Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear vetoes bill banning male-born athletes from female sports

[MrNiceGuy]

So you wouldn't watch women's sports if they were given equal time? Do you think that faux viewers wouldn't tune in?

Not generally. I hardly watch sports now. But when I do, it's like the occasional part of Stanley Cup playoff game, the baseball world series, or maybe one or two football games a season. I never watch soccer, except the world cup, and I would watch the Women's World cup if the American team is playing. But I won't watch women's soccer generally, and I won't watch women's basketball. There is no women's baseball that I'm aware of, and the only women's American football I know of is the Lingerie Bowl (which is interesting for about five minutes). I don't watch any other sports, like swimming, tennis, track and field, softball, cricket, auto racing, etc.

 

[Fishking]

The place to settle this in the courts, not by partisan legislation. The GOP are adding this to their 2022 and 2024 culture wars list. Too bad they couldn't run on policy but they can't.

The GOP didn't add this to the culture war, they are only responding to the wat the left continually wages.

It's always a bullshit talking point to say when the right responds to the left pushing, and pushing, and pushing their radical agenda as them starting a culture war.

A just a handful of years ago this wouldn't have been a culture war issue but the left has been pushing it, as they've gone full nutbag radical on this and so many other issues.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

Transgenders represent only 0.18% of America. The number of male transgenders in sports must be a very small fraction of that and I can't imagine more than a hundred or so.

I just don't get the attention and vitriol this segment of the population gets. You'd think millions of people were being thrown into a fire or something heinous. A male not destroying females in swimming should not be high on any list of prorities.

Well, it's because of the way the Leftist Progressives address the rest of society about this issue - it's fingerpointing, namecalling and accusations - as if acknowledging biologicial sex is now to be equated to racism and hate speech. Only "bigots" deny that a transwoman is a "real woman."

And, then the entire theory doesn't make a lick of sense - one says, "okay, what's a real woman? Define woman." The answer is "a woman is someoe who identifies as a woman in terms of gender." Which of course, is nonsensical, because we are still left with not knowing what a "woman" is - what are we identifying as when we identify as a woman? It's whatever one's personal definition of a woman is! Because, we know the traditional qualities associated with being a woman are just social constructs, and there is no such thing as the look, fashion, behavior, appearance, or feeling of being a woman - a woman can be feminine and delicate - or a woman can be tough and masculine - who ware we to say? Caitlyn Jenner became a woman and dresses and tries to act like a "traditional" woman - but there is no reason Bruce Jenner couldn't have shaved his head, and put on cargo shorts and said "this is how I express myself as a woman," in his deepest baritone voice. Because, being a woman is just a social construct, and the definition of a real woman is "someone who identifies as a woman." Surgery, hormones, and changing fashion/styles is not necessary to "be" a "real woman," according to the Left.

It's a jumbled mess of meaningless terms that boil down to "whatever I say subjectively is what it is, and I can change it whenever I want, AND you have to accept it -- all of you have to accept it - and if you don't you're a bigot." That's what it boils down to. If Caitlyn Jenner said tomorrow - you know, I realized I'm actually a man, and I had this epiphany about that. I'm not going to change back to my old Bruce Jenner appearance, and I'm changing my name to Carl Jenner, keeping the dresses and makeup, but now you call me "he/him" instead of "she/her," according tot he Left we'd all have to cater to that, and the media would have to make sure it refers to Carl as a he, and they'd be bigots if they "dead name" him Caitlyn, or Bruce, and they'd be bigots if they dead-gendered him and referred to him as her, even though he wears a dress..... that's the logic the Left is applying.

 

[Helix]

But ESPN is a "private organization which can do whatever it wants," right? Why would you support such a law? LOL. But as an aside, if the televised Olympics which recently occurred is any indication, the networks are already preferring televising women's sports, as every ****ing time I turned over to a channel showing the Olympics it was women's curling or women's soccer or other female events. They definitely had at least equal time. Which is just fine with me, as ESPN and others can choose what to broadcast for all I care.

My interest in women's sports, though, relates primarily to my daughters. I mean, I generally like women's World Cup Soccer, as over the last few World Cups, the women have been more entertaining than the me, and the men never fail to disappoint me with their cheating and faking being hurt CONSTANTLY. Every men's world cup is ruined by incidents of bullshit penalties and players flinging themselves to the ground over and over again. The women's world cup, while slower and less skilled, has been a purer game.

