At Instapundit, Stephen Green wrote:
GOOD. It’s Happening: 3 High School Girls File Complaint Over Dominating Transgender Athletes.
Commenter Allen responded with:
If I have to live in clown world, so does everyone else.
Recent Comments
Durasim on Message heard. Interested on Message heard. BobSutan on Message heard. Hazelshade on Farewell (for now at least), a… TheWanderer on Message heard. 5k40 on Farewell (for now at least), a… Ryder on Farewell (for now at least), a… Dry Holes on Message heard. letusreasonow on Message heard. chokingonredpills on Message heard.
Dalrock 
Too bad Anthony Kennedy isn’t on the US Supreme Court anymore, this would provide with an opportunity to expand on his own “meaning of life” riff in Obergefell. He could expand Title IX just for a start.
https://infogalactic.com/info/Obergefell_v._Hodges
Transvestites vs. feminists…I admit to experiencing definite Schadenfreude right now…
Does this mean all the men displaced by (far) less qualified women via affirmative action have a lawsuit? If not, then I want the trans athletes to drive biological females completely out of sports. For starters.
They are literally going to tear each other to shreds. And then the dam of lawsuits is going to burst.
American litigiousness will be on full, breathtaking display, and for years.
Well, as a child I learned that anything a boy can do, a girl can do better… The Liberation of Marcia Brady, first airing February 1971, 48 years ago. If these girls can’t do today what Marcia Brady did 48 years ago then they just need to get their lazy keisters off the couch and train harder.
Man of the week (MOTW). Allen.
This issue will always be the perfect display of the difference between cuckservative/whiteknight vs. legitimately red-pill thought.
The whole premise of women’s sports is flawed* if it cannot attract an audience in a legitimately free market (which tends to happen only in sports where the female form is aesthetic value, such as gymnastics).
Cuckservatives are going to agonize over this for years to come.
*The notion that flyweight and lightweight boxers and wrestlers can earn big money is equally flawed. Someone like Mayweather or Pacquaio is overtly shielded from any boxer 20+ pounds heavier than them. The system is wrong if it makes them famous. There might as well be a 100M dash for people under 5’6″, where the winner becomes as famous as Usain Bolt, or an NFL with a sub-180 pound division.
Comments are still going strong over there, with almost no sympathy or White Knighting. The few self-identified women {heh} who try to defend the girls are hit with “Title IX” and the excuse of “Not All Women…” is not flying far.
I’m surprised by the lack of White Knights, really I am.
Like Allen, I became entertained by the situation. At first, I was mad, then, I remembered that boys could not have Boyscouts anymore, men couldn’t have gentlement’s clubs… so, in the oppression olympics, let the majority of voters, women, fend for themselves when they destroyed anyone with morale and a spine that would have stood up for them.
Bonus: The Women’s World Cup of Football (Soccer)
The women are advocating hard for equal pay, comparing themselves to the men is one of the way to get there. I was offended when, on of of the soccer pages I follow, showed Marta along the great names like Ronaldo, Klose, while the women don’t play in the same category than boys, let alone men.
https://www.msn.com/en-sg/news/other/brazils-marta-overtakes-miroslav-klose-as-all-time-top-goalscorer-in-fifa-world-cup-tournaments/ar-AAD6ggh
Don’t complain cunts. That’s prejudiced! And if you do you’re just bitter that you’re unearned woman privilege has been revoked this time. Don’t like it? Too bad. You’re privileged after all so you deserve it.
Not so much fun when “equality” bites you in the ass is it cunts?
“*The notion that flyweight and lightweight boxers and wrestlers can earn big money is equally flawed. Someone like Mayweather or Pacquaio is overtly shielded from any boxer 20+ pounds heavier than them. The system is wrong if it makes them famous. There might as well be a 100M dash for people under 5’6″, where the winner becomes as famous as Usain Bolt, or an NFL with a sub-180 pound division.”
Boxing is built upon a bunch of extremely restrictive rules. The primary way in which a lighter man deals with a heavier man is by resorting to more lethal techniques(or to put it another way aiming for fragile and exposed parts of the body), and we can’t exactly make a sports arena about whoever strikes a fatal blow first.
An example of evil turning on itself. I wouldn’t be surprised if they reach some complicated, convoluted agreement to stop a civil war.
Evil in general and the Left in particular are very good at making deals to save themselves to fight their real enemy. Not to be pessimistic, but evil has shown remarkable skill at snatching victory from the jaws of defeat as the good and decent, having fought the well and stand on the threshold of victory, are dumbfounded at being, yet again, defeated by seemingly unstoppable supernatural, diabolical events.
Pingback: Hilarious | Reaction Times
Don’t those girls understand that the radical leftardology two-thirds of females voted for asserts that if someone claims to be anything whatsoever than they automatically are that thing and anyone who says otherwise is a racist bigot who should be imprisoned by the government. I identify as a giraffe.
@TheTraveler
Thats what happens when we dont abide in Christ and fight this spiritual war by the power of Jesus Christ.
A spiritual war can only be won by spiritual means.
Yes, I just love that a “Christian”, “conservative” is representing these girls. We must protect feminism lest we get evil in the world!
I hope they lose, I want to see lots of boys get scholarships to wrestle as self-identified male lesbians in college. How dare anyone judge them! Or deny them opportunity!
Anon says:
June 19, 2019 at 5:22 pm
>The notion that flyweight and lightweight boxers and wrestlers can earn big money is equally flawed. Someone like Mayweather or Pacquaio is overtly shielded from any boxer 20+ pounds heavier than them. The system is wrong if it makes them famous. There might as well be a 100M dash for people under 5’6″, where the winner becomes as famous as Usain Bolt, or an NFL with a sub-180 pound division.
maybe in your opinion but those leagues exist and are paid cuz there’s market demand for it.
Let’s rewind the clock 12 months ago on this story:
150,000 teens in the US “identify” as “transgender”.
Anonymous Reader says:
June 19, 2019 at 5:34 pm
>Comments are still going strong over there, with almost no sympathy or White Knighting. The few self-identified women {heh} who try to defend the girls are hit with “Title IX” and the excuse of “Not All Women…” is not flying far.
>I’m surprised by the lack of White Knights, really I am.
the people defending the plaintiffs aren’t white knights?
@info
Yes, all those good Christian people working hard and praying for victory, like the pro-lifers, by and large are dedicated Christians, fighting hard, gaining hard-won victories that take years, only to see the legions of Satan win quick, crushing, long-lasting, seemingly impregnable victory. And that’s just one example.
There’s a lot of evil in the world that, for some reason, God not only permits but to which He seems to grant tremendous latitude.
According to folk like you, the good guys aren’t “doing it right.” Exactly like what the Pharisees told Christ.
American
Don’t those girls understand … cause and effect?
This question answers itself.
Dylan Sexton
the people defending the plaintiffs aren’t white knights?
There are far fewer than I expected at that site.
Constrainedlocus
Let’s rewind the clock 12 months ago on this story:
Excellent find.
“maybe in your opinion but those leagues exist and are paid cuz there’s market demand for it.”
No they don’t. They are heavily subsidized.
Women’s tennis pays far less than men’s, b/c the demand isn’t as strong. And yes, women complain about the pay difference.
OT
I know everyone is on the collective edges of their seat waiting on these.
https://ljubomirfarms.wordpress.com/2019/06/20/groundbreaking-has-begun/
Later dudes. Or transdudes. Or whatever.
Congratulations, Scott! You already have a beautiful place to raise your family, and the big house will make it even more so.
DrTorch says:
June 19, 2019 at 10:27 pm
>No they don’t. They are heavily subsidized.
i didn’t know that. anyway, what’s “illegitimate” about them being subsidized?
Constrainedlocus said: “150,000 teens in the US “identify” as “transgender”.
^ I believe that’s an accurate figure due to the recent reward system implemented (while encouraging this method of adolescent rebellion) for minors to identify as immoral homosexual “transgenders” which the radical leftists have implemented across the nation artificially creating the surge.
