Fraud at Texas state wrestling championships

They should have banned her from wrestling. She had an unfair advantage over all other contestants.

I know what to expect:
inconsistency, hypocrisy, absurdity, and hysteria just for starters!

More a case of the first thing, I think. And from my understanding, this person did not want to compete on the girls' bracket, but did so because they were unable to compete on the boys' bracket. So they were put in the position where they had an advantage due to their hormone use (which honestly should have disqualified them). Of course, had this person been allowed to compete in the boys' bracket, they likely would have gotten beaten very badly, and then the regressives would be playing the "poor victim" game.

Yet that didn't happen, so we'll never know.

Did you read the part about him fighting to be put on the boys' team by chance?

"Because someone wronged me, I'll wrong a whole bunch of other somebodies who had nothing to do with it."

This logic says that robbing one bank is justified if your loan was unfairly declined by another bank.

Just....no.

To all of that.

Reread the report. He wanted to wrestle on the team that matched his gender, and the law forbade him.

So, @Paladin and everyone agreeing with him, what's the general principle here?

"If someone gave you an unfair advantage against your will, you must drop out of any competition entirely." ?

Make sure you include in your answer not just an application for this trans boy in wrestling, but also an application for any cis hetero white man in business.

Then perhaps you can explain why this fair to the girls then?

Against "his"will? Was someone sticking a gun to his head forcing him to wrestle?

It isn't. Everyone in the league has been ill served by a bad law.

Weak attempt to cloud the issue. If you want to argue that people should arbitrarily be denied certain professions, do so explicitly, and answer the question in my post that you just quoted and then ignored.

So cheating is okay because she's transgender, otherwise it's not okay? Did I get that right?

1) He isn't cheating.
2) Cheating isn't ok.
3) You've now avoided the central question twice.

Taking steroids is in sports is often times against the rules.

1) But not in this case, explicitly so.
2) This is indeed a bad law, let's change it.
3) You've now avoided the central question thrice, and that's barely a word.

I want to know if someone stuck a gun to his head and forced him to wrestle.

Answered twice now: No. You still haven't argued why that is relevant, and you have now avoided the central question four times.

Federal Freshman is the new garamet

You did not answer twice, you deflected and changed the subject.

For the fourth time, the answer to your question is No. And I didn't deflect at all; I asked a question, you quoted my post and avoided answering it, reposting your own instead, and you have now failed to answer the central question five times in a row. Some part of you has clearly figured out that you'll have to admit you're plain wrong as soon as you tackle it.

No, I'm not wrong. Nobody forced him to wrestle, he should have refused to wrestle instead of using an unfair advantage to win.

Also, how is it that nobody has brought this up.

That's six, and you managed to ignore my answer to your question yet again.

It's not an unfair advantage against his will.

No, you've failed to answer the central question. Quite spectacularly.

You're falling back on a legalistic argument instead of dealing with the issue of fairness.

The girl was allowed to compete against the other girls, despite being hulked-out on testosterone, because technically the testosterone was considered treatment for a recognized medical condition.

That doesn't address the issue of fundamental fairness to the other girls, who now had to compete against someone who was doped up on massive amounts of steroids, and had chemically-engineered arms & shoulders that looked like they belonged to a Longhorn linebacker.

Here's what should have happened, quite simply: the girl's parents should have insisted she withdraw from the competition. The parents should have insisted upon this for three reasons:

1. Internal consistency of logic - the girl no longer considers herself female, so there was no reason to follow through with competing against other females.
2. It was fundamentally unfair to the other girls, who have now forever lost their opportunity to win a state championship
3. The she/he's title is meaningless, it will never be considered legitimate, and it proved nothing about whether or not she could have won the title absent the aid of massive amounts of steroids.

But the parents didn't make that decision. The real question is the motivations of the parents. Did they think this was a way to embarrass the state of Texas into changing the law, fairness to the other girls be damned?

Seven! Yes it was, but at this point, how hard you're dodging the question is much more interesting than how wrong you are.

So if the answer to my question is no, then how is he being forced to wrestle the girls?

How much longer are you going to embarrass yourself in this thread?