But as for my daughters, I want them to compete against girls, not boys. I know full well how tween and teen boys play games and sports differently than girls, and how boys just are faster, stronger, and more aggressive/dangerous than girls. That's a fact. So, we need sex based leagues, because otherwise 50% of the population has nothing to compete in in high school and college. it's not rage - it's a desire to have some parity between men's and women's sports. That's all.

For you, yes. For others, they didn't give a tin shit about women's sports until faux figured out it could make money by stirring up hatred of transgenders.

 

[Paradoxical]

Well, it's because of the way the Leftist Progressives address the rest of society about this issue - it's fingerpointing, namecalling and accusations - as if acknowledging biologicial sex is now to be equated to racism and hate speech. Only "bigots" deny that a transwoman is a "real woman."

And, then the entire theory doesn't make a lick of sense - one says, "okay, what's a real woman? Define woman." The answer is "a woman is someoe who identifies as a woman in terms of gender." Which of course, is nonsensical, because we are still left with not knowing what a "woman" is - what are we identifying as when we identify as a woman? It's whatever one's personal definition of a woman is! Because, we know the traditional qualities associated with being a woman are just social constructs, and there is no such thing as the look, fashion, behavior, appearance, or feeling of being a woman - a woman can be feminine and delicate - or a woman can be tough and masculine - who ware we to say? Caitlyn Jenner became a woman and dresses and tries to act like a "traditional" woman - but there is no reason Bruce Jenner couldn't have shaved his head, and put on cargo shorts and said "this is how I express myself as a woman," in his deepest baritone voice. Because, being a woman is just a social construct, and the definition of a real woman is "someone who identifies as a woman." Surgery, hormones, and changing fashion/styles is not necessary to "be" a "real woman," according to the Left.

It's a jumbled mess of meaningless terms that boil down to "whatever I say subjectively is what it is, and I can change it whenever I want, AND you have to accept it -- all of you have to accept it - and if you don't you're a bigot." That's what it boils down to. If Caitlyn Jenner said tomorrow - you know, I realized I'm actually a man, and I had this epiphany about that. I'm not going to change back to my old Bruce Jenner appearance, and I'm changing my name to Carl Jenner, keeping the dresses and makeup, but now you call me "he/him" instead of "she/her," according tot he Left we'd all have to cater to that, and the media would have to make sure it refers to Carl as a he, and they'd be bigots if they "dead name" him Caitlyn, or Bruce, and they'd be bigots if they dead-gendered him and referred to him as her, even though he wears a dress..... that's the logic the Left is applying.

Excellent post, Mr. Nice Guy and it expressed my sentiments exactly. The left has this notion that absolutely NO ONE ever, ever should suffer any sort of pain, ridicule, embarrassment or being left out. In Rhode Island, they want to do away with the Honors Class. Why? Because others are left out and can't participate. We know who the "others" are. Instead of elevating the "others", they want to always bring down everyone so that the others don't feel bad for the reasons I previously stated. If there are people who don't agree with this, the tactic of the left is to riot, demonstrate, get in your face and call you racist, homophobic and (fill in the blanks).

I personally don't give a whit about a transgender person. I think most of them are pretenders and fake but that is just my personal opinion. In any event, for society to have tro change everything and allow biological males to dominate the women in sports when those particular males are such a tiny segment of the population is when society starts to crumble. It becomes cray cray time where we become Orwellian and have to agree with the fringe that we are all the same and should be treated that way no matter the effort or lack of effort someone puts in. This, in a nutshell, is socialism disguised as "equity".

 

[yankintx]

View attachment 67389925

I know a gay club in San Antonio for you.

For what we gays call tranny chasers, guys such aa you, who like chicks with dics. PM me for address

Me i like men, who wear pants, but to each there own.

 

[TurtleDude]

Why is the Right obsessed with this particular issue?

Live and let live

because we tire of the SJW left pushing this sort of nonsense that results in real girls and real women being screwed out of championships that they should have won

 

[Logician Man]

real girls and real women being screwed out of championships that they should have won

Interesting choice of words there.^

 

[Doug64]

Also, the idea of "fundamental rights" is interesting, in that the Constitution doesn't say there are "fundamental rights."

