Keeping Men out of Women's Sports

1121315171827

Comments

  • DE4173
    DE4173 Posts: 2,823
    OnWis97 said:
    As we revert back to traditional gender roles, we may just eliminate girls/womens sports altogether.
    Protests in the streets

    1993: 11/22 Little Rock
    1996; 9/28 New York
    1997: 11/14 Oakland, 11/15 Oakland
    1998: 7/5 Dallas, 7/7 Albuquerque, 7/8 Phoenix, 7/10 San Diego, 7/11 Las Vegas
    2000: 10/17 Dallas
    2003: 4/3 OKC
    2012: 11/17 Tulsa(EV), 11/18 Tulsa(EV)
    2013: 11/16 OKC
    2014: 10/8 Tulsa
    2022: 9/20 OKC
    2023: 9/13 Ft Worth, 9/15 Ft Worth
  • Go Beavers
    Go Beavers Posts: 9,555
    Spunkie said:
    The women and girls, like my girl, who play sports who aren't going to get concussions from bigger muscled men/boys are lucky, Hugh!
    Poorly written, over-reaching legislation isn’t the way to go. Since the fervor is largely based on appearance and who “looks like” a man or a woman, expect to see “tomboy” girls get harassed and abused as a result of this. 
  • SPEEDY MCCREADY
    SPEEDY MCCREADY Posts: 26,857
    Spunkie said:
    With Trump's new order, being signed today, on women's sports day called "keeping men out of women's sports", you Americans are so lucky that children born as males don't get to play in female sports! -speaking as a mother whose child received a concussion from a genetic born male in girls soccer.
    Hello Spunkie!
    Just wanted to say hi. 
    Take me piece by piece.....
    Till there aint nothing left worth taking away from me.....
  • Spunkie
    Spunkie i come from downtown. Posts: 7,095
    Hi Mr super bowl hope you guys have a good party! 
    You are all so funny except for the harassment part... Sticks n stones....
    I was swimming in the Great Barrier Reef 
    Animals were hiding behind the Coral 
    Except for little Turtle
    I could swear he's trying to talk to me 
    Gurgle Gurgle
  • smile6680
    smile6680 Posts: 437
    Spunkie said:
    mickeyrat said:
    Spunkie said:
    OP, what do you mean by "interacted with"?  I'm assuming that means something like a forward and goalie running into each other while going for a header or something similar.  
    I'm just getting to your question now as I was quite busy yesterday and didn't have a chance to thoughtfully read all these posts. My 12 year old striker daughter got a rebound header goal after her first shot was struck back at her by the U14 genetic male goalie during the BC provincial playoffs. 

    so if I understand this , there was no physical contact between the two then?

    could you share more details of the play in question, please? relative distances of your daughter to the goal, to the goalie, goalie from the mouth of the goal. relative size of each player.

    did your daughter use good technique in this header? under the circumstances of this type of play.

    as described thus far, it does sound as if this could have happened regardless of who the goalie might have been.
    I believe the force which the genetic male exerted upon the ball that caused blind spots, headache, and concussion is greater than that of a female player.

    It wasn't a good planned technique header, like her first two this season. The genetic male goalie defended her stike which smacked her face/head and rebounded in.


    My son plays U13 travel soccer. The play is way more physical and the ball is kicked with a lot more force than in the girls U13 league. 

    Many girls would get hurt if the boys team played the girls team. Technique wouldn't make a difference. 

    The only time I feel comfortable with girls and boys playing together in soccer is in a rec league at a young age. 
  • mickeyrat
    mickeyrat Posts: 44,408
    smile6680 said:
    Spunkie said:
    mickeyrat said:
    Spunkie said:
    OP, what do you mean by "interacted with"?  I'm assuming that means something like a forward and goalie running into each other while going for a header or something similar.  
    I'm just getting to your question now as I was quite busy yesterday and didn't have a chance to thoughtfully read all these posts. My 12 year old striker daughter got a rebound header goal after her first shot was struck back at her by the U14 genetic male goalie during the BC provincial playoffs. 

    so if I understand this , there was no physical contact between the two then?

    could you share more details of the play in question, please? relative distances of your daughter to the goal, to the goalie, goalie from the mouth of the goal. relative size of each player.

    did your daughter use good technique in this header? under the circumstances of this type of play.

    as described thus far, it does sound as if this could have happened regardless of who the goalie might have been.
    I believe the force which the genetic male exerted upon the ball that caused blind spots, headache, and concussion is greater than that of a female player.

