Riley Gaines attacked after Saving Women's Sports speech at SF State Univ

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of the f-n drama for what must be like 8 athletes. People are losing their marbles about the wrong thing.

But its not 8 athletes.....its 8 athletes competing against hundreds of female athletes.

I think the problem is even these "8" have an outsized number reaching the top in women's sports when the whole point of Title IX was to allow women to have actual competitive sports where they can reach their max potential. Even in the Olympics, a 45 year old trans woman was able to compete in weightlifting. She didn't win but it's certainly not at all possible for an amateur weightlifting female to transition to a man at 45 and then make the men's US weightlifting team over 20 year olds.

It amateur sport. There are 220,000 women college “athletes”. In the general population 0.6% identify as transgender. There should be 1,300 trans athletes in college sports. There are 32 tran athletes in college. Two have made the Olympics this cycle.

If you want to make to Olympics or a college team preform better. The bottom of the rosters are the ones getting cut but the number is way way under 1%. This is not an issue.

If it is a non-issue, why are they beating up this female swimmer over it? Seems like it's enough of an issue to the trans community to engage in violence against anyone who offers a contrary opinion.

Let’s be clear: They are physically assaulting a female athlete because that athlete is female and has opinions. This is a violent misogynist movement whose end goal is the subjugation of women.

Disagree. And the videos posted-at least the couple I’m seeing-are showing shouting and getting close to her but I didn’t see violence. Maybe I haven’t clicked the right link. I’m surprised the man who tried to murder her (according to a PP) hasn’t been identified yet.

+1
I see yelling, I see swearing, I see someone acknowledging that she's crying, but I see no physical violence. That's not to say that it wasn't scary for her, or that it happened prior to the filming, but this doesn't show it. That's also not to say that violence wouldn't have occurred if the police weren't there.

I agree with other PP too. We've retreated so far to the extreme positions that there was no time to have the meaningful conversation about the complicated and nuanced parts of this.

Riley Gaines has stated that she was hit twice.

But you are almost certainly going to claim she is lying.

I almost certainly acknowledged that it may have taken place before and/or after filming. Didn’t I? I’m responding to the video that was posted.

Come on. You were trying to minimize what happened. You spent a lot of words talking about how she might have been scared but you didn’t see violence and just saw yelling and swearing.

Are you okay with violence against women in the name of trans rights or not? Yes or no? Or is taking a stance against violence against women too “extreme” for you?

You are super unhinged. I'm not OK with violence against women in the name of anything. But this is why no discussion can take place. you come out swinging to someone who literally said, hey, it's not on the video but it sure may have happened before or after. But there is no physical violence ON THE VIDEO. There was a protest that was getting out of hand, and police protected her, thankfully. I acknowledged that it was likely scary for her, but even that is me making assumptions isn't it? And that it may have happened before or after is also me making assumptions, but that fits with what you want to hear. I don't follow this woman, so I don't know what she said happened. This video was posted. People are reacting to it. What is the matter with you?

You are going out of your way to avoid the truth. That is why discussions can’t be had. Because one side is bound and determined to hide the truth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of the f-n drama for what must be like 8 athletes. People are losing their marbles about the wrong thing.

But its not 8 athletes.....its 8 athletes competing against hundreds of female athletes.

I think the problem is even these "8" have an outsized number reaching the top in women's sports when the whole point of Title IX was to allow women to have actual competitive sports where they can reach their max potential. Even in the Olympics, a 45 year old trans woman was able to compete in weightlifting. She didn't win but it's certainly not at all possible for an amateur weightlifting female to transition to a man at 45 and then make the men's US weightlifting team over 20 year olds.

It amateur sport. There are 220,000 women college “athletes”. In the general population 0.6% identify as transgender. There should be 1,300 trans athletes in college sports. There are 32 tran athletes in college. Two have made the Olympics this cycle.

If you want to make to Olympics or a college team preform better. The bottom of the rosters are the ones getting cut but the number is way way under 1%. This is not an issue.

If it is a non-issue, why are they beating up this female swimmer over it? Seems like it's enough of an issue to the trans community to engage in violence against anyone who offers a contrary opinion.

Let’s be clear: They are physically assaulting a female athlete because that athlete is female and has opinions. This is a violent misogynist movement whose end goal is the subjugation of women.

Why do transphobes insist trans women are trying to take away women’s rights but are fine with conservatives actually taking away women’s reproductive rights? I don’t get it. Winning at sportsball isn’t a right. Not being forced to have a baby for whatever reason is.

What small world do you live in that you don’t know people who think it is wrong take away a woman’s reproductive right and wrong for men to trans women taking away other rights of women. They are both wrong and abhorrent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I want to see trans men Start playing women’s professional soccer and see if anyone cares that in a year or two there will not be any born female players in the league because they cannot make a team.

