Current Events > AOC BODIES Marjorie Taylor Greene over women's rights and the Equality Act.

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://twitter.com/aoc/status/1364650157392945152?s=21

Literally the perfect woman.

---

"Everyone should have freedom"

People like MTG: "But what about my freedom to deny you freedom? I'm oppressed! #WomenArePeopleToo"

---

I'd become American just to have a politician like AOC fighting for me.

---

That Puerto Rican snappy attitude. You love to see it

---

MTG likely literally attempted to have AOC killed. Which makes AOC standing up to her all the more impressive

Hopefully MTG loses her job eventually

Zikten posted...

MTG likely literally attempted to have AOC killed. Which makes AOC standing up to her all the more impressive

Hopefully MTG loses her job eventually

AOC, Pelosi, Romey, and Pence need to be protected. They were already gonna try to kill them during the Capitol terror attack.

---

marjorie is literally insane. I hope she loses her seat next election

---

I hate to say it because I hate MTG so much but I think she's ultimately right on womens sports.

That's not a moral issue, it's a biological one. Women's sports only exist because female bodies cannot compete against male bodies.

"Male" sporting leagues are not segregated. It's just that the absolute best super top #1 female athlete in the world is inferior to the worst male pro athlete in his sport. There is no female on Earth who could be an NFL tackle against men and there never will be.

I 100% agree everyone should have equal rights when it comes to like possession of property, representation in law, hospital visitation, employment oppotunity, marruage right etc. Discriminating against people is wrong. We all have the right to pursue happiness. It's in the consistitution.

But womens sport isn't a "rights" thing. It isn't about your mindset or emotions or soul. It's entirely about your physical body by it's conception and definition.

If you have a male body then you have a gigantic advantage over someone with a female body.

I love womens MMA. I love Amanda Nunes. But if Frank Mir transitioned into a girl, dropped to 135 pounds and fought her in a cage. I would be opposed to it because that's not a fair fight.

That's not because I like it, it sucks. I wish it wasn't like that. But it is, it's a fact and what I or you want doesn't matter. Nature and reality do not respect what you "want" to be true.

And I've never met a transgender who didn't understand this. They are not claiming to have the other sex's body. That's why it's transgender and not transchromosome.

I feel like people do themselves no favors by muddying the issue here. You're making the crazy bigots look more reasonable by being needlessly unreasonable when you're otherwise completely in the right.

Just think of "Womens sporting league" as "Biological womens sporting league" and maybe the left would understand it a little more.

---

UnfairRepresent posted...

I hate to say it because I hate MTG so much but I think she's ultimately right on womens sports.

That's not a moral issue, it's a biological one. Women's sports only exist because female bodies cannot compete against male bodies.

"Male" sporting leagues are not segregated. It's just that the absolute best super top #1 female athlete in the world is inferior to the worst male pro athlete in his sport. There is no female on Earth who could be an NFL tackle against men and there never will be.

I 100% agree everyone should have equal rights when it comes to like possession of property, representation in law, hospital visitation, employment oppotunity, marruage right etc. Discriminating against people is wrong. We all have the right to pursue happiness. It's in the consistitution.

But womens sport isn't a "rights" thing. It isn't about your mindset or emotions or soul. It's entirely about your physical body by it's conception and definition.

If you have a male body then you have a gigantic advantage over someone with a female body.

I love womens MMA. I love Amanda Nunes. But if Frank Mir transitioned into a girl, dropped to 135 pounds and fought her in a cage. I would be opposed to it because that's not a fair fight.

That's not because I like it, it sucks. I wish it wasn't like that. But it is, it's a fact and what I or you want doesn't matter. Nature and reality do not respect what you "want" to be true.

And I've never met a transgender who didn't understand this. They are not claiming to have the other sex's body. That's why it's transgender and not transchromosome.

I feel like people do themselves no favors by muddying the issue here. You're making the crazy bigots look more reasonable by being needlessly unreasonable when you're otherwise completely in the right.

Just think of "Womens sporting league" as "Biological womens sporting league" and maybe the left would understand it a little more.

