Looper

What is perverted about thinking that Trans-women should be excluded from women's sports?

What’s perverted, is you obsessing about the issue, when it’s obvious dog whistle shit. Again, statistics show such a small number of athletes, identify as trans, but Trump and his minions want people focused on issues like this, to distract from his mounting list of monumental fuck ups.

Originally Posted by Loopey

what mechanisms and measures are you referring to?

For you? I’m guessing a strap-on, probably 12 to 14 inches.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Put simply, like all trumpanzee fuckwits that have swallowed the Fox News Koolaid

People have been talking about this issue for years, before Trump even got in the first time. It is a 90/10 NO issue for most westerners but nothing has been done about it, since the sporting bodies are scared of the Trans-lobby. If Trump has fabricated the issue then why has the UK Supreme Court come out with a similar ruling just weeks after the original US executive order?

You avoided answering by instead turning the question round and asking me about Trans-men in men's sports. I gave you detailed and thought out answer which you were not happy with. So I shortened it to a simple Yes.

I think, in return, you should be able to answer the original question:

Do you think Trans-women should be allowed to take part in women's sport?

What are your own personal thoughts on this issue?

Originally Posted by beachbound

What’s perverted, is you obsessing about the issue

Still waiting for your answer too, BB.

Originally Posted by 39TG

Mothers kill their children at rates similar to, or higher, than fathers. I'd prefer you to use the pronoun "she".

Oh, do fuck off, there's a good chap...

Originally Posted by Looper

till no answer from any of Harry, Molle, Snubs, Beachbound

Because this is not the thread for your lame discussion that attempts to drive this thread off-topic. It is odd that you do not seem interested in the more important crisis, which is that your hero is trying to dismantle the rule of law and the US Constitution.

Originally Posted by Looper

People have been talking about this issue for years

Not "people". Retarded fucking trumpanzees like you. As someone else said, keep dribbling on about this fucking crap on your "I'm obsessed with trannies" thread.

I don't know what world you live in Harry, but it has been the Democrats and the left that have been completely obsessed with trannies for the last decade or so.

Originally Posted by pickel

I don't know what world you live in Harry, but it has been the Democrats and the left that have been completely obsessed with trannies for the last decade or so.

Actually I think you'll find the Democrats generally stand for protecting any minority, and it's the trumpanzees that foam at the mouth any time any of them look like they might get even equal treatment.

Kudos to Molle for putting his balls where his mouth is on the Trans-ladies

And Norton too.

I will add Norton to the Nay's (and subtract qwerty, since he actually thinks the Transies should not be allowed in ladies sports).

That makes it 8-3 so far

3 days to go and still time to get the trans-blokes over the line if you are so inclined.

Whatever point you are trying to make loopy is moot
The trans thing is nothing more than a distraction for political gain . Aussies tried it last election also. The percentage of trans is what? I'm guessing it's fuck all? Meanwhile in Thailand ladyboys are part of the landscape I don't see the Thais getting all worked up about that. Ffs live and live I reckon.

Originally Posted by BLD

a distraction for political gain

like most of these issues - welcome to country is the most recent dog whistle

all this is to distract from the thieving cnuts

Originally Posted by baldrick

Whatever point you are trying to make loopy is moot

I hear ya Lao, but, will have to respectfully disagree.

Here is a good interview from yesterday of one of the advocates who fought to get this over the line in the UK, hosted by the ever congenial Francis and Konstantin



As it highlights, this is about much more than sports.

People were losing their jobs and careers for simply saying that biological sex is a real thing, like it was a heresy, when it had been a common sense accepted fact just a few years earlier.

The legal clarification brings an end to a nightmare that had wrecked people lives.

There are countless reasons why society needs a biologically grounded definition of 'woman' when the concept has come under such ferocious attack by radical extremists over the past 15 years.

Originally Posted by BLD

Whatever point you are trying to make loopy is moot
The trans thing is nothing more than a distraction for political gain . Aussies tried it last election also. The percentage of trans is what? I'm guessing it's fuck all? Meanwhile in Thailand ladyboys are part of the landscape I don't see the Thais getting all worked up about that. Ffs live and live I reckon.

that.