But let’s put this in context. The “Federal Interagency Forum on Child and Family Statistics” “pop.1” table (see https://www.childstats.gov/americaschildren/tables/pop1.asp ) place the under age 18 U.S. population at 73.9 million as of 2019. 73,900,000 – 150,000 = 72,400,000 minors who do NOT “identify” as “transgender.”
The ignorant and/or deceived totalitarian radical leftists in control of public education, most of the mainstream media-social media, etc… are attempting to violate natural law and our Constitution to misuse government to force 72,400,000 minors, their parents, and dissenting teachers to violate the scientific consensus and all that’s holy or face persecution. I can’t believe the radical leftists got as far as they have but I that’s in itself an indictment.
It means that any claims they are just meeting demand are bogus. They wouldn’t need subsidies if the demand was there.
It is also not sustainable forever, since the money to pay for it will eventually run out, even if that comes from governmental pressure.
@Thetraveler
Because its only with conversion of romans that abortion ceased and other evils in society were suppressed. Christ is truly the only way for such evil to be on the retreat.
Satan can only be beaten back by Christ. There is no other way. Otherwise its only a bandaid.
I’ll just echo FeministHater in advance here: moar, moar, Moar, MOAR!!!!!
”And if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand.”
– Mark 3: 25
It was only a matter of time when it would eat itself….
I remember when I was in high school circa 1990, “lesbian trapped in a man’s body” was literally a joke. It was a one-liner, intrinsically funny, because it was implicitly understood that there were only two kinds of chicks with dicks: queers taking the femme thing too far, and straight dudes taking the joke too far. LARPers and porn whores, degenerate thespians either way.
And now, some.three decades later, high school girls are literally having to sue in court to get the drag queens out of their athletic contests.
Clown. World.
“The complaint was filed Monday by the conservative Christian law firm Alliance Defending Freedom.”
“Christiana Holcomb, legal counsel for the Alliance, explains in the New York Times:
Girls deserve to compete on a level playing field. Women fought long and hard to earn the equal athletic opportunities that Title IX provides. Allowing boys to compete in girls’ sports reverses nearly 50 years of advances for women under this law. We shouldn’t force these young women to be spectators in their own sports. ”
Excuse me? Is that conservative(!) Christian female lawyer calling transgender women boys? Wait till that is going to explode!
Anon raises an interesting point about lightweight boxers. One of the many things I like about Sumo is if like little Enho you are only five foot six inches tall and two hundred pounds then that is just unfortunate and he makes up in skill what he loses in size and often bests his taller larger opponents as here against Tokoshuryu who is twice Enho’s weight. Women by the way are banned from ever entering the Dohyo and for any reason.
And one of the Twitter comments wonderfully shows the philosophical hole they’ve dug for themselves:
Good I hope every woman and girl stands up. Transgender women are not the same as biological women and should not compete with bio women. transgender women have a genetic advantage over bio women,it has to stop. We bio women will not be suppressed again.
I repeat:
* Transgender women ARE NOT THE SAME AS BIOLOGICAL WOMEN
* Transgender women HAVE A GENETIC ADVANTAGE OVER BIOLOGICAL WOMEN
… but “equality” and “we will not be suppressed again”.
How wonderful if you cannot win in a competition to label the victor a “suppressor”! Stalin himself would have been proud!
I hate women taking over men’s occupations and so it seems to me wrong that Counsel for a Christian organisation Alliance defending Freedom should be a woman and a woman who spouts boilerplate feminism. I don’t know exactly what Title IX may be but I have to say my Mother ninety years ago and at an all-girl public school (founded 1726) played in the winter Lacrosse and in the Summer Cricket. How come America has prevented girls from running about? As a child all we boys needed was a ball of any size and we would happily all day kick it about with make shift goals. Why can’t girls do likewise if they wanted but they didn’t and the only thing I recall their instigating (which was promptly banned by the teachers) was kiss-chase. Never chased me.
No one ever subsidized Leonard, Hagler, Hearns, Robinson, Mayweather, Pacquaio. Great, entertaining fighters with a lot of skill to display and all little guys. Way too broad of a brushstroke there.
OT but closely related: Preview of coming attractions (pardon the pun) …
https://www.dailywire.com/news/48553/psychology-today-people-refusing-date-transgenders-paul-bois
Predictably it is being treated as interracial dating — something that you can’t “force” (that violates the left’s prime directive of complete personal sexual autonomy and self-determination after all), but something which you can nevertheless strongly encourage, as with interracial dating today — where, for example, today a good 40-60% or more of TV ads featuring couples are BM/WW, which isn’t reflective of the real world but is intended to make people think it’s more common than it is, and thereby normalize it, and thereby encourage more people to do it. It’s how the “refusal to date transgender” thing will be rolled out as well. They always follow a script that they know from the past has worked for them in another context and in the context of everything related to LGBT the process has been to follow the exact same playbook as was followed for race. Expect the same here.
Feminists wanted androgyny, now they have it.
@TheTraveler
This victory is temporary because Satan and his demons hasnt been cast into the lake of fire. And sin hasnt been truly eradicated. For each new generation need the spiritual rebirth.
Of course evil will come back again and again. We have to wait for the 2nd coming for that victory to be complete.
And as I have said. Christ is the only way that true victory can be achieved even for a time as in Ancient Rome.
Only a critical mass of spirit filled believers can beat back diabolical powers by the power of god.
I don’t know exactly what Title IX may be but I have to say my Mother ninety years ago and at an all-girl public school (founded 1726) played in the winter Lacrosse and in the Summer Cricket. How come America has prevented girls from running about?
Opus —
It’s a peculiarity of how American athletics works that isn’t applicable in other countries.
In the US, our colleges field teams that feed into the professional sports leagues here. In the US, American football and basketball professional teams are pretty much exclusively fed from the collegiate ranks, and for baseball and hockey the numbers are also not insignificant, although those two sports have “lower level professional leagues” like European soccer teams do — those lower level professional leagues do not exist for American football and basketball pretty much at all (there is a small one for basketball which is insignificant as a player source as compared to college basketball).
As a result, collegiate athletics is a big money business which generates a lot of money for the universities that field good teams, because you are watching guys who will be pro athletes in a couple years time — the level of play at the highest level in college basketball and football is extremely high, and the dollar flow from television and everything else is sky high.
Title IX is a federal law passed during second wave feminism that says that colleges need to provide equal treatment/facilities/programs to men and women alike. This was quickly interpreted to mean that the spending on athletics programs in colleges for men and women had to be equal between the sexes as well in order to comply with Title IX — this, despite the fact that the women’s collegiate teams make pretty much no money, and that the interest in participation at the collegiate level is also not matched as between young men and women. The net effect was that colleges that had significant football and basketball programs (these are expensive because they are full scholarship programs and an American college football team has like 100 players scattered over 4-5 class years) had to get rid of other men’s sports and divert funds to create other women’s sports, and fund them, in a way that assured that funding and participation was “equal” between men’s and women’s sports. So you have most colleges having far more women’s sports than men’s sports if they want to field competitive teams in the “money” sports of football and basketball that generate money for the university.
The issue was never “recreational sports” — they have always existed on college campuses. Women were never excluded from them. The issue was intercollegiate competitive sports, and the desire of feminists to take something away from men and hand it to women, which is what they did with collegiate sports. The feminists didn’t want most of the money going to the men’s sports that generated the money — instead they got a law passed that required the money to be equalized between men’s and women’s sports in terms of spending despite the fact that it’s only the men’s sports that generate revenue, and even there only a couple of them that generate significant revenue.
This is an endless complaint train. As you may be aware, women who are professional athletes are very pissed that they do not earn what male professional athletes do. It’s recognized that not that much can be done about this at the professional level due to the different levels of revenue generated between mens and womens professional leagues (although this doesn’t stop the sports networks here from shoving women’s professional athletics in front of an audience that is disinterested in them in order to try to gin up interest). However, at the level of the “national” teams, which are not revenue funded, a big stink is being made currently by the American national women’s soccer team about wanting to be paid the same as the men’s soccer team. it’s the same story all over again — although it isn’t Title IX, because it isn’t colleges, it’s the same idea of wanting to get the same pay/money despite the well known fact that the women’s world cup is not even 1/10th the TV draw of the men’s world cup. The whole thing is just envy-based, but it’s a long-running story of envy, and it’s a very deep-seated envy among women professional athletes.
