Originally Posted by Stu from NYC (Post 1948114)

Does this mean that Jenner is a lesbian? Asking for a friend.

Originally Posted by DAVES (Post 1948117)

I am left handed. The world should all be left handed. Wait, I have a pair of left handed scissors and I can't use them. I force the blades apart due to having lived in the real world.

Originally Posted by Byte1 (Post 1947716)

You reap what you sow. If women protested this issue, then there would be a stop to it immediately. If they sit back and allow it, then they get treated just like they did before they won the right to vote.
I do not hate transgenders, gays, etc. I just do not condone it. I believe that what one is, they were born with, not able to change what GOD made them. What a person does in private (relationship) is their business and I just don't care. But, I do not believe that a male should be able to enter a restroom with a female child or adult. I do not believe in transgenders in sports unless the sport is classed as open gender, male and female. But, that is just my opinion. What entertainment does to entertain is up to them and if they start losing support, then I guess they will change. I don't have to watch a sport or any other type of entertainment if I disapprove of something. I do not watch football anymore because of the athletes kneeling during the National Anthem. That is my prerogative. And the interesting point is that now I no longer miss those sports.
Someone said it is not fair that a male is allowed to play in a sport that has been dedicated to females. It's been going on the other way also. Females have attempted to enter male sports such as football, etc. What is fair? I would have to say that it is not fair in public school that males can enter female sports. Developing girls should be able to compete on equal terms with other girls while they are developing in public school. Otherwise, I really don't care. Sports is just entertainment and if they want to add a new element to it, I guess they will see how the public accepts it or not.

Originally Posted by Byte1 (Post 1948122)

Not quite subject related, but......does that mean Jenner is gay? If Jenner is now female, and Jenner prefers women sexually, it seems to me that would make Jenner homosexual, correct? Just a rhetoric question, which means no answer necessary. But, you have to admit, this makes an interesting point or hypothesis.

Originally Posted by Two Bills (Post 1948155)

Lets hope Bryson DeChambeau dosn't go all Victorias Secret, and get on the LPGA Tour!

Originally Posted by Ponygirl (Post 1948168)

I am appalled at the number of disrespectful, mean spirted and ugly posts today. So many adding their comments about something they know nothing.

I tried to find the posters name who posted abt African American male genitalia so that I could request that he be banned from this site. So disgusting and inappropriate. But the post must have been removed.

Nearly every day it is shocking to read what people post on Talk of the Villages. An embarrassment.

The ideal would be that this community be welcoming, kind and inclusive rather than what it is.

Originally Posted by Marty94 (Post 1948179)

As a female athlete, I have competed at the national and international level. In the past, I was made aware of transgender athletes competing and opted out of those competitions, as my husband, a doctor, explained the physiology advantages.

My take on transgender athletes is that they should be allowed to compete, but against each other. There should be a separate division for them. I mean, we have special olympics, para-olympics, etc. There is no need to shame or berate or call them freaks, but there are physical differences and this should be addressed so that everyone can compete in a fair and safe environment. And I emphasize the latter. If you want to see what a trans can do to women athletes, search for Fallon Fox who has fractured skulls and broken opponent’s bones. Not all sports are non-contact.

The International Olympic Committee states that an athlete has to be at a specific hormone level for only one year to qualify. The athlete does not have to undergo any surgery. This is a huge advantage for men, who might not be able to qualify in their division, to transition and compete as a woman. As Olympic and pro athletes get a great deal of endorsement money, I believe you are going to see more men going in this direction. Thus, I hope that more women will ban together and protest. After all, when the top 14-16 year old boys can crush women’s world records set in track and field, there is clearly a reason that men and women separately compete. I believe it only fair that this should remain the standard and thus a new division be created for trans athletes.

Originally Posted by Ponygirl (Post 1948168)

I am appalled at the number of disrespectful, mean spirted and ugly posts today. So many adding their comments about something they know nothing.

I tried to find the posters name who posted abt African American male genitalia so that I could request that he be banned from this site. So disgusting and inappropriate. But the post must have been removed.

Nearly every day it is shocking to read what people post on Talk of the Villages. An embarrassment.

The ideal would be that this community be welcoming, kind and inclusive rather than what it is.

Originally Posted by Boomer (Post 1948199)

I agree with you completely.

This thread-start was destined (and perhaps designed) to go down this road.

I have been on TOTV since its beginning and throughout all those years, I never reported a thread. But that has changed — and I don’t like it. I flagged this one early, very early.

Yet, here we are, past 100 posts, most of which are some seriously ugly stuff.

And, yes, I also saw the one you mentioned. But I would not be surprised if the one who posted it is still among us. There was a time though when that would have meant an instant banning.

