High School Boy Wins All-State Honors In Girls Track And Field

Yeah, but this is Alaska, not like TX or CA in which the top participants are at such a high level due to extraordinary competition. Anyway, at least six participants can feel good about themselves for beating a boy...

 

Real girls and women need no longer apply. Jenner puts on a dress and he's awarded Woman of the Year even though he hadn't been a woman for a year (or even a second). Now we have this dick winning all state in girls track.

 

Republicans don't allow guys to play girls sports lol. That is a liberal agenda mishap.

 

We may agree more than you think, brother from another mother.

On the contrary, they should be eager to step up and play with the big boys. Girl power and all. Seriously though... no.

I disagree with you.

Maybe.


- - - Updated - - -

Speak for yourself; I still like them.

 

So much for all this nonsense the sexes are equal. If they were there would be no need for mens and womens sports. We would simply have sports. I say liberate the women and let them compete on an even level.

[video=youtube;d43gKl9xIME]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d43gKl9xIME[/video]

 

Whats to stop any male from claiming he identifies as a woman? He maybe only good enough for 10th as male but could be a world record holder as a woman.

Whats the old saying ? Whats good for the goose is good for the gander. Heck women can join mens teams and not even claim to feel like a man.

[video=youtube;ZJL4UGSbeFg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJL4UGSbeFg&list=RDZJL4UGSbeFg[/video]

 

Women can compete with men in games(sports) of skill, like bowling, shooting and other sports that don't require muscle and/or speed. Women can join a man's team but they won't be the stars. When you watch a woman's all star team you're watching the best women players, but when you're watching a men's all star team you're watching the best players period. Women's sports don't attract the audience of men's sports because they (women), are not the best athletes in that sport.

 

And wouldn't that suck?

I totally dig the U.S. women's soccer team. Not only are they fun to watch, they're the best squad on the planet...



Force them to play with the men and all of that is gone.

 

Why would they want to exhaust themselves physically and not ever win?

 

Ok for all of you who just don't get what the differences are or that there are any:

Men are born with penises
women are born with vaginas
men have testosterone
women have estrogen
women develop hips and breasts
men get a broader body and deeper voice
women give birth and produce milk
men do not
These are the things that make women women and men men. These are not options, we are born with them. They are also facts, not beliefs or opinions.

 

pfft

not the US men. We haven't had a decent central midfielder in a lonnngggg time and if you don't have good center mids, then you'd best have the fastest and most talented players on the pitch in the other positions

 

I tackled this VERY thing in a thread months ago on this topic that seems to be rehashed again...

their method has a major flaw... they require the testing 1 year in advance, and then nothing the next 12 months, then a retest post-events... why is this a problem? because the male can stop taking the suppression drugs until a month before and never show any signs they had the normal male levels for the prior 11 months while training and preparing for the olympics... and in some of the newer synthetics they can cut that time down to mere days, which might be enough of a delay to win a medal, then delay your post-test required... they don't draw blood the second you walk off the podium, they give you so many days to present yourself for a medical review, this is why many athletes don't come home right away, they're waiting in line, literally...

so they could quite possibly have full testosterone levels for an entire year then crash on the blocking drugs before their test after they win, assuming they win... so their method is nothing more than placating people so they aren't called homophobic... they know there are an immensely few number of athletes who are transgender, so odds are its going to continue to be an almost non-issue for them, so this policy is nothing more than placating people so they don't have to get the media attention... because if they were serious about this issue, they would require constant testing prior and during the olympics, much like they do when checking now for athletes who are using blood transfusions to regain energy for multiple events... many of the dirty old tricks used for bicycling are finding their way into the olympics on a routine basis...

let me guess, you want pics or it didn't happen? maybe you could just spend a few moment and google testosterone blockers and dig down on your own...

 

I read all the replies to this thread, including the one I posted earlier... it seems nobody has been able to really defend this, or even really tried, only one person attempted to throw up something reasonable like maybe we should base sports on weight classes, although thats going to make it damn near impossible to have most teams, unless you want teams for every weight class... I can't imagine 20 basketball teams per school... forget football, won't be enough kids in a single weight class for most schools...

but I thought I would add some information that nobody seems to have looked up, in all this discussion... what are the current high school records for men and women?

https://www.trackandfieldnews.com/index.php/records/30-records/277-mens-outdoor-high-school-records

https://www.trackandfieldnews.com/index.php/records/30-records/281-womens-high-school-records

I mean its pretty clear, not ONE single event where women ran faster, jumped further, or vaulted higher than men in track and field events...

the shorter races are closer, but once you get to distance, or the more physical track and field events, the gaps dramatically rise and create quite the distance...

(and has everyone forgotten why we have womens teams, its to give GIRLS a chance to compete, since boys already had a team to compete on)

 

This is simply not true. It calls for regular monitoring for the year in advance.
http://www.outsports.com/2016/1/21/10812404/transgender-ioc-policy-new-olympics

The IOC medical experts are not actually idiots.

 

Today's libs are so confused that the above is a 100% legitimate question that they have a hard time with.