BUT; BUT; BUT WAIT!!! I’ve been taught gender is only a social construct…until it ain´t. Once again da wimminz are strong and capable until they cannot win and then they need a man (or his institutions) to fix their problems. Its an equal opportunity world baby… Live in it like all the rest of us.
Dylan Sexton,
maybe in your opinion but those leagues exist and are paid cuz there’s market demand for it.
Are you sure there is market demand that is not artificially propped up?
There is no more reason for lightweight boxing divisions than for an NFL division restricted to people under 180 pounds, or a 100m dash event at the Olympics for men under 5’6″.
Novaseeker,
Cuckservatives are going to be a huge part of forcing people to date/marry transgenders. As I have been saying, mark my words, by 2021 or so, there will be some cartoonish cuckservative who insists that he is very ‘pro traditional marriage’, by pressuring men to marry MtF transgenders.
The cuckservative will pressure them to do this while saying with a straight face that he is ‘preserving marriage’.
I recently heard a funny comment on a British podcast: We have a Labor Party for people who do no labor. And a Conservative Party for people who conserve nothing.
John James R,
No one ever subsidized Leonard, Hagler, Hearns, Robinson, Mayweather, Pacquaio. Great, entertaining fighters with a lot of skill to display and all little guys.
Why are they not required to compete against the heavyweights? Why is it fair that Mayweather is much richer and more famous than the #21 heavyweight boxer in the world, despite the fact that the heavyweight would defeat him?
Venus Williams, Serena Williams, etc. also are, as you describe, great tennis players with a lot of skill to display.
@ Opus
Right. Women’s sports don’t exist in America. Never have. At any level.
@Anon
Because boxing rules were designed to promote a level playing field such that the skill of boxing itself could be best displayed. Earlier forms of boxing did not have weight classes, it was much more akin to brawling. The deliberate ideals of English fair play are intrinsic to what the sport became.
Serena Williams, good as she is, cannot win against a much less skilled man. Mayweather, despite his defensive prowess, would get beat under by a George Foreman.
More recently people have created a different sport, MMA. In its early form, it was much more raw and had far fewer rules. Since then, MMA has evolved a set of rules to best display the sport same as boxing.
Wraithburn,
Mayweather, despite his defensive prowess, would get beat under by a George Foreman.
Which is why there should be no weight divisions in boxing. The best should be the best, period. If a smaller boxer can beat a larger one based purely on speed and precision, so be it, but barring that, there should be no smaller boxers. There should be no weight divisions, which are exactly the same artificially-created sub-tier as women’s sports.
Anyone who defends weight divisions in boxing is really just guilty of defending the status quo. In reality, weight divisions to create fame for lightweight boxers is no different than if there were an NFL division of sub-180 pound players, or a 100M dash sub-race of sub 5’6″ men, where a gold medal is worth just as much as the Usain Bolt gold medal in the unrestricted division.
This is especially true on the ESPN channels, which are quite a few. If you channel surf between them you are bound to run into a women’s collegiate or professional basketball or soccer match, and if not that then maybe a women’s Lacrosse, softball, baseball match or track and field event. I’m sure that the viewer numbers for those events are beyond dismal and that ESPN (a Disney subsidiary) loses money broadcasting them, but they do it to avoid the feminists’ wrath.
Likewise, the US sports media makes a HUGE deal over the Women’s FIFA World Cup. I was asked (four years ago) by a very progressive colleague if I had seen a certain match at the Women’s World Cup. I told him flat out that I don’t watch Women’s soccer. He was predictably aghast at my comment and asked me why. I replied “They’re slow and boring, high school boys play a better game than they do.”
Do you really think a George Foreman could beat a Mayweather? Most likely, the smaller guys quickness would avoid punches from the bigger, while not being able to do much damage himself to the bigger guy. So, you get boxing that gets boring after the initial novelty wears off. Since entertainment is the actual goal, seeing evenly matched opponents is better to watch.
Oh, and height isn’t really an advantage in a sprint. Bolt is an anomaly for sprinters.
I’ll point and laugh at whichever side loses this lawsuit, but won’t be surprised if it goes away quietly bc it highlights the left’s various fallacies.
@ Novaseeker
So you have most colleges having far more women’s sports than men’s sports if they want to field competitive teams in the “money” sports of football and basketball that generate money for the university.
I was aware of the basics of Title IX but your tutorial really spells out the whole thing nicely, to include individual and collective motivations behind how it is handled. Curious as to the idea that women’s sports actually ended up with the lion’s share of teams, I checked the websites of the half dozen largest universities in the state. In two cases men and women had equal numbers of sports teams, and in the other four there were actually more women’s than men’s sports at the school. The largest gap was 5 men’s teams vs. 9 for women.
Given that at most American uni’s now the student population is 60% or more female, the sports team gap may well continue to increase in women’s favor.
“Why is it fair that Mayweather is much richer and more famous than the #21 heavyweight boxer in the world, despite the fact that the heavyweight would defeat him?”
Because….okay, listen this time….NO ONE HAD TO SUBSIDIZE HIS FIGHTS. He is an entertainer and people pay that much to watch him.
My university is similar. Maybe 5 male teams (and it’s a D-1, big 5 conference) and about 12 female teams. They have to have that many to try and balance out the expenditure between males and females. And football is exorbitant. There is no female sport that equates to that. Mediocre female rowers getting full ride scholarships on at least some taxpayer dime, just to row in front of about 18 fans on some river out in the countryside is top shelf clown world.
vandicus @ June 19, 2019 at 6:38 pm:
“Boxing is built upon a bunch of extremely restrictive rules. The primary way in which a lighter man deals with a heavier man is by resorting to more lethal techniques(or to put it another way aiming for fragile and exposed parts of the body), and we can’t exactly make a sports arena about whoever strikes a fatal blow first.”
Not lethality, just hitting below the belt. I learned in martial arts as a big, tall guy that little Mikey will always go for my knees and the match is as over if he gets there as if I smash his head. But kneecapping and crotch shots are poor entertainment.
Lightweights give a fast game and Heavywrights give a power game. Different entertainment values. I prefer heavywright fights simply because I need fewer slo-mo replays to see what happened.
A lot of univeristy coaches are spectacularly paid. And the staff is simply huge: specialty coaches, trainers, PR people, the cost of the equipment, etc.
Stephen Fry has a documentary where he visits the 50 states driving a London taxi. In one episode he attended a collegiate football game and was simply floored by the attendance (I think it 70,000) and the fan’s passion, for what he said was just a “derby match”. Not all states have NFL teams, and college games can be just as important as the professional matches in many states,
In some states, say like Texas, even high schools have sumptuous stadiums.
What the girls of 15-20 don’t understand is, the Gen X and Boomer girls weaponized transmen to tear down and attack White hetero men. Now they have a monster that is stronger than feminism and homosexual lobbies combined. And the young girls are having to pay for it, fighting a new and freaky patriarchy of a sorts. Unbalanced boys are attempting to grab female privilege.
In two cases men and women had equal numbers of sports teams, and in the other four there were actually more women’s than men’s sports at the school. The largest gap was 5 men’s teams vs. 9 for women.
Lost Patrol —
Normally where you have division 1 football involved, like John and Frank say, the cost is extreme — it’s like 100 scholarships and there is no women’s sport like it, so you need more women’s sports to balance it out. If you don’t run a D1 CFB program, you can more easily swing equal numbers of men’s and women’s sports — even top tier NCAA basketball programs are cheap(ish) because the number of players and staff and so on is tiny compared to football.
I had no idea that the women’s world cup was happening. When men are playing the World Cup, you know – the streets are deserted and then you hear in the distance cries and screams and then after the game, cars racing through the street honking their horns, revelers singing until sun-up. Should we win or come close (honourable failure is the preferred outcome) the morale of the country is instantly affected. The most important man in the country, far more important than the Prime Minister is the Manager who shoulders all blame and bathes in plaudits.