Btw, accepting though I am and a kind soul, too, I do not think transgender athletes should be allowed to compete in women’s sports. I think that because it is not fair competition and because my common sense tells me so.

That being said, I do not think hate-mongering is ever acceptable. And the subject at hand invited that and the spewing has been allowed to continue.

There is a pattern lately of certain posters being allowed to really push the envelope — actually it’s turned into more than that — it goes beyond. I do not understand why this is happening. But it is continuing to be the bent of TOTV.
(And I need to stop deluding myself that it will get better around here.)
Boomer

Originally Posted by golfing eagles (Post 1947534)

In other words, spread the transgenders out evenly to create a level playing field???? I don't think so.

Originally Posted by LiverpoolWalrus (Post 1947845)

But this is about respect. You and at least two other posters here referred to trangendered people as "freaks." Are we really that perfect that we can judge other people? Several people here invoked the word "God." Didn't Jesus teach us not to judge?

I'm sure this thread is being read by transgenders, their family members, friends and loved ones. To call them "freaks" hurts ALL of those people and says volumes more about the one hurling the insult than it says about those to whom it's directed.

Originally Posted by BigHoss18 (Post 1948010)

Although all your statements are true, IMHO, you’re response misses the main point of this topic; fairness in sports.

No one will ever convince all people to be fair and kind to people that believe there are more than two genders. I’m this specific situation though, I agree that “sexually reassigned” people should not be allowed to compete with the new sex of players they now align with.

If transgenders want to compete, start their own league.

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby (Post 1948347)

And I'll say what I said the last time: if leagues were not divided by gender in the first place, this wouldn't be an issue at all. No more mens' teams and womens' teams. Just teams.

Originally Posted by Boomer (Post 1948199)

I agree with you completely.

This thread-start was destined (and perhaps designed) to go down this road.

I have been on TOTV since its beginning and throughout all those years, I never reported a thread. But that has changed — and I don’t like it. I flagged this one early, very early.

Yet, here we are, past 100 posts, most of which are some seriously ugly stuff.

And, yes, I also saw the one you mentioned. But I would not be surprised if the one who posted it is still among us. There was a time though when that would have meant an instant banning.

Btw, accepting though I am and a kind soul, too, I do not think transgender athletes should be allowed to compete in women’s sports. I think that because it is not fair competition and because my common sense tells me so.

That being said, I do not think hate-mongering is ever acceptable. And the subject at hand invited that and the spewing has been allowed to continue.

There is a pattern lately of certain posters being allowed to really push the envelope — actually it’s turned into more than that — it goes beyond. I do not understand why this is happening. But it is now the bent of TOTV.

(And I need to stop deluding myself that it will get better around here.)

Boomer

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby (Post 1948355)

I'm a woman. I'm not compromising a damned thing. I don't feel that transgenders belong in gender-specific team sports. I ALSO don't feel that gender-specific team sports should exist at all. If a woman wants to join a football team, her acceptance or rejection should be based on her ability to perform up to the standards of the team. It shouldn't matter what's between her legs - she'd be wearing a cup just like the men do. What matters is, can she catch a ball? Can she throw it well? Can she tackle? Can she take a tackle? Can she run? Can she pass, feint, hurl, and do everything else that is expected of "a football player" regardless of their genitalia? Yes? Then she should be accepted onto the team. No? Then she's out.

Should a man be allowed on the syncronized swim team? Is he graceful in the water? Does he know how to swim? Can he move his arms and legs in the required way? Can he do a handstand in the water? Can he spin in the water? Can he hold his breath underwater for a minute or longer? Yes? Then he is on the team. No? Then he's out.

The criteria for ANY sport should be ability. Not genitalia. Full stop.

Originally Posted by Topspinmo (Post 1948365)

You do have the power to stop going on forum’s that don’t meet you’re standards. Good luck finding any forum that will conform to you’re standards.

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby (Post 1948355)

I'm a woman. I'm not compromising a damned thing. I don't feel that transgenders belong in gender-specific team sports. I ALSO don't feel that gender-specific team sports should exist at all. If a woman wants to join a football team, her acceptance or rejection should be based on her ability to perform up to the standards of the team. It shouldn't matter what's between her legs - she'd be wearing a cup just like the men do. What matters is, can she catch a ball? Can she throw it well? Can she tackle? Can she take a tackle? Can she run? Can she pass, feint, hurl, and do everything else that is expected of "a football player" regardless of their genitalia? Yes? Then she should be accepted onto the team. No? Then she's out.

Should a man be allowed on the syncronized swim team? Is he graceful in the water? Does he know how to swim? Can he move his arms and legs in the required way? Can he do a handstand in the water? Can he spin in the water? Can he hold his breath underwater for a minute or longer? Yes? Then he is on the team. No? Then he's out.

