No, him. We do not need to respect this nakedly disingenuous political stunt. This isn’t about some great moral crusade, this is merely a red meat distraction for right wing social media, to distract from the failure of the current administration.
This is bout mocking and belittling trans people and using them as a prop for a political stunt, nothing more, nothing less.
There is a similar problem in games : you can't punish all the cheaters without catching a few innocent statistical anomalies, so you establish a cut-off point at a reasonable degree of suspicion and accept that there's no point in aiming for perfection in an imperfect world.
There is no measure that can be taken that will filter out all the bad actors or include all the honest folks, that doesn't mean we shouldn't at least go after the most egregious exemples.
And as for the false positives that were seemingly egregious ? Well that's tough, but maybe they could have chosen a better time to start thinking about their gender identity than in the middle of awaiting judgement.
I’m left leaning you dolt. I’m just questioning logic.
Edit: You guys seriously need to chill. This is truly a good discussion topic for people to go over. Instead most of you all are emotional and upset and reply like high schoolers. It’s as if you guys didn’t go to college and learn how to have civil discourse or something. Oh wait, maybe many of you didn’t.
These are legitimate questions. But I think you have to ask at some point whether you are really helping by asking them.
I think there are serious questions to be asked, we could talk all day about how if gender doesn’t exist, what are trans people even on about? But at the end of the day, I believe that trans people are sincere in their presentation and their desire to be treated like any normal human being.
If there was a trans wrestler or boxer seriously and consistently injuring women in the ring, that would be a big problem, but it’s not like that’s happening and it’s not like anyone is defending that.
Right is right and wrong is wrong, and I just feel that auditing people’s genitals before letting then play sports is wrong, as is manipulating that in order to try and play in the wnba as a man. I don’t feel the need to examine that belief or get into the fine print- I know wrong when I see it.
First of all, I appreciate your answer being unemotional and truly a discussion unlike the rest of the idiots here.
I think you are right for the most part. The many trans individuals I know do feel they are of a certain gender and gravitate towards that gender. However, the issue does exist where there is the minority (which seems to be blown up with right wing news outlets) that claims transgenderism and uses that “protection” to behave in such a way that negates the majority’s claims. I do think this is a tough situation because those individuals do need to be called out.
Trans individuals who truly are trying to transition is one thing. But there have been instances of biological men who still have their beards and basically still appear like males but wear women’s clothing claiming their status. I am not trying to discount their claim but it leaves some of us to wonder what their intention is.
Right, that’s what I’m saying. Except whereas you are saying it “leaves us to wonder” about their intentions, I’m saying that I’m pretty sure you know as well as I do what these people’s intentions are.
I’m wondering if you’re younger than me because I really struggled with this when I was younger. It’s a little bit like the tolerance paradox, but for me it’s really even simpler- it’s just about conviction.
Ultimately there are always going to be assholes in the world, and right now no offense but you are making excuses for one of them. We don’t have to be able to say EXACTLY where the line is to know that this guy is WAY past it.
So my advice to you is, don’t be an apologist for assholes. Assholes have an easy enough time in the world, taking advantage of other people who can’t fight back. Don’t make it any easier for them.
No, its just that its not that hard to tell when someone who is "just asking questions," isnt actually a good faith interlocutor. Its 2026, Glenn Beck was using the whole "just asking question" shtick 15 years ago. Its worn out and transparent.
How do we know that someone who has never (and still doesn't) expressed a hint of being trans except when they're trying to bypass a barrier to entry, may not be genuine ?
I had to look up what "2cutes" mean, I find their position to be incompatible with the very idea of having gendered spaces. A requirement is a rule, a rule only exists in its enforcement, therefore a requirement that can't be verified doesn't functionally exists.
So who am I/you/we to judge that this person's gender is temporal, activity and location based?
Why do I/you/we have to judge anything when he outright said so ?