FIFA was claiming sold out attendances including for the England -v- Scotland game but according to the BBC the stadium was only one third full. I saw a clip of England -v- Japan. The women all looks like lezzers. I can’t see the point. Unless they are hot who cares and if they are hot they are wasting their energies because no women is ever one iota more desirable because she is in a soccer team.
Equality has to be not merely one of the least un-pin-down-able of enlightenment ideas but also one of the daftest. Your revolutionaries who I now see are being accused of being Slave-driving colonial masters (oh the schadenfreude) rather swallowed all that Locke and Rousseau without proper reflection. Poor Jefferson.
I am indebted to Novaseeker for the lengthy explanation of Title IX.
@Anon
You are confusing “good at winning a fight” with “good at boxing”. These are different things. There is no way in boxing to get what you are asking, because if you take away the weight classes it is not boxing.
Boxing is not a street fight.
Clown World indeed.
https://www.military.com/daily-news/2019/06/19/fort-carson-celebrates-national-pride-month-lgbtq-soldiers.html
LOL! Not according to US media. They routinely show “tasteful” nude photos of the ladies to show just how hot they are!
Getting back to my male colleague who loves women’s football, I told him that outside the US no gives a flying fart about the women’s world cup. Hoo boy! Was he offended when I said that. He was quick to tell me that Europeans do care, and I laughed at him.
And to think that the leftists want to go to war with Russia with this freak show military.
LOL! Not according to US media. They routinely show “tasteful” nude photos of the ladies to show just how hot they are!
That’s 1/2 eye-candy for lez execs in media and 1/2 “push” advertising that is “trying to change beauty standards”. Will not be effective, because common beauty standards for women are now ruthlessly enforced by internet porn, which (unfortunately) almost all young men are exposed to, and the pornographers couldn’t care less about “changing men’s beauty standards”.
@Frank K
Certainly in Great Britain no one cares about women’s soccer. or women’s cricket. or women’s hockey (or even men’s hockey) or women’s anything else other than to laugh at it. The one exception seems to be Tennis and that is only for the two weeks of the Wimbledon Tournament. I presume because women’s Tennis is fairly graceful and because they wear skirts so short they might be pelmets.
I once saw that Billie Jean King at Wimbledon (my only visit to SW19) but also a very young Bjorn Borg and he was prettier.
Tomorrow lets discuss why no one is interested in Women’s Chess or Women’s musical composition.
Tomorrow lets discuss why no one is interested in Women’s Chess or Women’s musical composition.
No one can stay awake long enough to discuss those things.
“[Name of Woman Dunks in Women’s NBA game!” read a headline some years ago.
A commonplace event in the men’s game is cause for adulation when done by a woman, inadvertently proving (by the virtue-signaling media, no less) that women ARE inferior to men in physical pursuits.
some seriously misguided commentary on boxing here as it relates to the intersection of supply and demand in sports.
any sport segmented by weight class (boxing, weightlifting, wrestling) is designed to give the greatest competitive opportunity to men and women of different anthropological backgrounds, different morphologies. a 5’8″, 185lb man is relatively average in america…but a man at that height and weight is an outlier in parts of asia and central + south america.
what is a talented little man supposed to do, just give up because people only want to see heavyweights brawl? mayweather pacquiao, marquez, julio cesar chavez, et all prove that there is plenty of demand for exciting, technical fighters of all sizes that fill stadiums and make tons of money.
boxing is a technical sport based on points scored. the larger man does not always win. ignoring human biological diversity just because you don’t understand there are more ways to win a boxing match than knocking your opponent out is the most dogheaded stance ever.
Returning to the OP with a side trip to Novaseeker’s discourse on Title IX: there are some real monetary issues hiding in the background. High school girls who may well be planning to attend some state Uni on a track scholarship have a real problem if boys-as-girls are beating them. They don’t have as good a win / lose record as needed.
Sure, there’s the usual feminine petulance, but there’s also potentially some money at stake also.
Wraithburn,
You are confusing “good at winning a fight” with “good at boxing”. These are different things. There is no way in boxing to get what you are asking, because if you take away the weight classes it is not boxing.
Incorrect. Your point is irrelevant.
The fact remains, boxing can no more justify weight divisions, enabling smaller boxers to become wealthy and famous when there are hundreds of larger men who can beat them, than there can be a ‘5’6″ and shorter’ 100M dash, the winner of which deserves to be as famous as Usain Bolt, even though the world record 100M time for a person shorter than 5’6″ is probably not enough to even qualify for the Olympics in the unrestricted 100M dash.
You, and others, are merely defending the status quo, which is why the rebuttals are so weak. If we lived in a world where there was no weight division in boxing and the best boxer is always someone 200+ pounds in weight, but we had a full-size NFL and a middleweight NFL of people under 180 lbs (since they are ‘faster’ and more agile, of course), you would be defending this status quo and scoffing at the notion of boxing/MMA/Greco-Roman wrestling weight classes.
You people don’t realize what you are actually defending, and why. It is just status-quo bias. In other words, it is the typical GOPe Conservative position.
John James R,
He is an entertainer and people pay that much to watch him.
False. The same argument can apply to Venus/Serena Williams, Leila Ali, and Rhonda Roussey.
The only points you have made are ones that can equally justify women’s sports.
“They don’t have as good a win / lose record as needed. ”
Maybe, but track is actually pretty easy to evaluate since you can go with finish times. And recruiting coaches understand the situation.
This is more about hurt feelings and egos.
Anecdote: I know of many high school girls who got a full ride scholarships to very expensive Universities because they play volleyball, Lacrosse, softball or some other sport no one cares about. But I don’t know of a single lad who got a full ride sports scholarship, My son played club soccer as a teen and the best offer he got was a measly $3000 a year. He got better scholarship offers for his grades.
I can see a lot of parents being upset with this because they were counting on their little girl getting a free ride in college and now they are facing $20-40K annual bills because a “chick with a dick” might get little Snotly’s scholarship.
“False. The same argument can apply to Venus/Serena Williams, Leila Ali, and Rhonda Roussey.”
Anon you continue to be wrong as you troll here. The market has clearly demonstrated who is more entertaining than whom.
The rules of these sports have been shaped by the entertainment value. It makes no difference what weight Mayweather fights at, b/c audiences appreciate his performance.
And they appreciate it far more than Roussey.
That’s the metric being discussed.
Audiences prefer Ohio State football over the Jaguars, even though the Jaguars could beat Ohio St.
To be honest, I do my best to keep my hard earned money from being sucked up by the sports entertainment complex. Meaning that I don’t attend sporting events, I don’t have cable TV and I never purchase anything on pay per view.
That said, if some unknown dude who is ranked 400th in Tennis were to declare himself a woman and win the Wimbledon lady’s crown, I would laugh my head off.
DrTorch,
The market has clearly demonstrated who is more entertaining than whom.
False. You are actually saying that a smaller boxer who stands no chance against heavyweight boxers nonetheless should have the same wealth, fame, and recognition. You are merely doing the same thing that promoters of womens’ sports do.
If being ‘entertaining’ ahead of being one of the top 200 boxers in the world is the sole criteria, that is why the WWE came into being.
Again, you are just biased towards preserving the status quo, however odd it is (as conservatives always do). I am certain that if there were no boxing divisions, but there was a 100M dash for short people, you would fight hard to insist that the fastest sprinter under 5’6″ deserves just as much fame and gold-medal recognition as the fastest sprinter in the wide-open event, even while you insist boxing/MMA/mat wrestling weight divisions make no sense.
Anon, don’t put words in my mouth. It’s you who is making the ridiculous and wrong claims.
You wrote, “False. You are actually saying that a smaller boxer who stands no chance against heavyweight boxers nonetheless should have the same wealth, fame, and recognition. You are merely doing the same thing that promoters of womens’ sports do.”
