Trans activists failing to persuade people on the sports issue

#trustthescience #Iamthescience *#weownthescience

*In case you missed it, this came out of the mouth of someone from the World Economic Forum, but please do go on to tell me that the Great Reset isn't a thing.

Where did I say this? Point to it, quote it, link to it.

So now we're getting to why you want the idiots to be given 10-20 minutes in the class. You're the idiot.

Climate change denial groups funded by big oil have manipulated google algorithms to prioritize their damaging bullshit in search results.

This is science advocate saying they fought back to ensure real science is prioritized instead.

Yes, the science is all on one side on this. Hence 'we own the science' on the topic of anthropogenic climate change is 100% accurate.

The Great Reset came out of WEF as a way to prioritize sustainable growth through green initiatives after the Covid-19 pandemic. We do need to be making better choices for the future of humanity and the more we can get off fossil fuels while maintaining standard of living the better off we will be.

Conspiracy theorists grabbed onto that saying the great reset is getting rid of white people.

It's whaco, cuckoo land Q stuff and you should point and laugh at anyone stupid enough to fall for that nonsense.

It's not up to me. I don't think it's unreasonable for a professor t to briefly explain to a student, who asks a question about flat earth in a geography class, why they're wrong.

For a professor? That's college.

If you are a geography professor and someone is talking about flat earth the only appropriate question is 'How the hell did you get into this university?'

That's basic world knowledge (literally) that you should grasp by 5th grade.

No shit. That's not the point. A student could ask any number of "stupid" questions for a number of reasons that have nothing to do with their education level (they heard it on Joe Rogan for example). Should a professor embarrass the student in front of the whole class or should they take the opportunity as a teachable moment?

who cares?

If there is such thing, it's been a long time coming.

I care.

see... state the effect and the cause reveals itself.

The whole "you heard that on Joe Rogan, therefore your argument is invalid and I win " schtick is tired and needs to be put out of its fucking misery already. You don't have to endorse every second of every broadcast to point out the undeniable fact that there have been some highly qualified people bringing expert opinions on that show. Throwing out all of that because one or two people made comments that offend you is just prime-time assclownery.

I know this is meant to be an insult towards me, but my answer was in response to a hypothetical situation brought up in another thread and somehow it jumped into this thread. I do not believe the Earth is flat, but Eddie Bravo does and Eddie Bravo was on The Joe Rogan Experience talking about flat Earth so it was a readily handy example that was fresh in my mind.

One could have a student who's very intelligent, but because they're young and don't know any better, they might be fooled into believing some aspects of the flat Earth theories. Then they naively end up asking a professor a question about what they heard on The Joe Rogan Experience and the professor would likely have to field that question in some way. Apparently that's a bridge too far for some people.

Now you're probably thinking this about me, but you'd be wrong because you think a lot of things about me that you are wrong about.

"So the large majority were cis men wearing female clothing to allow them access to areas that are protected space for women. Sounds familiar."

Large majority of WHAT?

Those were the only "crossdresser in the ladies room" items on the list and they were a small minority of the items they cited.

More to the point, of all the sexual offenses documented to have occurred in those settings - only one in 9 billion+ involved such a cross-dressed (in whole or in part) dude.

So no, they aren't the majority in any context - statistically speaking, in terms of rate significance, they basically don't exist.

about the rape, did you mean this case?

About That Alleged Rape In Virginia … | Opinion | plaintalk.net

I will freely admit that the only NWSL matches I have watched either in person or on TV were Reign matches. I follow the team not the league. Just like I couldn’t tell you how many MLS teams there are even though I am season ticket holder of the Sounders.

So when I read in the Executive Summary of the Yate’s Report (have you had the time to read even that?) that half the coaches had been fired I did assume they were more.
My bad.

However none of that changes the fact that you seem much more concerned about the potential harm done by dozens of trans women athletes simply competing then about the actual, proven abuse committed against thousands to tens of thousands of women athletes laid out in this 319 page report put together by a former Attorney General of the United States and commissioned by the USSF.