You can say "ooo my god but what about their bodies" all you want, and that doesn't change the fact that there is zero evidence for anyone becoming trans to have an edge in sports.

UnfairRepresent posted...

I hate to say it because I hate MTG so much but I think she's ultimately right on womens sports.

That's not a moral issue, it's a biological one. Women's sports only exist because female bodies cannot compete against male bodies.

"Male" sporting leagues are not segregated. It's just that the absolute best super top #1 female athlete in the world is inferior to the worst male pro athlete in his sport. There is no female on Earth who could be an NFL tackle against men and there never will be.

I 100% agree everyone should have equal rights when it comes to like possession of property, representation in law, hospital visitation, employment oppotunity, marruage right etc. Discriminating against people is wrong. We all have the right to pursue happiness. It's in the consistitution.

But womens sport isn't a "rights" thing. It isn't about your mindset or emotions or soul. It's entirely about your physical body by it's conception and definition.

If you have a male body then you have a gigantic advantage over someone with a female body.

I love womens MMA. I love Amanda Nunes. But if Frank Mir transitioned into a girl, dropped to 135 pounds and fought her in a cage. I would be opposed to it because that's not a fair fight.

That's not because I like it, it sucks. I wish it wasn't like that. But it is, it's a fact and what I or you want doesn't matter. Nature and reality do not respect what you "want" to be true.

And I've never met a transgender who didn't understand this. They are not claiming to have the other sex's body. That's why it's transgender and not transchromosome.

I feel like people do themselves no favors by muddying the issue here. You're making the crazy bigots look more reasonable by being needlessly unreasonable when you're otherwise completely in the right.

Just think of "Womens sporting league" as "Biological womens sporting league" and maybe the left would understand it a little more.

Wow. Would you look at that. A wall of Garbage

---

Robot2600 posted...

You can say "ooo my god but what about their bodies" all you want, and that doesn't change the fact that there is zero evidence for anyone becoming trans to have an edge in sports.

Bro don't you know that being born with a vagina automatically give you a negative modifier to your strength stats? /s
---

why is that lunatic blonde bimbo still around?

A lot of her clap backs are straight to policy and ideals.

This is just a hell of a dunk on top of that.

---

Bothers me when the sports thing gets thrown in and reduced to incoherent ideological positions from people who don't care about sports to begin with, but otherwise agree

---

Yeah! Slamming blastoise!

---

UnfairRepresent posted...

I love womens MMA. I love Amanda Nunes. But if Frank Mir transitioned into a girl, dropped to 135 pounds and fought her in a cage. I would be opposed to it because that's not a fair fight.

this is one of the most stupid things I have ever read.

you do know frank mir and Nunes would never be in the same weight division, right? You could emanciate him and cut one of his legs and he would still not make weight.

frank mir is 63. Nunes is 58, and she is already tall for a woman lmao


---

Goatslapper posted...

Yeah! Slamming blastoise!

*nods* Arugula.

---

Zikten posted...

MTG likely literally attempted to have AOC killed.

No she didn't. Stop spreading misinformation. You're acting just like Trump

---

Robot2600 posted...

You can say "ooo my god but what about their bodies" all you want, and that doesn't change the fact that there is zero evidence for anyone becoming trans to have an edge in sports.

There's not enough evidence, but there is evidence. Whenever it gets posted to a topic like this it either gets ignored or somebody claims that the sample size isn't big enough but isn't willing to agree to the notion that the study should be repeated with a larger sample size.

For example, here's a study that looked at strength across a cohort of trans men and trans women that found that even after a year of treatment the trans women still outperformed the trans men.
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2019/09/26/782557.full.pdf

Cross-sex hormone treatment markedly affects muscle function, size and composition in transgender individuals. Despite the robust changes in lower-limb muscle mass and strength in TM, the TW still had an absolute advantage at the 12-month follow-up. The question of when it is fair to permit a Transwoman to compete in sport in line with her experienced gender identity is challenging and very little data have been provided to add clarity on the potential performance benefits for TW arising from the lifelong experience of being a biological male. Our results indicate that after 12 months of hormonal therapy, a transwoman will still likely have performance benefits over a cis-woman. These findings add new knowledge that could be relevant for sport-governing bodies when evaluating the eligibility of transwomen to compete in the womens category of athletic competition.