    It wasn't a good planned technique header, like her first two this season. The genetic male goalie defended her stike which smacked her face/head and rebounded in.


    My son plays U13 travel soccer. The play is way more physical and the ball is kicked with a lot more force than in the girls U13 league. 

    Many girls would get hurt if the boys team played the girls team. Technique wouldn't make a difference. 

    The only time I feel comfortable with girls and boys playing together in soccer is in a rec league at a young age. 

    and the play was a goalie punched the ball back from an admitted poor technique header.


    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • smile6680
    smile6680 Posts: 437
    mickeyrat said:
    smile6680 said:
    Spunkie said:
    mickeyrat said:
    Spunkie said:
    OP, what do you mean by "interacted with"?  I'm assuming that means something like a forward and goalie running into each other while going for a header or something similar.  
    I'm just getting to your question now as I was quite busy yesterday and didn't have a chance to thoughtfully read all these posts. My 12 year old striker daughter got a rebound header goal after her first shot was struck back at her by the U14 genetic male goalie during the BC provincial playoffs. 

    so if I understand this , there was no physical contact between the two then?

    could you share more details of the play in question, please? relative distances of your daughter to the goal, to the goalie, goalie from the mouth of the goal. relative size of each player.

    did your daughter use good technique in this header? under the circumstances of this type of play.

    as described thus far, it does sound as if this could have happened regardless of who the goalie might have been.
    I believe the force which the genetic male exerted upon the ball that caused blind spots, headache, and concussion is greater than that of a female player.

    It wasn't a good planned technique header, like her first two this season. The genetic male goalie defended her stike which smacked her face/head and rebounded in.


    My son plays U13 travel soccer. The play is way more physical and the ball is kicked with a lot more force than in the girls U13 league. 

    Many girls would get hurt if the boys team played the girls team. Technique wouldn't make a difference. 

    The only time I feel comfortable with girls and boys playing together in soccer is in a rec league at a young age. 

    and the play was a goalie punched the ball back from an admitted poor technique header.


    I thought the thread evolved into a discussion about whether or not it was a good idea to let males play against females from a safety stand point.

    I guess I should have payed closer attention.
  • Gern Blansten
    Gern Blansten Mar-A-Lago Posts: 22,185
    edited February 7
    I don't disagree that males shouldn't play females. I just think it's stupid to have an executive order about it. Totally unnecessary and hateful.
    Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)
    The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)

    1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
    2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
    2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
    2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
    2020: Oakland, Oakland:  2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
    2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
    2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
  • Tim Simmons
    Tim Simmons Posts: 9,576
    Agreed. Let the organizations decide. 

  • SVRDhand13
    SVRDhand13 Posts: 27,003
    Spunkie said:
    With Trump's new order, being signed today, on women's sports day called "keeping men out of women's sports", you Americans are so lucky that children born as males don't get to play in female sports! -speaking as a mother whose child received a concussion from a genetic born male in girls soccer.
    I, an American, don't feel lucky about anything Trump has done.  This was a deliberate measure to hate a small minority and to ignore typical protocols.... something Trump and his cronies are very good at.  But don't worry, you'll be an American soon enough (51st state) lol 
    severed hand thirteen
    2006: Gorge 7/23 2008: Hartford 6/27 Beacon 7/1 2009: Spectrum 10/30-31
    2010: Newark 5/18 MSG 5/20-21 2011: PJ20 9/3-4 2012: Made In America 9/2
    2013: Brooklyn 10/18-19 Philly 10/21-22 Hartford 10/25 2014: ACL10/12
    2015: NYC 9/23 2016: Tampa 4/11 Philly 4/28-29 MSG 5/1-2 Fenway 8/5+8/7
    2017: RRHoF 4/7   2018: Fenway 9/2+9/4   2021: Sea Hear Now 9/18 
    2022: MSG 9/11  2024: MSG 9/3-4 Philly 9/7+9/9 Fenway 9/15+9/17
    2025: Pittsburgh 5/16+5/18
  • cincybearcat
    cincybearcat Posts: 16,836
    This was always a non-brainer issue for me.  There are few issues where I cannot see the other side at all....this is one of them.
    hippiemom = goodness
  • OnWis97
    OnWis97 St. Paul, MN Posts: 5,610
    How's it going to be enforced, now?