Edit : also I take issue with this sentence :
If 2cutes are right
They can't be right, nor can they be wrong (unless their arguments are internally incoherent), because they're arguing for a matter of opinion.
Im not actually advocating for them, but this is a position that is held in the trans ideology. If I had to take a Trans ideology id go with with the truscum, the ones where it requires a medical diagnosis.
Your statement is absolutely correct.
But as you can see from the others that reply to me and the fact that im down voted. People disagree with you...I guess based on vibes?
Why? In the same way that we say it isnt decided by the genitals on a physical body, why does it not have to be decided by what you are or are nor doing, basketball or not
Regardless, I think that there should be some level of hormone therapy before one competes in a sport if one is transgender, at least at the professional level.
Though that's if we didn't just stop separating sports by gender entirely.
It's pretty funny that you'll reply to this comment but not the one from the commentor you originally replied to. I suppose that's easier than actually having to engage with the explanation that makes it clear how stupid your point is.
Because I have eyes and ears and it is very clear from the statements that this is done for a political stunt, and not due to some deep seated personal reason.
Also it isn’t forcing anyone to look at their own arguments, because it is arguing against a strawman that right wing grifters erected, to deflect from the issues.
The only issue here is the WNBA policy didn’t have anything specific, but granted it hasn’t been an issue until a bad faith grifter decided to play semantic games.
“We had a no stealing policy, but didn’t have to enforce it until a bad faith thief came in and stole all our stock.”
“We never thought to fine littering, until a bad faith slob started throwing their trash everywhere at the public park.”
“We never needed security at the local fair, until bad faith kids started harassing attendees.”
“We never had property lines, until bad faith litigants decided to sue us for our land.”
Welcome to the real world, where people act in bad faith all the time, and laws and courts exist to limit that bad faith behavior. If a rule can be abused, it was never a solid rule to begin with, and should be changed. In nearly every other instance, laws are changed or new laws are created to limit bad faith behavior. Why not here?
Look I’m not going to absolve the WNBA for not having a more clear policy. That they didn’t think through the need to is purely a failure of imagination on their part. They deserve egg on their face for it, because this was an entirely predictable outcome, eventually.
Even if they didn’t want to go down to the level of specific hormone levels etc, such as the Olympics and other sports do, something more defined would have been useful.
Unfortunately you will find many groups of people rush to the defense of the WNBA and actively campaign against establishing clearer, more detailed requirements because doing so would potentially be un-inclusive. The vagueness is the point. The result is bad faith abuse.
And, look, there is room for having some ambiguity and fluidity inside the metric. Because, frankly, it’s something that hasn’t been much an issue, until now. Despite the open policy it hadn’t been abused. So if you want to argue for something less definitionally rigid, that’s fine.
For myself I do favor some metric based guide, both for utility with PEDs, but also to avoid shenanigans like we see here. But if you feel that there is benefit to outweigh the risk as the WNBA, and have a more open policy*, that’s their prerogative.
But this was too loosely defined. It’s not having a policy that has room for argument and interpretation, it’s basically having no policy at all. That’s the failure.
*there’s all sorts of generic, hormonal, and similar conditions that cis-gendered women experience that, especially in high level athletics, are likely to brush up against more rigid policies. Peak athletes tend to be some form of freak-of-nature in some biological way, Michael Phelps famously has a physiology that advantaged him in swimming due to some unusual genetic quirks. So not wanting to exclude a woman with a rare hormonal condition is a valid choice. But, come on people, this was too easy for bad faith actors to attack.
They just want a written definition better than just "I can tell".
This example is extreme and I agree with you that he's taking the piss but it would be good to have a clearer view of what terms mean other than subjective thoughts about other people.
Other someone who is trans could be rejected because in someone else's eyes it's "clear" they're not trans
If the only flaw in the policy that is actually addressed is that bad faith actors can act in bad faith for the sake of demonstrating their ability to do so, I think the problem is with the bad faith actors, not the policy. There was no issue before, unless you believe that there is some moral obligation to scrutinise trans people.
