Dude. I means that’s all very well. But you are missing the real victim here.
Did you not read about how mad Riverman would be in the hypothetical situation where his daughter would hypothetically lose to a “biological male” in a hypothetically unfair competition?
fwiw, I will exit this thread because I admit that I am super green on the topic and I have no want or desire to hurt anyone as this is a more important subject to others than me.
Last thing I am posting about this in here but “fairness” in sportsball being more important than human rights is a horrific take. Like if that is your take think about it and what is really important.
I’m okay with any “freak” competing in an open division.
Trouble is that when you create women’s sports, the ridiculous comes when you’re essentially allowing arguably non-women to compete. Your point is not the slam-dunk you think it is. The swimmer that warranted the bumping of this thread has already competed in men’s competition. To be competing in women’s only events is complete bullshit imo.
If I said blind people shouldn’t be able to drive cars, it wouldn’t mean I was being “dismissive of human rights.”
Not sure why your so dismissive of the right of female athletes to compete in female-only events. I mean I guess we can just abandon women’s sports altogether, but seems silly.
If the point is that restricting female-only events to females is a this massive violation of human rights, I guess I’m just not seeing it when the athlete in question has already competed in men’s events. I guess the analogy isn’t great, but the characterization of my position was really stupid.