I make no assertion whether he should or should not attain those things. Rather I observe reality that some lighter weight boxers do. You are committing an is/ought fallacy and putting it on others, which makes you illogical AND dishonest.
If a woman entertainer makes more money (and some musicians do) then that’s reality. I may or may not like her talent which would influence me to say she “should” or “shouldn’t” earn it, but that’s a different discussion than the morality of whether she should or shouldn’t make it.
Generally speaking, women athletes don’t make as much as men. The market has spoken. In this instance it’s usually b/c they aren’t as competitive b/c people pay to see the most competitive performers. But that’s not always the case, such as premier college football or basketball teams.
Now you’ve been proven wrong with multiple examples and your dishonest verbiage identified.
@Anon
I box for fun. I am rejecting your framing and telling you that boxing has nothing to do with what you think it does. The rules of the game are what they are, and they don’t care a whit for your opinion on the matter.
Wraithburn,
Translation : You could not come up with a logical rebuttal, so just fling some subjective statements over.
DrTorch and Wraithburn,
You still have not provided any rationale about why a lightweight boxer, who would lose to at least 200 heavier boxers, deserves to be made wealthy/famous, but somehow there should not be a 100M sprint restricted to short men, the winner of which deserves to be just as famous as Floyd Mayweather, because he is, in fact, the same thing as Mayweather or Paquaio.
In terms of ‘popularity’, you both are making the common fallacy of not realizing which are legitimate sports (i.e. that test a very universal human skill), vs. what was created by marketing geniuses.
Legitimate sports that test a universal skill (i.e. millions of amateurs have competed in these) :
Sprinting
Long distance running
Jumping (high and long)
Freestyle swimming
Basic boxing or wrestling with no weight classes
Weightlifting
Examples of Marketing creations :
Butterfly/Breaststroke swimming
Artificial weight division in boxing/wrestling/MMA
Badminton
Professional snowboarding
There are sports that would have emerged no matter what, and sports that only exist because a marketing genius created them and enough dupes are willing to consume the farce unquestioningly. The marketing genius that created all non-heavyweight boxing tiers could have gotten you to vociferously defend short-man 100M dash sprinting and sub-180-lbs NFL football if he was hired to create that instead.
Lightweight boxing/MMA exists for the same reason women’s versions of the same exist. That does not mean it is ‘free market’. Many people (including you) will eagerly consume marketing concoctions that are served up to you.
Wraithburn,
I box for fun. I am rejecting your framing and telling you that boxing has nothing to do with what you think it does.
So? I sprint for fun. I guarantee that no sprinter, short or tall, thinks that the short guy should be given a two-second head start over the tallest guy, and that the short guy should still be praised if he wins despite this head start.
Yet, you seem to think that the exact same form of ‘affirmative action’ for weight is justified in Boxing.
So who pays for Mayweather then? All of the massive profits from the fight between the world’s 64th and 81st ranked heavyweights? Because everyone watched that, right? And then they shifted the money to the little guy Mayweather out of sympathy and tens of millions of people worldwide watched Mayweather fight because they are brainwashed conservatives or something? Your meltdown here is really troubling. You need to log off. And by the way, THERE IS NO 5’6″ and under 100 meter dash. You keep bringing that up as if your silly and fictitious scenario carries weight in the real world. What a flawed argument. There must be a term for what you’ve done there with such a logical error. And log off for awhile. Really. You’re in bad shape.
DrTorch
Maybe, but track is actually pretty easy to evaluate since you can go with finish times. And recruiting coaches understand the situation.
This is more about hurt feelings and egos.
Yes and no. If this high school continues to win meets with two boys pretending to be girls…how long before a Div I college signs up a tranny for the women’s track team? Once one does, the rest will have to follow to remain competitive.
I believe I see a supreme court decision on exactly what Title IX means by “woman” somewhere out in the future. And popcorn.
FWIW, all the people who pay to watch his fights, and do so in sufficient numbers to make the smaller boxer’s purse very lucrative, think it’s worth it. Contrast that with women’s professional soccer or basketball, where they can’t give the tickets away and they play in nearly empty venues, yet the women demand to be paid the same as men.
John James R,
And by the way, THERE IS NO 5’6″ and under 100 meter dash.
You are making my point, without realizing it.
If the marketing genius that created lightweight boxing had instead created a short-man 100M sprint, you would be defending that just as vociferously.
You, and the others, still can’t justify why a small boxer who would not be in the Top 200 if not for weight classifications (a creation of the aforementioned marketing genius) deserves the ‘affirmative action’ he gets, without making the same arguments that defenders of women’s sports make.
Prove that Mayweather and Pacquiao are any more ‘free market’ inevitabilities than Leila Ali and Rhonda Roussey. Nevermind that lightweight boxers only got famous in the age of cable TV, and the entire premise would rightly have been considered absurd in the days of Rocky Marciano.
Not to mention that Olympic teams will have to send trannies on the women’s teams to be competitive. A very possible eventual outcome will be men sweeping all the medals in female events, while the drones at ESPN continue to enthusiastically pretend that the trannies are women.
Honk, honk.
@Anon: I think I’ve read everything you’ve written in this thread, and I still don’t get your point. This is what throws me: You, and the others, still can’t justify why a small boxer … deserves the [whatever]
You keep using that term “deserve”. Why? Nobody is arguing that anyone “deserves” anything. They are arguing that, where money can be made, a product will be created to make that money (through sales).
Every businessman worth his paycheck works to segment his market so as to make the largest possible profit. That is one of the first “truths” taught at Business School. Pitch your product at different market tiers. If you lower your price enough in this tier, you will pick up folks who would never buy your product at the “normal” price. If you raise your price you will capture the customer who thinks something is valuable and worth having just because it is expensive. All while maintaining sales to the market that responds to the “normal” price.
There are a limited number of boxers who will choose to get the sh*t kicked out of them by the largest boxers. The pool of such “David’s” willing to go up against “Goliath” is relatively small. And so there will be fewer fights, and thus smaller profits.
Now let big fight big, medium fight medium, and small fight small. Lots of folks are willing to fight folks their own size. So there will be many more fights, and thus larger profits.
“Deserve” has nothing to do with this. Segmenting the market in order to maximize profits has every thing to do with it. And none of this has anything to do with why there are female sports – who apparently attract much smaller dollar volumes than do male sports.
I notice that Americans refer to – say – Baseball or Football players as athletes. In England we tend to reserve that designation for tests of skill or stamina which are not Sports, thus runners and jumpers are athletes but those who play soccer or cricket are not so designated. David Beckham is thus not an athlete but a ‘footballer’ and Ian Botham a ‘cricketer’. No generic name is used but merely a reference to the sport of the player. It is impossible to say who invented running or jumping but sports such as Soccer or Cricket were all invented by the British and British males at that (or their colonials). I cannot think of a single sport or indeed activity created by women and thus the notion that women should be the beneficiaries of Title IX is outrageous for had (say) Lacrosse been a women’s invention you know they would have demanded that no money at all should go to male Lacrosse players. The reason women never invented anything was of course because men were oppressing them but how does that square with the assertion that they are men’s equal and indeed if there is no difference between men and women why on earth should men seek to oppress a group no different from them. As Anon always says modern life has merely revealed what was previously kept hidden namely female inferiority but he puts it better than me.
@ Anon
Every sport has an arbitrary set of rules by which the competitors agree to abide. You can argue over what the rules “should” be, but ultimately, the rules are the rules.
For example, weightlifting and power lifting have weight classes. Strongman and Crossfit do not.
Weightlifting, power lifting, and Crossfit all have “masters” classes for older athletes, Strongman does not.
You can argue all you want over whether they “should” have weight classes, or masters classes, or what the weight classes, or masters classes “should” be, but ultimately, each sports league sets its own rules. If you disagree with the rules set by one league, you could do what many before you have done.
Start your own league with the rules you think it “should” have.
You’re certainly not going to solve any of the “problems” you perceive with boxing here.