You don’t find that… odd in any way Mr. Women Protector?

yet another scandal in amateur hockey as well

It's like sports in general are a breeding ground for predatory behavior

Here's the thing - half the league was fired, the commissioner resigned, and the report came out recently, and that is going to lead to more action. Which I've already stated - now for a third time.

So I think they have things pretty well handled.

What's more, the topic isn't being addressed here in any thread, I'm literally the only one who engaged you on it, and I showed I had more familiarity with what's going on than anyone else on the board. Including yourself.

Mr 'It's not five or six coaches, it's half the league!' Right, Mr Women's Sports are important in my area?

If you find there are things that you feel should be addressed in the NWSL that are not currently being addressed, I'd be willing to offer my opinion on that.

But that's not why you brought it up, and clearly you have very little knowledge of it - it's just your standard tactic to attack anyone else's integrity on the issue if they don't align with your dogma 100%.

Which is dogmatic on the far left's part itself. You are just following their playbook.

You might want to analyze why you feel the need to do that.

It's ridiculously obvious that's what you do, but I tried to engage in good faith in the hope that maybe you actually had a point. I like to think people can grow.

But you've proven you don't.

Mr BUTWHATABBOUT? LOL.

Which means there should be more oversight and regulation, surely, not less.

You obviously haven’t read the report, the executive summary or anything on it as for the third time you miss that the NWSL was actually the least important info that came out.

Here I’ll copy paste and bold for you:

It documents systemic issues in women’s soccer (the second largest women’s sport in the nation) including the emotional, mental, physical and sexual abuse of women from the National Team level, to the NWSL, to the NCAA, to High School to YOUTH soccer.

However none of that seems to matter to you. You seem much more concerned about the potential harm done by dozens of trans women athletes simply competing then about the actual, proven abuse committed against thousands to tens of thousands of women athletes laid out in this 319 page report put together by a former Attorney General of the United States and commissioned by the USSF.

Of the cases you self-selected as being 'relevant' because they fight your clearly highly biased definition of what a 'trans inclusion' issue is. Lots of no true scotsman there, Nova.

Of that selection, you pointed out 9 sexual assaults that were specific to that criteria.

The fact that a male can use trans inclusive policies to attack a woman in a place they are normally barred from is indeed a question of how acceptable that policy is and has to be weighed into the discussion.

And I think it is far preferable to deal with those issues as much as possible before they happen, not after.

That's why I am very much for limiting access to women's bathrooms to trans people who are currently receiving care in UHC countries, which is almost all of the developed countries in the world save ours.

The number of attacks is not zero, but it's negligible, but you aren't doing anyone any favors by saying 'it never happens' which I routinely see in articles on the subject.

Because then one anecdotal but true incident does show the person making that claim is lying about it, and that isn't very helpful, is it?

You think giving coaches and other adults the power to conduct genital inspections will lower sexual assault?

Oh, finally, an actual comment about the review itself. That only took multiple incidents of me requesting it. Of course, you finalize it with the assumption that I don't care about it, when the very first question I asked you was 'Is there something in the review you feel is relevant to the topic.'

So the answer to that is no, EXCEPT your dogma that if I was asking you for how you thought it was germane to this topic it MUST mean I don't care about the other topic you are broaching, even though none of this has one thing to do with the thread topic, only your desire to delegitimize my take on the thread topic.

So, complete and utter bullshit on your part, no?

Feel free to start a new thread about the Yates report. I'll happily chime in.

BTW, what did you copy and paste from? It wasn't the report itself. That would mean you looked at it.

A reporters take on the Yates report no doubt? No doubt.

The Yates report wasn't commissioned on Youth leagues. While it found that several of the coaches in question who were fired were also running youth leagues, it specifically says in the report that the scope of the report was only relevant to the individuals in question and not of Youth leagues as a whole, which was beyond its mandate.

Such as "While the scope of our investigation was broad, it was not boundless. For example, we did not investigate standalone allegations of abusive behavior and misconduct in the NWSL’s predecessor leagues, the Women’s United Soccer Association (“WUSA”) and Women’s Professional Soccer (“WPS”). Nor did our mandate include a review of youth soccer"

Your reporter might have been overstating the scope of the review.