 

did you read that yourself? it says whats already been said countless times by them over the past few months... you have to test 12 months PRIOR... we both agree on that right? so far? we're together holding hands? yes? okay good...

now we jump to the part following that, that requires testing "throughout" eligibility period... THIS is where they are idiots, because they don't define the "monthly" or "weekly" or "quarterly" tests... they just say during eligibility period... that means if the person is transgender now, they could test today for the 2016 Rio olympics, but lets say that athlete wants to compete in the 2020 tokyo olympics, they have to test no later than 2019 for THAT eligibility period... now there are ongoing competitions sponsored by the olympics every year to qualify for events that eventually count as an entry to the olympics for athletes, THOSE events sometimes take place PRIOR to the 12 months before the olympics, which means the athlete would have to test correctly during that eligibility period... not ongoing tests every week until the olympics...

https://stillmed.olympic.org/media/Document%20Library/OlympicOrg/IOC/Who-We-Are/Commissions/Medical-and-Scientific-Commission/EN-IOC-Consensus-Meeting-on-Sex-Reassignment-and-Hyperandrogenism.pdf

thats basically what your article was quoting, except I prefer source documents, so people don't say "pics or it didn't happen"...

but could you cite to me where it says testing will continue during the 12 month period from initial assessment? or are you just PRESUMING they will test because they said "eligibility period"... you have to test 12 months out, or at the beginning of the eligibility period... the eligibility period for many events is more than 12 months prior to the olympics itself... the important part is compliance "MAY" be monitored... not "WILL" be monitored... so like I said, this is just a placation with no actual security...

 

Nope. You don't have all the facts. Just your opinion and no backing of it.
Now I don't remember saying I'd allow them to have 5-6 licenses, post the link or admit its a lie. Just so people know you post BS.

- - - Updated - - -

Yet the news is from a mostly republican state. Can't argue with the facts.

 

And then there is a small % that has mixture of both. Those are also facts.
Not every male has the same testosterone levels.
Not ever female has the same estrogen levels.
Not all women develop breasts
Some men have bigger breast than some women.
I'll give you the milk and birth part, for now.

 

:facepalm:

This is guidance for other sports organizations and such. So if a given sports federation adopts them, the 12-month rule would apply for that federation.

The IOC is expected to base their own rules on this guidance, with IOC-specific details.

Since most sports federations would adopt the same standards if they allow transgenders to compete, that means the 12-month rule will apply to EACH step in the qualifying process.

This is a good thing, as transgenders must qualify under the same conditions they would have to compete under.

Why would they adopt these guidelines? Because the last thing a sports federation want is to have someone qualify for the Olympics while using testosterone, and then spend 12 months at low testosterone, losing muscle mass and strength, before actually competing. The person competing in the Olympics wouldn't be the same person who qualified. That is the reason for the 12-month rule -- to allow plenty of time for the effects of heightened testosterone to fade.

So now you are down to quibbling about language.

Section 2.3 says the athlete must maintain the low testosterone levels for the 12 months prior to competition.

Section 2.4 says compliance may be monitored by testing.

You seem to think that "may" means "won't." And that a spelled-out schedule of testing (weekly, monthly, quarterly) would be better.

Forgetting two things:

1. These are guidelines for other sports federations. It's saying they can test if they want. If they don't want to test, and instead are willing to risk sending non-competitive athletes to the Olympics, that's their business. They are, however, incentivized to test.
2. Random testing, not scheduled testing, is the norm in sports, because a schedule allows athletes to plan how to spoof the test. The IOC is saying "we reserve the right to test you at any time during the 12 month period."

 

They are women hating sexist getting their rocks off in a goal of proving women are inferior and should stay at home cooking, cleaning and having babies for me. They well know that for height men have longer legs than women and that women have different hip structure. They're liars and scum.

 

Again, Atlanta and Memphis are inside majority republican states. So what is your point? Are you trying to say liberals only live in California?

 

My guess is Thai descent.

 

Men have testosterone within a range, and women will never have that range with artificial injections, same with women and estrogen. As for breasts, just because some don't have large ones, they are still designed for feeding babies, again different from men. You can argue and jump and stomp all you want, we are not the same.

 

What does this word "stuff" mean?? It would also seem to me that you'd be equally concerned about both girls and boys getting seriously hurt playing contact sports. Or is it boys safety & health isn't as important to you as girls safety and health when it comes to contact sports????

In my opinion, I doubt very few people outside of the state association really care; there are bigger hurdles facing students in High School (like getting a good education) as opposed to whether some guy who identifies as a female wins some track and field event.

 

so if "these are guides for other sports organizations" doesn't that mean it negates your proof you cited to me a while ago saying this is proof positive they WILL test? so you're telling me that me literally repeating the document you cited, is now proof they may or may not test... which means you can't refute my claims they WILL test, because you're not even certain yourself... and all I did was cite the official olympic document your editorialized website copied...

so once again, my flaw stands... there is no proof they WILL test, only that they MAY, but in no way is that guaranteed except 12 months prior and days post competition...

so once again, where is your proof they now will test during to ensure? and that my giant claim that its a major flaw, isn't relevant still? nothing says they have to or will on a set schedule to ensure that athletes during that time don't engage in reversing their treatments in order to gain an advantage...

you see my point, you can't prove they WILL... only a "maybe"... which is why I saw this is nothing more than propaganda and placation, because they don't expect a lot of transgender athletes to begin with, and they aren't very likely to win anyhow, so why put up a big fuss when they can silence the media and push the issue away so they don't have to deal with it and ensure integrity... because if they were worried about integrity they would state a set interval or number of required randoms they WOULD do... rather than issue a "maybe" which means they don't have to and leave a wide open canyon for abuse...

like I said, my claim still stands as a likely outcome... its not been proven inaccurate... its a very real potential...