The to me unexpected rise of the Tranny athlete seems to me to mimic something else quite common in Sport which no one ever questions. America being so large (that you do not need to go abroad to obtain sporting opponents) and full of immigrants and their descendants the phenomena may be less common. By way of example: you are a German soccer player and very good but not quite good enough to be considered for the German team. No problem:you discover that your Great Grandfather was a Luxemourger and so you are now eligible for the Luxembourg team. You are a South African runner (who does not use shoes) but because of Apartheid your country is barred from competing in the Olympics. No problem: your Great Grand mother was Welsh and so now you compete for team Great Britain. In the event you trip up an American athlete and lose anyway and now live in Florida. You are an Ethiopian who needs sponsorship. No problem: you also join team Great Britain even though you do not have a welsh Grandmother and have never yet set foot in Britain (HMG rush through citizenship papers). With your Gold medal you then settle in Florida.
When the English Football team is indistinguishable from the Nigerian I rather lose interest.
… as I do when the competitors in the women’s events are not really women at all.
So, a “marketing genius” created lightweight boxing? My bet is that is was just men who invented it thousands of years ago. Your anger towards smaller boxers has been hilarious to read though. Are you the world’s 417th ranked heavyweight or something? You need to find each and every one of the tens of millions of people who are entertained by Mayweather and tell them that they need to demand their money back, I guess. Weirdo.
Oscar,
For example, weightlifting and power lifting have weight classes. Strongman and Crossfit do not.
Weightlifting is a different matter, since the ratio between body weight and lifted weight matters. A 150 pound man lifting 300 pounds is more impressive than a 250 pound man lifting 350 pounds.
You’re certainly not going to solve any of the “problems” you perceive with boxing here.
Well, duh! The whole point is that there is a tremendous amount of blind, unquestioning acceptance of something that was created by marketing geniuses in some sports (but not others), no matter how illogical the creation is. It is patently absurd that a lightweight boxer should receive fame and wealth when there are literally over 200 (larger) professional boxers who could easily beat him. The same people scoff at the notion that there should be lightweight and heavyweight NFL divisions of equal prestige and status, or that there should be sub-6′ and above 6′ NBA divisions of equal status, where the best sub-6′ basketball player is glorified to the same extent of a LeBron James or Shaquille O’Neal.
Another commenter above correctly pointed out that Sumo Wrestling does not have weight classes, and the very suggestion would rightly be considered absurd. Imagine if there were a sub-250 lbs division that has its own Yokozuna, and he gets the glory of being a Yokozuna without ever having to face another Sumo Wrestler above 300lbs, even though dozens of that size exist.
It is amazing that marketing geniuses can brainwash a segment of the population into liking something, and this is assumed to be ‘free market’. It is defended solely due to status-quo bias, no matter how artificial or accidental the status quo in question may be.
RichardP,
Some of your points are actually good ones (unlike with many of the others).
Every businessman worth his paycheck works to segment his market so as to make the largest possible profit.
Of course. Hats off to the visionaries who hired the marketing genius to create additional artificial demand for variants of the primary product, with too many dupes unwilling to say that the Emperor has no clothes.
Now let big fight big, medium fight medium, and small fight small. Lots of folks are willing to fight folks their own size. So there will be many more fights, and thus larger profits.
Of course. The same marketing geniuses, if hired by other sports, would create the same silly situations there.
i) Two NFL divisions of equal status and prestige : sub-180lbs and over-180lbs.
ii) Two NBA divisions of equal status and prestige : sub-6′ and over-6″
iii) The aforementioned short sprinter division alongside the unrestricted height division.
…..and so on.
My point is, the dupes who say that market demands it in X sport but not Y sport are oblivious to their own brainwashed, status-quo-loving state.
For example, thinking people cannot possibly get excited about some Mayweather vs. Pacquiao bout, when no one disputes that there are 200+ larger professional boxers who could easily beat each of them.
Now, a handicap match would be interesting. Mayweather + Pacquaio as a tag team against Wladimir Kitschko or Tyson Fury. Now THAT would be an innovation.
What strategies would each side employ? The heavyweight cannot possibly win on points against two smaller boxers, but how will the small guys avoid KOs and TKOs?
@Anon
I’m telling you you don’t know what you are talking about. You’re trying to make a claim that is nonsensical in the boxing world.
Wraithburn,
It is ‘nonsensical’ to status-quo swallowers for the reasons I have already described more than once.
If a small guy worked on a giant-toppling tactic of beating larger boxers via speed and winning on points while avoiding a KO, that would be something worth watching on merit. But as there is nothing like this, lightweight boxing remains a creation of marketing geniuses who know that the rubes will consume whatever concoction they are fed, and then imagine it is ‘free market’.
What you are defending is just status-quo bias. Weight divisions exist in MMA and mat wrestling too, so your claim that boxing has some special unique magic to it does not hold water. I already gave you the sprinting analogy that refutes your premise.
Different weight classes clearly exist in many places, but that doesn’t mean they are really the best idea that is possible. Those arguing for them make the assumption that they are good because they exist. Those arguing against ignore the likely monetary value to promoters who benefit from them.
They may be stupid, they may not be. They exist and are unlikely to go away soon since it would limit the ability to generate more pay-per-view events. (Do those still happen/matter?)
This is completely different from almost all women’s sports, since those only get propped up in a false attempt to create fairness. Colleges have to give scholarships to female athletes to match the ones given for the more valuable men’s sports to stay clear of Title IX problems.
It definitely is falsely propping things up in that area.
Debating the other area is like debating net neutrality requirements. Both sides have flaws and good points. Let it be an go onto something else.
Frank K.
Not to mention that Olympic teams will have to send trannies on the women’s teams to be competitive.
That would be one way to further normalize tranny-dom to the rest of the world. The East Germans back in the 1980’s weren’t cheating, they were decades ahead of their time in “liberation”, yeah!
Clearly it’s time for some bearded man in a dress to sing a cover of Helen Reddy’s “I Am Woman” on one of those talent shows…
@Anon
No, it doesn’t. Your attempt simply shows you are talking out of your hat, don’t understand what boxing is, and don’t understand why removing weight divisions makes it stop being boxing.
That, or you’re just a gamma. Either way, I am no longer interested in your screed.
@ Anon
250 lb weightlifters lift a whole lot more than 350 lb. The world record for the clean and jerk in the 105 kg+ (231 lb+) weight class is 263 kg (580 lb).
Furthermore, weight classes favor shorter weightlifters. Because work = force * vertical displacement, a shorter weightlifter can lift the same amount of weight, while performing less work than a taller weightlifter. Furthermore, a shorter weight lifter will have more muscle on his frame than a taller weightlifter of equal weight. So, in weight lifting, weight classes are essentially height classes, and you’ll notice that the best weightlifters in each weight class are also roughly the same height. Who cares? Those are the rules. As long as everyone is competing by the same rules, that’s all that matters.
Furthermore, you failed to address the fact that Strongman has no weight classes, which then favors 400 lb+ behemoths well over 6′ tall. They’re both sports that test strength, so why “should” one have weight classes, and the other not have weight classes?
Why? Is it patently absurd that boxers have to use 10-12 oz gloves? If not, why not? Why “should” they not use lighter gloves? Or heavier gloves? Or no gloves at all?
Is it patently absurd that boxers can’t hit below the belt? If not, why not? Why “should” they not hit below the belt? Other fighting arts allow strikes to the legs, why “should” boxing not allow them?
Is it patently absurd that boxers can’t use elbow, knee, or foot strikes, or head butt? If not, why not? Other fighting arts allow such strikes, why “should” boxing not allow them?
Is it patently absurd that a boxer who gets knocked down gets until the count of ten to stand up? If not, why not? Why not 20? Why not 5? Why give him a count at all? Other fighting arts don’t, why “should” boxing give a downed opponent a count?
All those rules are arbitrary. But they are the rules. If fans don’t like the rules, they can leave the sport. I did.
If the fans want to watch a lightweight NFL division, with faster, more continuous play, what’s it to you? And if they don’t, what’s it to you? All the rules are arbitrary anyway. Some people like them, others don’t. So what?
I’d like the NFL to change the rules so that all players play both offense and defense, but the NFL disagrees with me. So what? I don’t make the rules.