Though granted, after finding these issues that were extraordinately problematic a broader look at this culture in broader scope is no doubt warranted. Hopefully the other organizations respond from a top down systemic approach at curing the ills of the NWSL and adopt rules to help better protect the players from predation and abuse.

Nope, as I clearly said before. Must have missed that while you were inhaling your self-righteousness. What was the word I used for that? Oh, right - abhorrent.

You guys sure seem to be arguing against someone who isn't here.

Almost like you don't care about the discussion at all, only a chance to reiterate your dogma.

I copy pasted from my earlier posts.

So the only finally was you actually reading what I posted and not just reflexively lashing out after your obvious lack of concern about women in sports was called out.

Guess the bolding was actually needed.

And really, REALLY. You are gonna quibble about it being youth soccer coaches who were caught abusing players but the youth leagues themselves weren’t investigated as some kind of gotcha?



Do you or do you not agree that the rampant abuses highlighted in this report which you are now aware above are totally, completely, by orders and orders of magnitude more damaging to women players than competing against a handful of trans women?

Dogme was a bullshit movement in film, and it only really had "The Idiots" to show for it, which isn't saying very much at all.


Oh! DogmA!
Dogma was Kevin Smith trying to be Neil Gaiman.

This nonsense again. You just made an entire post that proved you didn't read what you were accusing me of.

My 'obvious lack of concern.' Is that a scientific term? As soon as you broached the subject, I asked how you thought it was applicable, and have waited until just recently to find that out.

Your personal belief about my lack of concern. Your 'gotcha' moment. LOL. It's just not possible I could have a difference of opinion while also having pure motives. No one could ever disagree with Anc unless they were actively lying about their intentions.

You said they were. Guess you should have read the report. I gave you credence that you were simply reiterating an opinion piece instead of making shit up en toto. My mistake.

Of course. But I've already stated this - there's no discussion here. I'm pretty sure we aren't going to get a 20 page thread that male coaches shouldn't abuse their female players That's a given, no? Is there anyone here in the pro-rape contingent?

But sure, I don't care about women at all, very happy they are getting raped, and if I don't state that every fifteen words somehow I have 'absolutely no concern for women.'

Fuck off with that nonsense.

I'd say it's beneath you, but clearly I would be mistaken. It certainly should be.

As to the rest, I can certainly be against abuse in women's sports and also have an opinion on trans issues in women's sports. These aren't mutually exclusive, and it's absolutely assinine to think so.

I specifically said earlier in the thread that it happens (in general) probably similarly to cis people, there's no claim that trans people are more noble on this score than cis people - or less. I didn't "self select" anything - I analyzed the list and eliminated those cases not germane to the claim in dispute.

Yes, over at least 11 years. So?

But they can do that whether or not the official policy is trans accepting. If the nine case, IIRC, 3 or 4 of them were in settings where no law or policy was trans affirming related to restrooms. But more to the point, these guys seemed to be fetishists. There are vastly more attacks in such space by individuals making no attempt at a costume.

We can look at the rates in places with such policies and compare them to those without - we find no increased risk
We can compare a place with from before the trans-affirmative policies with those after - no increased risk.

Allowing that the sample size is so very small that rate states hardly apply. But that only means that it's not an issue, or their would be vastly more examples.

Nevermind that in such countries one has very often found themselves on waiting lists 2 years or more long and if they don't social transition in the meantime then they will be suspected of not really being trans - yet if they DO socially transition then every time they are forced to conform their restroom usage to their genitals they are outing themselves to strangers who may get violent with them.

You lot sure put a lot of caveats on how we are to live our lives with no actual sound reasoning behind them. First you were carrying water for the ADF, now for the hateful GCs? You're gonna "yeah but" yourself into a corner you denied standing in.

If you mean the boy in VA, that it happened doesn't mean that all the framing attached to it was true. The right wingers were very happy to lie about it because there's always plenty of rubes who'll buy the lie.

I felt there were a few elements of Lisner's "Dawn" in there as well.

You're right, we should trust a podcast hosted by a former game show host who famously made contestants consume deer balls and donkey semen.