I used to say that women should just refuse to compete in events where biological men are competing as women.... until....

A Vermont HS basketball team did just that.
Now, the Vermont Principals' Association, the governing body of sports in Vermont, have banned them from competing in future activities and tournaments.
Absolutely ludicrous.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/14/us/mid-vermont-christian-school-transgender-athlete-ineligible-future-activities/index.html

If only the other female players at the other schools would support this Vermont team and refuse to compete. That is when their message would be heard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think lesbians and gays understand how much trans people are destroying the goodwill built up for the former two

You think so? I feel like most people are pretty fine with LG, but the T is where they have reservations.

Right — that was my point

Got it, but I'm not necessarily sure the activities of the T are eroding any of the goodwill built up for the L and the G. You think they are?

Yes

Interesting, thanks. Is this in the twitterverse? Stuff you're seeing in real life convos? Journalists?

Gay rights was a dead issue with widespread acceptance before T issues started coming to the forefront.

Yes, but are people questioning or backtracking on gay rights again now?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/29/texas-sodomy-supreme-court-lawrence-paxton-lgbtq/

Yes, I hear much more talk about challenging Lawrence v. Texas than I had even immediately after it came down

Interesting. Thank you. I guess I could see some dredging up Scalia's slippery slope rationale.

The issue is that LGB rights are additive rights. Nobody loses rights when LGB people benefit from marriage and other rights. So, in general, the public supports them. Trans rights, however, are in direct conflict with women’s rights. Women lose rights (safety, privacy, bodily integrity, etc) in the name of trans rights. You cannot accept that transwomen are women full stop without compromising the safety of women.

The problem is that LGB rights have been conflated with trans rights, but the impact on society is not the same.

Sounds nice, but I suspect the thinking would be that you cannot readily disentangle the harms like that because the acceptance of one paves the way for the acceptance of the others since they're all "deviant".

Some might also argue with your framing of those rights as wholly additive with some of the compelled speech cases coming before the court with the bakeries and websites and stuff like that. They would claim that they're losing their speech/religion rights and that "they" did not want to stop at merely just being able to get married or whatever, but wanted to force acceptance of their "deviancy". More slippery slope stuff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:ESPN anchor. Good for her.

They are afraid. They saw what the mob did to JK Rowling. Too sad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of the f-n drama for what must be like 8 athletes. People are losing their marbles about the wrong thing.

But its not 8 athletes.....its 8 athletes competing against hundreds of female athletes.

I think the problem is even these "8" have an outsized number reaching the top in women's sports when the whole point of Title IX was to allow women to have actual competitive sports where they can reach their max potential. Even in the Olympics, a 45 year old trans woman was able to compete in weightlifting. She didn't win but it's certainly not at all possible for an amateur weightlifting female to transition to a man at 45 and then make the men's US weightlifting team over 20 year olds.

It amateur sport. There are 220,000 women college “athletes”. In the general population 0.6% identify as transgender. There should be 1,300 trans athletes in college sports. There are 32 tran athletes in college. Two have made the Olympics this cycle.

If you want to make to Olympics or a college team preform better. The bottom of the rosters are the ones getting cut but the number is way way under 1%. This is not an issue.

If it is a non-issue, why are they beating up this female swimmer over it? Seems like it's enough of an issue to the trans community to engage in violence against anyone who offers a contrary opinion.

Let’s be clear: They are physically assaulting a female athlete because that athlete is female and has opinions. This is a violent misogynist movement whose end goal is the subjugation of women.

Disagree. And the videos posted-at least the couple I’m seeing-are showing shouting and getting close to her but I didn’t see violence. Maybe I haven’t clicked the right link. I’m surprised the man who tried to murder her (according to a PP) hasn’t been identified yet.

+1
I see yelling, I see swearing, I see someone acknowledging that she's crying, but I see no physical violence. That's not to say that it wasn't scary for her, or that it happened prior to the filming, but this doesn't show it. That's also not to say that violence wouldn't have occurred if the police weren't there.

I agree with other PP too. We've retreated so far to the extreme positions that there was no time to have the meaningful conversation about the complicated and nuanced parts of this.

Riley Gaines has stated that she was hit twice.

But you are almost certainly going to claim she is lying.

I almost certainly acknowledged that it may have taken place before and/or after filming. Didn’t I? I’m responding to the video that was posted.

Come on. You were trying to minimize what happened. You spent a lot of words talking about how she might have been scared but you didn’t see violence and just saw yelling and swearing.

Are you okay with violence against women in the name of trans rights or not? Yes or no? Or is taking a stance against violence against women too “extreme” for you?