I hated it when the IJF changed the rules of judo so that now, they’re not allowed to grab opponents’ legs. I think that ruined judo. So what? Nobody asked me. The IJF makes the rules, not I. So, now, I prefer jiu-jitsu.
Wrestling is a great sport. I admire wrestlers’ tenacity and athleticism, but I hate the rules. No chokes? No arm bars? No fighting from your back? Where’s the fun in that? But, guess what? Nobody asked me. The UWW makes the rules, not I. So, I prefer jiu-jitsu.
Hopefully the IBJJF won’t make rules I hate, but if they do, so what? I’m not in charge, so I don’t make the rules. The fans will stay, or they’ll leave, just as I stopped watching some sports and started watching others instead.
So, you don’t like the rules in boxing? Start your own boxing league with rules you do like. You’ll only be the thousandth person to start a new sport, because he didn’t like the rules of an old sport. I wish you all the luck and success in the world. And when people complain that they don’t like the rules of your no-weight-class boxing league, I’ll tell them the same thing.
Wraithburn,
don’t understand what boxing is,
I apparently know more about boxing than you do.
and don’t understand why removing weight divisions makes it stop being boxing.
Stop being boxing? Really? You actually said that?
Look, I realize you are a boxer in some middleweight or lightweight class, and don’t want your rice bowl taken away since the lower weight divisions, and thus your entire expertise, are purely a creation of marketing experts, who could just as easily make an NFL small-guy division or NBA short-guy division of equal status, prestige, and financial lucre.
That doesn’t make your very poorly articulated ‘defense’ of any value. I hope your boxing is vastly better than your verbal debate skills, for your sake (even though you never face heavyweights in the ring).
Oscar,
Furthermore, you failed to address the fact that Strongman has no weight classes, which then favors 400 lb+ behemoths well over 6′ tall.
Failed? er… I am the one arguing in FAVOR of their being no weight classes. Hence, strongman competitions (like Sumo wrestling) are more honest sports.
I am not sure you understand who is making what point.
A thinking man cannot possibly get excited about a Mayweather vs. Pacquiao fight, when it is widely known that over 200 other (larger) professional boxers could beat them.
I would rather see Foreman and Holmes come out of retirement for ‘one night only’ and have a bout with each other even at age 70. I am sure you will say that is absurd, but it is no less absurd than artificially created lightweight tiers, making stars out of people who would not be in the top 200 if not for weight tiers.
So, you don’t like the rules in boxing? Start your own boxing league with rules you do like.
Again with this. Why would I do that? I simply don’t watch the silly lightweight fights, which have barely more legitimate value than women’s boxing.
Rather my point (which you are not getting) is that suckers can be brainwashed to consume what the marketing geniuses feed them, and then insist that any status quo is sacrosanct, no matter how artificial or accidental. They think this is the ‘free market’.
No one’s been brainwashed by a combat sports marketing elite… you’re just an imbecile. You’ve said nothing original; I’ve watched and participated in combat sports my whole life and I’ve heard this same point made since I was 10 (albeit w/o as much stupid as was represented in your comments). Joe Rogan made the same point to a guest of his on a podcast I watched last week. Everyone already knows the heavyweights would win w/o weight classes. We watch smaller men fight because they’re still gifted/talented fighters who work hard to put on a pretty entertaining show. I can now watch bouts at all weight classes and learn/be entertained on more levels than just ‘two big guys wrestle eachother for a few minutes and immediately become tired before the 1st bell is even wrung’. Get a grip. You’re not a secret visionary educating the braindead masses- you’re just too stubborn to admit your point was stupid
@ Anon
Okay. First, you claimed that a 250 lb weightlifter would lift only 350 lb (which is ridiculous, considering that I’ve done that), and now you’re calling sumo wrestling a “strongman competition”.
Sumo wresting is not strongman. This is strongman.
They’re not even the same kind of sport. One is a strength sport, more similar to weightlifting, power lifting, and Crossfit. The other is a grappling combat sport, more similar to wrestling, judo, and sambo.
If you’re going to claim that those who disagree with you aren’t “thinking men”, you might want to know a little about the sports being discussed.
And yes, you failed to explain why weightlifting “should” have weight classes, and strongman “should” not. You claimed that…
If “weightlifting is a different matter”, then why isn’t strongman a “different matter”? Or, if strongman isn’t “a different matter”, then why is weightlifting “a different matter”?
First, it would be a lot more productive than whining about an arbitrary set of rules. Second, you might be the next Dana White, if you’re right.
By the way, I asked you a whole bunch of questions. None were rhetorical. Do you think you could answer a few?
Anon, you keep using the words “free market,” it would be interesting to hear what you think the free market is. Isn’t it people making up their own mind about what to purchase, not being forced to make the decision based on government intervention.
Looking at your argument, you seem to believe that people have chosen to have different weight classes for different sports because the government forced them to spend their own money to support those different weight classes. That is not the case with boxing, MMA, wrestling, etc… but it is the case for women’s sports after title IX. So it does not matter that some marketing genius sold us different weight classes for boxing and not for the NFL. If some marketing genius could sell an under 150 lb NFL and people paid to see it at the same rate as the regular NFL, that is the free market. People would make those players idols/heroes and pay them accordingly. Right now, there is no market for it, status quo or not.
The free market says men’s sports are valuable commodities and women’s are not. Tran’s sports will not be a valuable commodity either because people will continue to pay to watch people without mental disorders compete at higher levels.
If the fans want to watch a lightweight NFL division, with faster, more continuous play, what’s it to you? And if they don’t, what’s it to you? All the rules are arbitrary anyway. Some people like them, others don’t. So what?
In fact people already do — that’s Power 5 college football in a nutshell: smaller players, slightly different rules, massively popular. Nobody thinks Bama or Clemson can actually hang with even a low tier NFL team, but that doesn’t stop hundreds of millions of people from loving to watch the sport. Same for college basketball — an NBA team would wipe the court with the NCAA champion team. Yet millions of people tune in to watch the NCAA tournament every year, even though “these teams would be killed by any NBA team!”, and so on.
Regarding women vs. men.
The U.S. Women’s National Soccer Team played a team of young boys. Not professional. Not college. Not even full VARSITY High Schoolers. BOYS UNDER 15. These barely-teen boys beat the women 5-2. The unspoken excuse — this was a “friendly,” implying the girls weren’t really trying.
https://www.cbssports.com/soccer/news/a-dallas-fc-under-15-boys-squad-beat-the-u-s-womens-national-team-in-a-scrimmage/
But we all know the truth. Moderately athletic, barely-pubescent boys are physically superior to the most elite women athletes.
And no amount of screaming, money, legislation, court rulings, or virtue signaling will ever change that.
Novaseeker,
Same for college basketball — an NBA team would wipe the court with the NCAA champion team.
College football/basketball, etc. is a feeder system for pro sports, and features much younger players (students) than the Pros, so that is not a suitable comparison.
Oscar,
First, you claimed that a 250 lb weightlifter would lift only 350 lb
False. That was an *example*, and no where did I claim that that was the max that such a lifter could do. You missed the point by a mile on that one. I made the mistake of offering an example of one of the only sports where weight divisions actually make sense due to ratios.
Again, you completely missed the point there.
Sumo wresting is not strongman. This is strongman.
No one said it is. Again, you haven’t understood the simple text written. Those were simply two examples of sports where there is no weight division, nor should there be.
If this is the caliber of your reading comprehension, we are not going to get very far here.
And yes, you failed to explain why weightlifting “should” have weight classes,
Nope. I explained it clearly, twice. In fact, I just said that weightlifting has a stronger case for weight classes due to ratio. I didn’t say the rationale was rock solid, and I did not use the word ‘should’.
By the way, I asked you a whole bunch of questions. None were rhetorical. Do you think you could answer a few?
I answered them all. You didn’t understand the answer (as per the pattern of non-reading comprehension I have pointed out). Plus, if you ask the same question in six different forms, there is one answer, not six. That is why I can answer all of your questions without a 1:1 match of the number of my answers vs. the number of your (redundant) questions.