    A lot of girls and women will be accused of being boys and men.
    1995 Milwaukee     1998 Alpine, Alpine     2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston     2004 Boston, Boston     2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty)     2011 Alpine, Alpine     
    2013 Wrigley     2014 St. Paul     2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley     2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley     2021 Asbury Park     2022 St Louis     2023 Austin, Austin
    2024 Napa, Wrigley, Wrigley
  • battle1
    battle1 PHI Posts: 637
    OnWis97 said:
    How's it going to be enforced, now?

    A lot of girls and women will be accused of being boys and men.
    You should have to take a physical, just like we all did to play sports. Seems pretty straightforward to me. 
  • HughFreakingDillon
    HughFreakingDillon Winnipeg Posts: 39,473
    yep, being forced to show your junk to a gym teacher never caused any problems. ever. 
    By The Time They Figure Out What Went Wrong, We'll Be Sitting On A Beach, Earning Twenty Percent.




  • battle1
    battle1 PHI Posts: 637
    yep, being forced to show your junk to a gym teacher never caused any problems. ever. 
    Where I’m from it was a school doctor. Not a gym teacher. I cant speak for canada. Also, students had the option to go to their primary care physician to have the physical if they were uncomfortable doing it at school. I fail to see what the harm in this is. There is zero harm in a doctor making sure boys aren’t playing with girls. 
  • Gern Blansten
    Gern Blansten Mar-A-Lago Posts: 22,185
    Depends on the sport..swimming obviously is not a contact sport. You can argue that volleyball isn't either...but it's still not fair.

    If you identify as X then play sports with X. If Y then Y, Z then Z, etc.
    Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)
    The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)

    1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
    2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
    2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
    2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
    2020: Oakland, Oakland:  2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
    2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
    2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
  • smile6680
    smile6680 Posts: 437
    edited February 7
    I think a lot of people are overthinking the issue. 

    1. Is it a good idea for safety reasons. My opinion is it's a real concern

    2. In non contact sports is it fair to biological females and or trans people. This can be debated. 


  • cincybearcat
    cincybearcat Posts: 16,836
    Depends on the sport..swimming obviously is not a contact sport. You can argue that volleyball isn't either...but it's still not fair.

    If you identify as X then play sports with X. If Y then Y, Z then Z, etc.
    Identify doesn’t mean shit for athletic competition. 
    hippiemom = goodness
  • OnWis97
    OnWis97 St. Paul, MN Posts: 5,610
    battle1 said:
    yep, being forced to show your junk to a gym teacher never caused any problems. ever. 
    Where I’m from it was a school doctor. Not a gym teacher. I cant speak for canada. Also, students had the option to go to their primary care physician to have the physical if they were uncomfortable doing it at school. I fail to see what the harm in this is. There is zero harm in a doctor making sure boys aren’t playing with girls. 
    You had a school doctor confirm your sex?
    1995 Milwaukee     1998 Alpine, Alpine     2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston     2004 Boston, Boston     2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty)     2011 Alpine, Alpine     
    2013 Wrigley     2014 St. Paul     2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley     2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley     2021 Asbury Park     2022 St Louis     2023 Austin, Austin
    2024 Napa, Wrigley, Wrigley
  • battle1
    battle1 PHI Posts: 637
    Depends on the sport..swimming obviously is not a contact sport. You can argue that volleyball isn't either...but it's still not fair.

    If you identify as X then play sports with X. If Y then Y, Z then Z, etc.
    Identify doesn’t mean shit for athletic competition. 
    I know, people literally leave me shaking my head with how liberal we’ve become.