---

Here is the thing: this whole controversy over women competing with testicle-owners in fight sports is a stupid excuse for the GOP evangelicals to rally their people, like abortion was back in the day.

segregation because a lost cause, so they switched to abortion, and now its this thing too.

how many cases of this have happened in the US in the last 50 years.. 5? Let me be generous: 20? Yes, lets focus national attention and the time and tax money of national law makers fighting over something thats amazingly uncommon and will continue to be uncommon for decades to come. This will prevent a grant total of 20 more cases or so for decades.

china is eating our lunch and the trumpers want to overthrow democracy and instal a pseudo-religious white ethnostate, but sure, focus on this amazingly uncommon thing instead.... youre getting played

---

And
We're
Doing
This
Again!

To 500!

---

SPE posted...

this is one of the most stupid things I have ever read.

you do know frank mir and Nunes would never be in the same weight division, right? You could emanciate him and cut one of his legs and he would still not make weight.

frank mir is 63. Nunes is 58, and she is already tall for a woman lmao

I don't know, the boxer Sebastian Fundora is 6'6" and he weighs 154 lbs. How the hell he can make that kind of weight at that height I have no idea.

---

SPE posted...

this is one of the most stupid things I have ever read.

you do know frank mir and Nunes would never be in the same weight division, right? You could emanciate him and cut one of his legs and he would still not make weight.

frank mir is 63. Nunes is 58, and she is already tall for a woman lmao

UR as usual is making terrible arguments but here's a better one:

Currently we have women and men sports divisions for the purpose of protecting a class who is not anywhere near as advantaged genetically. If we change the current model to allow the categories of women and men to simply be self-identifiable, it undermines any reason whatsoever for having these separate categories in the first place. We'd just be having different leagues, "just because". It doesn't really make sense, and the logical conclusion would be to do away with men/womens sports altogether. But that's...obviously not a good solution.

So the question remains, what is the policy you can go ahead with that makes sense to separate these categories, if chromosomes doesn't work and self-ID doesn't work? How do you be inclusive to trans women and inclusive to women in sport in general at the same time, without undermining the reason for having divisions at all?

---

dolomedes posted...

ummm, you watching the news lately?

whats your point ?

---

onedarksoul posted...

No she didn't. Stop spreading misinformation. You're acting just like Trump

She was supposedly updating her Twitter in real time during the attack and letting people know where everyone was hiding

shockthemonkey posted...

The NCAA and Olympics allow trans women to compete as women and there have been literally 0 issues with this fact. Anyone pretending that trans women shouldnt compete with cis women is being spiteful, not scientific.

There's a little more to it than that. Whether current guidelines are sufficient or excessive and whether self-ID is sufficient - these are the scientific issues. And there's been a significant amount of controversy over it, although the "FTM sweeping up the medals" was never a legitimate issue.

The Olympics doesn't have a laissez faire approach, currently. They're trying to use T as a proxy, to mixed reception.


---

shockthemonkey posted...

So youre saying the current standards are working just fine

If the only measure is "unless trans women sweep up all the medals there's no problem" then sure, but I think that's dishonest. You don't have to win in order for the question of fair or unfair advantage to come up.

Some sports (rugby, for example) are dealing with a welfare concern for one thing, not simply a fairness concern. And scientists are still undecided on whether current T guidelines are sufficient.

---

Literally the perfect body.

---

shockthemonkey posted...

Some people complaining doesnt mean that its a real issue

Scientists unable to reach a conclusion and coming to wildly different results depending on the sport is an issue. This is not simply a problem of terfs vs not terfs.

---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVm-FY-9X5M

shockthemonkey posted...

Unable to reach a conclusion that appeases obnoxious alarmists

With respect I think this is taking any of the nuance or discussion out of the issue by framing it with whatever the worst and most abhorrent opinions are. What are we disagreeing about here first, whether there is an advantage or whether it even matters? That would be a good starting point.