You are super unhinged. I'm not OK with violence against women in the name of anything. But this is why no discussion can take place. you come out swinging to someone who literally said, hey, it's not on the video but it sure may have happened before or after. But there is no physical violence ON THE VIDEO. There was a protest that was getting out of hand, and police protected her, thankfully. I acknowledged that it was likely scary for her, but even that is me making assumptions isn't it? And that it may have happened before or after is also me making assumptions, but that fits with what you want to hear. I don't follow this woman, so I don't know what she said happened. This video was posted. People are reacting to it. What is the matter with you?

You are going out of your way to avoid the truth. That is why discussions can’t be had. Because one side is bound and determined to hide the truth.

I suspect PP would not be hemming and hawing if a cis woman reported that she was physically assaulted by a man, even in the absence of video evidence of the specific assault incident, if the woman provided video similar to the Gaines incident. It would be a foregone conclusion; not some evidentiary excursion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Women vote liberal.

We made our bed now lie in it.

Women only have two choices, satan and the devil. Picking our poison.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think lesbians and gays understand how much trans people are destroying the goodwill built up for the former two

You think so? I feel like most people are pretty fine with LG, but the T is where they have reservations.

Right — that was my point

Got it, but I'm not necessarily sure the activities of the T are eroding any of the goodwill built up for the L and the G. You think they are?

Yes

Interesting, thanks. Is this in the twitterverse? Stuff you're seeing in real life convos? Journalists?

Gay rights was a dead issue with widespread acceptance before T issues started coming to the forefront.

Yes, but are people questioning or backtracking on gay rights again now?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/29/texas-sodomy-supreme-court-lawrence-paxton-lgbtq/

Yes, I hear much more talk about challenging Lawrence v. Texas than I had even immediately after it came down

Interesting. Thank you. I guess I could see some dredging up Scalia's slippery slope rationale.

The issue is that LGB rights are additive rights. Nobody loses rights when LGB people benefit from marriage and other rights. So, in general, the public supports them. Trans rights, however, are in direct conflict with women’s rights. Women lose rights (safety, privacy, bodily integrity, etc) in the name of trans rights. You cannot accept that transwomen are women full stop without compromising the safety of women.

The problem is that LGB rights have been conflated with trans rights, but the impact on society is not the same.

Good point. I have to say that I am not at all opposed to LGB rights. And, I also remember that when gay marriage was controversial, LGB people and their supporters were not confrontational, aggressive, or violent. Protests and rallies? Sure. But, this is different.
IMO - LGB people were fighting for their rights. This movement is an in-your-face-you-better-get-on-board movement that allows nobody to dissent.

That’s because it is a movement of white men who want more.

I made this point earlier and it was deleted. Are progressives being straight up duped?

It's so strange. Feel like I'm in the twilight zone.

What does the term “men” refer to?

This is the thing. You can grow up like a man, be socialized like a man and then change how you identify but still have the entitlement, lack of respect for boundaries, thirst to occupy and claim space and aggression of a white socialized male. All traits that progressives decry, but they're not only accepted, but fervently championed because these same individuals identify differently, though they exhibit the same characteristics. It's dizzying.

Gee, do you think the fact that they are *no longer white males* might have anything to do with our championing it? It’s good to see someone else BESIDES white men ACTING like white men!

Duh!

Do you actually champion it? Would you marry a trans woman?

[Anonymous]

There is no point in arguing this issue on DCUM. It is clearly a liberal website and any comments contrary to the prevailing progressive talking points are deleted. Post at your own discretion but know that the conversation is heavily moderated and pro trans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think people are still supportive of gays and lesbians, but it does take a little shine off the LGBT movement for some people.

It exposes some of the heavy handed tactics Progressives use to shut down voices they don’t like. Progressives have been doing it for years, but now it’s being directed at people who once thought themselves to be allies.

I am no fan in the T, but you jumped the shark and lost the argument when you say progressives shut down voices. Do you mean like the entire Tennessee elected Republican party did to two, young Black elected state officials last night. And how convenient the cherished whites woman was spared expulsion. But I bet even she was soundly chastised into submission and will not speak out again. Yeah, the Republicans have no quarter to make such brainless statements about shutting up voices.

When you have to sink to silencing opponents, you may not have the right side of the argument be it conservatives in Tennessee doing it over gun control or students in San Francisco doing over women's sports

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of the f-n drama for what must be like 8 athletes. People are losing their marbles about the wrong thing.

But its not 8 athletes.....its 8 athletes competing against hundreds of female athletes.

I think the problem is even these "8" have an outsized number reaching the top in women's sports when the whole point of Title IX was to allow women to have actual competitive sports where they can reach their max potential. Even in the Olympics, a 45 year old trans woman was able to compete in weightlifting. She didn't win but it's certainly not at all possible for an amateur weightlifting female to transition to a man at 45 and then make the men's US weightlifting team over 20 year olds.

