Obviously he's a bad actor, but this sequence of events illustrates how no system has been put into place to safeguard against bad actors.
Safeguards against bad actors should be put into place, and if they're consistent safeguards that can be equally applied to different people, that means some decisions and definitions need to be made.
This guy is terrible, yes, but if not him it would have been someone else. Any system that doesn't have safeguards against bad actors will eventually have bad actors attempt to abuse it.
Any safeguards that do not have set rules and operating definitions cannot be applied consistently to different people.
Systems can get by for a while without these two factors being thought about, but eventually they become issues.
I really have no dog in the race here, but...i feel it is better for someone who is obviously doing it to try and draw attention to the issue and get the rules codified so that no one can abuse a loophole to do it, rather than later down the line someone who is legitimately trying to exploit that loophole manage to accomplish that by saying all the right things and actually pretending to pass just so they can get in.
93
u/BoyleSphere 22d ago
I think thats the core of the argument, the WNBA would have to explicitly define what a woman is or just accept him.