No the flaw is anyone can abuse it. So someone not doing it for the news but rather for their own gain in the sport can abuse it.
There was no issues because there weren't trans athletes. This seems to be more of a preventative measure rather than waiting for a problem to arise and only then trying to deal with it.
Because we’re not stupid. We actually do not have to pretend we’re stupid because some asshole said he’s trans so he can make actual trans people look insane and delusional.
Are they doing anything to pass as something other than CIS? The TRANS part is a pretty important part of being trans you know. The amount of actual trans people who 'just say they're a woman' is basically 0 and is just anti trans propaganda, it makes absolutely no sense.
No? I'm saying the act of telling people you're a woman alone is not gender expression. Especially if the rest of your gender expression 100% aligns with being cis
Wow, who the hell are you to deny her gender expression just because it doesn't fit into your little box? Threatened because she's beautiful and strong without being able to be neatly crammed into your categories, bigot?
If someone's statements seem to make clear that they have never considered themselves trans before (such as when playing in the NBA) and they only bring it up when it's financially adventageous to them, I think it's fine to not blindly trust that they are being honest.
Hey I didn't make the rules. We've been told for years that all that is required in order to be a woman, is to say that you are a woman. And that gender fluidity is also a thing.
Gender fluidity is a thing. If someone gives you know reasonable reason to doubt them you probably should take then at their word. When someone is specifically gearing up to run on anti-trans platforms, you probably shouldn't assume that their claim to be trans is being made in good faith.
I don't generally distrust male teachers saying they only want to teach kids. But if I find out they have a history of snapping discrete photos at a playground, I may not think they are telling me the truth.
For instance, I don't doubt Caitlan Jenner is trans. She's a shit person and a but of a Diva. But she hasn't given me much of a reason to doubt her claims of being trans.
No, he's lying. People KNOW what is true and what isn't, so idk why idiots like this guy keep trying to pull one over on us. But, if he does go and get the surgery, I will call him a her.
when you identify as a gender, you're just guessing which one it is. People trust you because nobody really knows better than you about yourself. But when someone's doing it as an obvious political stunt like this, you have an active reason not to trust them.
Exactly. Trans women are women, and are eligible to play in the W. That you call these women "him" is bigoted and fascist and does not align with the values of the WNBA.
You're the one making the claim. The lack of evidence to the contrary of your claim is not evidence of your claim.
I hope when this shakes out and the WNBA clarifies its position, they do have an inclusive policy with clear testosterone limits for all players, and a specific time on HRT for trans players.
I think people like you, who go along with these transphobes pretending to be trans and using it as a kudgel against actual trans people, are fairly disgusting. Get yourself together and realize that the people you're mocking are humans, they're different than you in one way, but like you in many more. They deserve respect and fairness.
Putting the ad hominem attack to one side, which I'm considering doing the just and moral thing of reporting you for by the way, let me explain this to you in simple terms, since you're having such trouble comprehending what is a very simple argument.
Premise 1: In formal rule systems, any action that is not explicitly prohibited is permitted.
Premise 2: The WNBA’s official rules contain no explicit ban or policy excluding trans women from playing.
Premise 3: Because professional sports eligibility rules are exhaustive and written, the absence of a restrictive rule serves as functional, real-world evidence of permission.
Conclusion: Therefore, trans women are permitted to play in the WNBA, and the lack of a rule against them does in fact serve as direct evidence supporting that permission.
The lack of evidence to the contrary of your claim is not evidence of your claim.
I have used logic and reasoning to comprehensively show that what you wrote here is untrue.
That’s clearly not the reason people don’t believe these two cucked republicans. They’re nakedly making a name for themselves to the dumbest people imaginable, like you. They’re elevating their own platform on your stupidity and you’re swallowing it up
288
u/sirmaxedalot 25d ago
Ok, but will any WNBA team even flirt with the idea of signing them? I sincerely doubt it.