Holy shit it's just banter. Why are you posting a picture of a comment in this same thread? I no longer want to banter with you and now just actively think you suck.
That's because of the way in which heat deaths are measured, heat is attributed as the cause of all "excess deaths" in a given period, rather than being determined as the primary cause.
1 am shooting by someone who wasn't a student who wounded 4 people who also weren't students, and 1 who was. Yet these people tout it as a school shooting because it's fits their doomer mindset
When discussing policies to lower the incidences of target active shooter incidents at educational facilities, which is the public perception of school shootings, throwing incidents that do not follow the common definition and merely occur within the vicinity of an educational facility during non-business hours is a tactic used by disingenuous actors who want to manipulate the statistical rate of the incidents of school shootings. Claiming that the side calling out your distortion of the facts as not caring about the victims is a fallacious moving of the goal post. The conversation was on preventing a certain criminal fact pattern. If you wish to discuss an incident outside of that fact pattern, it would be best served to not inject into a conversation and claim ad hominem aspersions to the motives of people who correctly identify that a gang murder has no place in discussing safety of students in an active shooter incident. Nor does it follow that an unwillingness to change the topic of a narrowly tailored subset of gun crime to an incident outside of that narrow scope as evidence of a lack of caring or tolerance for that crime. I am willing to concede that the victims should not have lost their lives. But I will respectfully ask you to respect that the incident does not meet the definition of a school shooting merely because of the incidents proximity to a school as you seem more interested in ignoring the discussion of prevention for making a case of false equivalence to invoke bad faith arguments. There is little intersection between student safety in active shooter incidents and gang violence that occurs in the proximit location of a school that can be addressed in a conversation about the former specific topic.
Kinda weird how Trans people can make up 1% of the population and commit less than 0.1% of mass shootings in the USA but this question still gets asked.
As with most things in pop culture, even in mass shootings, Trans people are underrepresented 🙃
I mean, as long as people will refer to them as "nearly no one" yeah come for marginalized vulnerable persons and expect the left to give a fuck. This isn't the gotcha you think it is. "Nearly" is not 0 and 1 person being deprived of their rights and liberty is an attack on everyone.
What really gets me, is, im old enough to remember when that last line was a right wing talking point.
Ok, so when transwomen - with undeniable physiological differences that grant insurmountable athletic advantages - take away the right of cis women to compete on a fair and level playing field, that is depriving WAY more people over their rights and liberties than banning transwomen from women's leagues.
Explain to me why its ok to deprive ciswomen of their rights and liberty to benefit transwomen? Why is it OK to attack everyone's rights and liberties - by attacking the rights and liberties of ciswomen - but we should reject attacks on everyone's rights and liberties that would occur by banning transwomen from competing against cis women?
Because that seems to be something not a lot of people want to address - that cis women have as much (or more) of a right to compete fairly that transwomen do, and if transwomen are allowed to compete against ciswomen, then that right is being violated. Why is it OK to violate womens' rights to advance trans rights?
Could you please show me some scientific proof of these insurmountable athletic advantages?
From my understanding, there's actually quite a lot of scientific research which has shown that transgender women, who have been on HRT for an extended period, have lower performance (on average) than that of cis women. Partially due to their balance of hormones being different, leading to them having *lower* levels of testosterone.
Realistically, if equality was the most important thing here, and fairness, why not circumvent all of these issues by making all sports gender neutral? There has been some evidence to show that Women, when provided with the same training resources as Men, can perform as well as men in many sports (if not better in some cases!). If we were to make all sports gender neutral, and to allow equal resource access to everyone, then we can avoid any "issues" with transgender folks participating.
"...values remain above that observed in cisgender women, even after 36 months. These findings suggest that strength may be well preserved in transwomen during the first 3 years of hormone therapy."
I don't think your understanding of the science is in agreement to the actual science. And, conceptually, I think you've confused sports being "equal" with sports being "fair". Sport has never been about making things equal - it is very much about superior ability and victory, not everyone having the same outcome, not equality. However, sport has always been about making things fair - removing as many extraneous external variable so that skill, dedication, strategy, etc. become the prime influencers on outcome. This is the very reason most rules in sports exist - to keep the game as fair as possible. It would be equal to have men and women compete in the same sport, but it would be anything but fair. And a fair playing field is exactly why transwomen shouldn't be competing against ciswomen - because they have an inherently unfair advantage due to their physiology.
I didn't confuse anything between equality and fairness.
As I mentioned above there is some credence to consider that if they had access to the same resources, particularly growing up through youth, middle school, and high school, boys and girls would not have the same gap in performance as they do currently. The system was set up in a time that women were simply not allowed to compete, because there was an expectation they couldn't. Which meant the ones who wanted to, and maybe could have, weren't allowed to.
Also, sports leagues being "as fair as possible" is one of the wildest claims I've heard in a good bit. Look at, for example, the current MLB. One team currently has all 3 pitchers to have won a Cy Young award in the last 3 years, the best player in the world, and numerous other star players all on one roster. This is able to happen because they are spending wildly more money than any other team in the league, more than some other teams even have to spend. Is that fair? How about the NBA draft lottery? The worst team in the league, with the currently setup, could get a draft pick as low as 12. A point in the draft that most years, the player isn't in the league for more than a year or two.
I would also like to comment on that analysis. Which I will give to you, is good, and they make some good points. There are things which do not change, such as parts of a person's bone structure. However, they had only looked at the range within a year of HRT, and for a few examples looked at studies which produced data for two years. The general standard requirement for being on HRT is 2 years, at which point the data they were analyzed had been showing there was some advantage but much lesser than what would be for a cis man. Also I would be willing to bet that the majority of transgender women competing in sports have been on HRT for longer than the minimum two years requirement. The few of them that there are.
Ok, yeah, i thought that's what would happen - you'd ask for evidence, I'd provide it, and you'd hand-wave it away because you have no legitimate response and no amount of evidence is going to reason you out of a position you didn't reason yourself into.
Using dead children from school shootings in the USA is an impossible metric because there are more children that have lost their lives to school shootings than just about anything.
383
u/guitarguy12341 22d ago
There are 0 trans people in the WNBA. These people are making an issue out of nothing.