The criteria for ANY sport should be ability. Not genitalia. Full stop.

Originally Posted by Tom52 (Post 1948370)

So, if sports evolve as you suggest there would be no womens golf, tennis, basketball, volleyball, track, soccer teams, etc. That does not seem fair to me. Women deserve to have opportunities for athletic scholarships and professional careers same as men. Mybe I mis-read what you are proposing.

Originally Posted by JMintzer (Post 1947835)

Renee Richards was a mediocre male tennis player before his transition surgery. Well past his prime...

Using Richard's as an example is a red herring.

A very good friend of mine has two sons who were both State Champions in High School. Played college tennis, but never were good enough to turn pro.

My friend has a vacation home in the same Country Club community as the Williams sisters.

The boys (now in their early 30s) practiced with them when came to visit. They've done so since they were in High School.

They would often beat both of them...

What's this all mean? That routinely (but not always), men are stronger and faster than women. It's a combination of biology and physics. You can change the biology, but not the physics...

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby (Post 1948369)

I'd be content if the posters merely conformed to the Terms of Service. They can't manage that, and the only reason I can think of why they are able to get away with it on this thread is that the moderators have been unavailable for the past few days.

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby (Post 1948347)

And I'll say what I said the last time: if leagues were not divided by gender in the first place, this wouldn't be an issue at all. No more mens' teams and womens' teams. Just teams.

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby (Post 1948347)

And I'll say what I said the last time: if leagues were not divided by gender in the first place, this wouldn't be an issue at all. No more mens' teams and womens' teams. Just teams.

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby (Post 1948406)

I don't see why not. Any sport can be divided by something OTHER than gender. If females have a lower capacity for brute strength, then you can have a "lower strength" league. Like you have bantam-weight and lightweight fighting matches. You wouldn't pit a heavyweight fighter with a bantam-weight fighter. Why not? They're all male aren't they? So why aren't they all fighting each other? Because it wouldn't be much of a fight. Because the fights are matched based on weight, not on gender.

But I'll bet if you chose to select teams based on ability, rather than gender, you'd come up with a decent mix of people. And sure - one set of teams might end up being all men. But it wouldn't be required that their gender be male. It would simply be the natural result of selecting by ability. They'd compete against each other NOT because they're men, but because they all fit within a certain standard of ability. And if it just so happens that you get a woman, or a transgender, or a hermaphrodite, or someone who claims no gender at all, who is able to bat home runs better than Hank Aaron, well then you should be grateful she/they/he is in your league and not be too concerned that their genitals look different from yours.

If you can do A, B, and C proficiently, then you are in THIS league.
If you can do A, B, and C only moderately, then you are in THAT league.
If you can do A, B, and C excellently, you belong in THAT OTHER league.

All are open to any gender, no gender, unsure gender, whatever gender. Gender ceases to matter.

Originally Posted by golfing eagles (Post 1948485)

And after you do all that, what have you really accomplished. Strike a victory for women's lib and liberalism? BFD

Originally Posted by JMintzer (Post 1948925)

You'd lose that bet.

Men will be stronger and faster regardless of "weight class"...

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby (Post 1948934)

After you reject it and expend vast amounts of energy rejecting it, what have YOU really accomplished? Proven that you have a big e-peen and making all the denture-wearing old biddies in the world hot for your ace viagra skills? BFD

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby (Post 1948937)

You missed that.

I used prizefighting as an example of what I was talking about. Obviously weight doesn't matter when you're talking about golf. You'd need a different set of criteria. Whether or not you are possessed of a p.e.n.i.s. or vagina or both or neither should be absolutely, positively, unequivocally irrelevant.

Edit: ridiculous periods between the letters of the word because apparently ToTV is too immature to accept the actual word. Interesting that it has no problem with the word vagina though.

Originally Posted by JMintzer (Post 1949013)

If you actually read my response, I said "regardless of weight"...

Smaller men still have an physical advantage over women of the same size...

You know... Science...

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby (Post 1949020)

And again - I refer you to the word "ability."

Ability doesn't equate with size.

A 13-year-old 100-pound 5'0" geeky girl with a 170iq is no less able to do things that require a high IQ than a 30-year-old 170-pound 5'10" guy who has a perfect 6-pack and can lift 240 pounds with one hand.

A short, slender, agile but not muscular amateur league golfer female who has 20 years experience playing and has 11 holes in one recorded in league play, is no less capable of being on a man's league than a heavier, taller, more muscular male with 20 years of experience playing with 11 holes in one recorded in league play.

A female bowler with a 235 average is no less capable of bowling a 300 than a male bowler with a 235 average.