It amateur sport. There are 220,000 women college “athletes”. In the general population 0.6% identify as transgender. There should be 1,300 trans athletes in college sports. There are 32 tran athletes in college. Two have made the Olympics this cycle.

If you want to make to Olympics or a college team preform better. The bottom of the rosters are the ones getting cut but the number is way way under 1%. This is not an issue.

If it is a non-issue, why are they beating up this female swimmer over it? Seems like it's enough of an issue to the trans community to engage in violence against anyone who offers a contrary opinion.

Let’s be clear: They are physically assaulting a female athlete because that athlete is female and has opinions. This is a violent misogynist movement whose end goal is the subjugation of women.

Disagree. And the videos posted-at least the couple I’m seeing-are showing shouting and getting close to her but I didn’t see violence. Maybe I haven’t clicked the right link. I’m surprised the man who tried to murder her (according to a PP) hasn’t been identified yet.

+1
I see yelling, I see swearing, I see someone acknowledging that she's crying, but I see no physical violence. That's not to say that it wasn't scary for her, or that it happened prior to the filming, but this doesn't show it. That's also not to say that violence wouldn't have occurred if the police weren't there.

I agree with other PP too. We've retreated so far to the extreme positions that there was no time to have the meaningful conversation about the complicated and nuanced parts of this.

Riley Gaines has stated that she was hit twice.

But you are almost certainly going to claim she is lying.

I almost certainly acknowledged that it may have taken place before and/or after filming. Didn’t I? I’m responding to the video that was posted.

Come on. You were trying to minimize what happened. You spent a lot of words talking about how she might have been scared but you didn’t see violence and just saw yelling and swearing.

Are you okay with violence against women in the name of trans rights or not? Yes or no? Or is taking a stance against violence against women too “extreme” for you?

You are super unhinged. I'm not OK with violence against women in the name of anything. But this is why no discussion can take place. you come out swinging to someone who literally said, hey, it's not on the video but it sure may have happened before or after. But there is no physical violence ON THE VIDEO. There was a protest that was getting out of hand, and police protected her, thankfully. I acknowledged that it was likely scary for her, but even that is me making assumptions isn't it? And that it may have happened before or after is also me making assumptions, but that fits with what you want to hear. I don't follow this woman, so I don't know what she said happened. This video was posted. People are reacting to it. What is the matter with you?

You are going out of your way to avoid the truth. That is why discussions can’t be had. Because one side is bound and determined to hide the truth.

I suspect PP would not be hemming and hawing if a cis woman reported that she was physically assaulted by a man, even in the absence of video evidence of the specific assault incident, if the woman provided video similar to the Gaines incident. It would be a foregone conclusion; not some evidentiary excursion.

I agree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of the f-n drama for what must be like 8 athletes. People are losing their marbles about the wrong thing.

But its not 8 athletes.....its 8 athletes competing against hundreds of female athletes.

I think the problem is even these "8" have an outsized number reaching the top in women's sports when the whole point of Title IX was to allow women to have actual competitive sports where they can reach their max potential. Even in the Olympics, a 45 year old trans woman was able to compete in weightlifting. She didn't win but it's certainly not at all possible for an amateur weightlifting female to transition to a man at 45 and then make the men's US weightlifting team over 20 year olds.

It amateur sport. There are 220,000 women college “athletes”. In the general population 0.6% identify as transgender. There should be 1,300 trans athletes in college sports. There are 32 tran athletes in college. Two have made the Olympics this cycle.

If you want to make to Olympics or a college team preform better. The bottom of the rosters are the ones getting cut but the number is way way under 1%. This is not an issue.

If it is a non-issue, why are they beating up this female swimmer over it? Seems like it's enough of an issue to the trans community to engage in violence against anyone who offers a contrary opinion.

Let’s be clear: They are physically assaulting a female athlete because that athlete is female and has opinions. This is a violent misogynist movement whose end goal is the subjugation of women.

Why do transphobes insist trans women are trying to take away women’s rights but are fine with conservatives actually taking away women’s reproductive rights? I don’t get it. Winning at sportsball isn’t a right. Not being forced to have a baby for whatever reason is.

Some of the same people disparaging Republicans for attacking abortion rights are the same ones on DCUM telling women they need sit down and shut up (at the risk of violence) and accept that the rights of biological men supersede their own. You hypocrites would make Aunt Lydia so very proud.

[Anonymous]

How many videos of women being physically assaulted by trans rights activists do people need to see before they accept the truth of what this movement is? There have been several from the last two weeks alone.

[Anonymous]

The alleged assault was wrong but he’s a dick for saying “man on a dress”.

[Anonymous]

This thread is appalling.

I never really trusted that the left cared much at all about women but it’s distressing to see just how fast they have abandoned women. It’s like #metoo never happened.