World Rugby did an exercise where they got a large team of sports scientists, physiologists, trans psychiatrists, LGBTQ activists and data analysts to analyse and weigh up the evidence, and after all this didnt arrive at the conclusion that the only issue is ideological and the only reason for exclusion is bigotry. I think thats interesting.

---

People need to chill with the "perfect woman" stuff...

The cult hasn't hit Trump level of bad yet, but regardless the complete devotion surrounding AOC is hitting cult level.

shockthemonkey posted...

I think faux alarmism in regards to trans people is overplayed and obnoxious

Ok agreed, and I wouldn't expect nor be remotely fearful of a wave of trans women sweeping up at the elite levels of sports, and I don't think that's a legitimate concern people should have.

However I do believe it's completely acceptable for sporting bodies to want more evidence to support a fair way to create policy if categories must exist in the first place, and the current policy doesn't sit comfortably with the arguments that are being presented. On one hand, we have a separate women's sport category on the basis that "women physically cannot compete with men because of X advantage", and on the other hand there is a lobby that wants to allow inclusion into this category even for people that (may) have X. That's incoherent at best. Why bother with categories then? We don't have "womens sport" just because we like to see sports with 50% of the population divided up. It exists because of X. We can't pretend X is irrelevant and also maintain say that women and men's sport must remain seperate when X was the reason for this division to begin with.

What might make sense is an argument to say "well you can come into this category if X is removed, but only if you can show for certain that it does". or alternatively, "so what, X exists, who cares." That's where the actual controversy is. And it's not one that is remotely agreed upon, however much it's laid out by either lobby, for or against inclusion.

---

t5yvxc posted...

People need to chill with the "perfect woman" stuff...

The cult hasn't hit Trump level of bad yet, but regardless the complete devotion surrounding AOC is hitting cult level.

She deserves it.

Ellie95 posted...

She deserves it.

....crossing into cult territory.

It's obviously not as bad as Trumps cult, however the point is this is how cult leaders are born. Over the the top adoration. Calm it down.

Imagine trying to have an honest conversation with shock where youre trying to explain why your different opinion on the matter has validity. Lmfao

---

How is MTG not in jail for her role in the insurrection and why is she still able to vote on these issues despite live tweeting the location of politicians so terrorists could kill them?

---

shockthemonkey posted...

This is just annoying alarmism and feargongering and I dont know why you think it isnt.

I don't really know what to say about this. If you believe fairness and welfare are legitimate concerns, and you accept that scientists who study this issue are not agreed on those issues (and they aren't), then it should be reasonable to say that we should wait until scientists have figured out the issue more carefully.

I mean I'm not referring to the TERF social support network here with my arguments. I'm referring to say, Ross Tucker, the lead biophysiologist who stood in front of the supreme court and argued in Caster Semenya's case on the issue. Even he doesn't think it's clearcut.

Alternatively you can say that fairness and welfare might be important but ultimately have zero importance or standing over inclusivity, which is fine - but just own that. Say that you don't care about fairness or welfare regardless of whatever the evidence shows, because inclusion is the only thing that matters. That would be honest.

---

It would be rad if CE could have one topic about trans people that didn't involve sports

---

MTG, the buffoon who thought you had to swear-in on a Bible:

https://twitter.com/Public_Citizen/status/1357462990006624257

Taharqa_ posted...

I don't know, the boxer Sebastian Fundora is 6'6" and he weighs 154 lbs. How the hell he can make that kind of weight at that height I have no idea.

Thats wild, Im 60 160 lbs. and people have said I have that Jesus on the cross look when they see me with my shirt off lol.

---

FlameTurtle posted...

It would be rad if CE could have one topic about trans people that didn't involve sports

There's several all the time but this is really the only one that ever invites argument

---

FlameTurtle posted...

It would be rad if CE could have one topic about trans people that didn't involve sports

It would be but it's the only Trans thing related to dumb rednecks who keep voting for the GOP.

It's a rallying topic them like abortion.
---