It's true that the Constitution doesn't use the words "fundamental rights," but it was understood that that was the reason that (most) of those areas were given special protection from Federal legislation. Actually, the US Bill of Rights was pretty sparse when compared to the Bills of Rights of the various states that it was in part based on, as I understand it the state BoRs actually doing a fair bit of philosophizing.

After the Civil War, SCOTUS then used its assumed power under Marbury v. Madison to take the 14th Amendment due process clause, which said that states can't deprive someone of liberty, etc., without due process of law, and they said that what that means is States can't abridge the freedom of speech, religion, press, assembly, or commit unreasonable searches and seizures, deny people jury trials, etc.., except under rare circumstances, if any, thus adopting the "incorporation" doctrine. I never understood or accepted the rationale that the SCOTUS could just say that "you can't deprive people of liberty without due process of law" means that "a state faces the same restriction as Congress in not being allowed to abridge freedom of speech..." Don't get me wrong, I love freedom of speech, and I'm glad my State can't infringe on it either, but from an academic perspective, I don't think SCOTUS needed to "incorporate" (most of) the bill of rights into the 14th amendment to do so.

A major reason for the 14th Amendment was to give constitutional force to the Civil Rights Act of 1866--both because there were (probably well-founded) questions whether Congress had the authority to pass that act, and because Congress was concerned about what might happen in future Congresses that might not be so enlightened. But just how it was supposed to be applied was iffy. You can find a good review of the various arguments here:

The Heritage Guide to the Constitution

The Heritage Guide to the Constitution is intended to provide a brief and accurate explanation of each clause of the Constitution.

www.heritage.org

 

[bluesmoke]

She may think and behave female, I don't much care about how she thinks or behaves regarding sporting events. I do care about how she performs, and if she performs like the natural born male that she is/was, then she should be banned from competing against females.

End of story.

What else trans should be banned from?

 

[bluesmoke]

your ignorance of reality is surpassed by the silliness of throwing a stupid race card

Both a part of the whole that is being marginalized by the RW. I make a list that adds to transphobia and race hate, but banning books that have nothing to do with CRT would only be another on which would be stacked many.

 

[Cope]

What else trans should be banned from?

Any sport where a biological male holds a significant advantage over a biological female. How hard is this to understand?

 

[bluesmoke]

Any sport where a biological male holds a significant advantage over a biological female. How hard is this to understand?

So, a trans MtF should not be banned from using facilities designated for females, such as restrooms? Should they be allowed their own facilities, designated for MtF and FtM? Banned only in sports, but not FtM?

 

[Cope]

So, a trans MtF should not be banned from using facilities designated for females, such as restrooms? Should they be allowed their own facilities, designated for MtF and FtM? Banned only in sports, but not FtM?

I imagine if we spend enough time, we could list out every place, every incidence and every time they should be in their own division/bathroom/sport/ whatever

But first, I am assuming that you agree that the biological advantage of MtF trans people should NOT allow them to participate against biological females?
Once you can unequivocally state that, we can continue the dissection.

 

[bluesmoke]

.....

 

[bluesmoke]

I imagine if we spend enough time, we could list out every place, every incidence and every time they should be in their own division/bathroom/sport/ whatever

But first, I am assuming that you agree that the biological advantage of MtF trans people should NOT allow them to participate against biological females?
Once you can unequivocally state that, we can continue the dissection.

You answer my questions, I'll answer yours. That's how debate works.

 

[Cope]

You answer my questions, I'll answer yours. That's how debate works.

No debate works when you stay on topic and not move the goal posts to a new location because you failed to defend the old location.

Any sport where a biological male holds a significant advantage over a biological female. How hard is this to understand?

So, a trans MtF should not be banned from using facilities designated for females, such as restrooms? Should they be allowed their own facilities, designated for MtF and FtM? Banned only in sports, but not FtM?

Do you see where the goal posts shift is? Hint: 'Such as'

 

[bluesmoke]

No debate works when you stay on topic and not move the goal posts to a new location because you failed to defend the old location.




Do you see where the goal posts shift is? Hint: 'Such as'

Your "goal post" accusation is overused and does not change the fact of what I say. Instead of your goal post maneuver, try quoting me and what of it you can refute.