LiveStreaming Now:
Rollo and Conk on Christian Culture vs The Bible
Returning to the OP:
https://www.espn.com/high-school/story/_/id/27015115/complaint-targets-transgender-hs-track-athletes
It is in fact all about Title IX.
Anon —
To be very frank, your doctrinaire libertarianism is wearing thin for this setting.
Novaseeker,
To be very frank, your doctrinaire libertarianism is wearing thin for this setting.
er… I haven’t used the word ‘libertarian’ more than twice in the last 12 months.
But there is nothing ‘doctrinaire’ about recognizing that the reason feminism as encoded into law is so crushing is because of the massive size and scope of government. Hence, the reverse is necessarily the path to less ubiquity of feminism. It is impossible to combine big govt + democracy without the whole thing being overwhelmingly feminist.
I don’t think anyone here disputes that both Democrats and Republicans are a) big government parties, and b) dominated by feminist assumptions.
@ Anon
No, you made the mistake of using the “example” of a 250 lb weightlifter lifting a mere 350 lb. Here’s an exact quote of the nonsense you wrote.
No one who knows anything about weightlifting would ever use such a ridiculous “example”, because no such “example” exists in real life. There are no 250 lb men lifting 350 lb at weightlifting competitions, because that’s barely a warm up weight for a 250 lb male weightlifter. Had you known anything about weightlifting, you’d have known that. But you didn’t know that, which is why you wrote the nonsense you wrote, which proves you know nothing about weightlifting.
Again, here’s an exact quote of the nonsense you wrote.
Words have meaning. Strongman is a specific sport. Sumo is a specific sport. Sumo is not – as you wrote – a “strongman competition”. They’re two different things. Again, if you knew anything about the sports we’re discussing, you’d have known that. But you didn’t know that, which is why you wrote the nonsense you wrote, which proves you don’t know what you’re talking about.
Since you don’t even know the most basic, easily verifiable facts about these sports, your opinions about these sports are worthless.
Oscar,
Good Lord, you are exhibiting some horrendously poor reading comprehension.
Any English speaker would easily understand that my sentence meant that both Strongman and Sumo wrestling are sports that rightfully do not have weight classes. Your interpretation of my sentence that sumo wrestling is a form of strongman is absurd. No one else thinks my sentence meant that.
Using the same sentence structure, one could take a different example, and write :
“Ball-based team sports have the largest television audiences. Soccer (like baseball) is a ball-based team sport.”
Everyone else would interpret that as soccer and baseball are examples of ball-based sports. You, and only you, would interpret that as someone saying that baseball is a subset of soccer.
The same goes for the example of weight-lifting ratios, which in no way was suggested to be the world record. A similar, comparable sentence for a different sport would be.
“It is more impressive for a woman to run the 100M in 11 seconds than for a man to run it in 11 seconds”.
An English speaker would correctly understand this to mean that 11 seconds is a higher percentile of womens’ speed than mens’. By contrast, you would interpret this as ‘How can the same speed mean one is faster??? You know nothing about this sport!!!!!’.
Words have meaning.
Funny you should say that, as it makes your reading comprehension issue look even worse.
Anyway, your tangents are based entirely on reading miscomprehension, and hence are worthless. Bringing it back to the main topic of this discussion, you have done exactly zero to make the case that lightweight/middleweight boxing warrants the same stardom as heavyweight boxing, when the lightweight would not be in the Top 200 without weight classes. This is further proven by how Sumo Wrestling and Strongman competitions rightfully have no such weight classes. The large audiences for lightweight boxing/MMA/mat wrestling could be similarly persuaded to like a small-man NFL division or short-man NBA division if the same marketing geniuses told them to like it.
Period.
On this topic, Boog_City and RichardP made decent points that were somewhat persuasive. Oscar’s ‘arguments’ were the worst of all (even worse than Wraithburn’s) as he could not even manage the necessary reading comprehension.
Oh poor Anon. Still way out over your skis on this. Much like a 115 pound boxer forced to fight a 270 pound heavyweight, you’ve taken a real beating here. It would have been more entertaining to watch you debate someone closer to your IQ. Maybe a ‘marketing genius’ will set up internet debates between people in the same IQ classes.
John James R,
Your projection is total, and seethes of sulking butthurt. I held my own in an eight vs. one debate. You were reduced to making personal attacks in short order, because you could not make any worthwhile points to defend your emotionally-derived position.
It is time you admit that you will happily consume any garbage that some marketing expert tells you to.
All hail the secret king!
Franck K: I remember that anecdote of yours with your aghast colleague.
Anyway, I hope USWNT loses this world cup vs Nederlands or Germany, or they’ll not stop yapping about equal pay.
PS, Franck K: The goal cup is better. The African Nation’s Cup is better. The Copa America is better. And, the U21’s World cup, all actually on air, are better than the women’s world cup.
It was so funny, he was soooo indignant, you’d think I had told him I was going to have my way with his young daughter. He isn’t a colleague anymore, as he was laid off. You might also remember that we had a resident tranny in the office. He too was laid off.
And I agree that all of the regional FIFA men’s tournaments are far better than the women’s world cup. Heck, not only is the US’s Major League Soccer heads above and shoulders above the women, NCAA Division 3 men’s soccer is higher level.
What kind of hell hole were you working in, Frank? I mean, never wanted to snap someone’s neck?
I know I’m very intolerant to BS, so, it can be problematic…
I tried to have some distraction, and started to watch the manly show 9-1-1, about firemen, strong men, and emergency calls. Or so I thought!
Strong women, weak men, propaganda…
Watch 5 episodes of you can. I folded at 5.
Earlier that month, I had seen the trailer for a TV show that could have been my thing. Could have. Never will be.
Nick MGTOW
I tried to have some distraction,
Kill your TV.
In a multinational tech corp. I’ve worked at a few, and believe it or not, this is one of the better ones, as corporate doesn’t shove the crap down our throats. At other employers I endured stuff like my whole department being forced to attend a day long leftist propaganda session, complete with a lesbian enlightening us.
Cut the cable about ten years ago. I can’t say that I miss it. I have an HD antenna which I use only for occasionally watching sportsball, which is becoming harder and harder to stomach. The advertising can make one’s stomach churn.
@ Anon
There’s no shame in admitting you know nothing about weightlifting or strongman. Neither sport is particularly popular in the USA, and no one expects you to know everything about everything. It’s a lot better than making silly comments like…
…. and then trying to defend such silliness with increasingly desperate logical contortions.
@ John James R.
It’s not about IQ. No reasonable person expects anyone to know everything about everything, no matter how intelligent they are. Thus, a reasonable response to being informed of facts one didn’t previously know is something like… “Huh… I didn’t know that. Thanks.”
That’s the problem.
@ Il Deplorevolissimo
That’s hilarious.
Anon, you’re an idiot. People are going to watch whichever boxers they find entertaining. Period..
Oscar,
If you are going to double down on your misinterpretation/reading miscomprehension (which no one else seems to have made), you are not going to get anywhere.
Note that upthread, I even used the term ‘Yokozuna’ in the discussion of Sumo wrestling earlier than the comment you are disingenuously latching onto. That means that obviously know enough about Sumo wrestling, and probably more than you :
“Imagine if there were a sub-250 lbs division that has its own Yokozuna, and he gets the glory of being a Yokozuna without ever having to face another Sumo Wrestler above 300lbs, even though dozens of that size exist.”
rocko,
Read the points I made upthread which describe why this alone means nothing. People also watch WWE by the millions, often in preference over real MMA. Your oversimplified statement accounts for none of the nuances.
The entire “transgender” thing is the biggest Big Brother order ever. It is a test into our “Overton Window”, to test and see how far they can push sanity and common sense before people rebel. Judge Roy Moore in ‘Bama was a test case as to whether false sexual accusations from 30+ years can work and defeat a Christian politician in a deep-red State or not and it worked. They realized it worked and the left went ahead with a barrage of false accusations nationally, from Trump to Bret Kavanaugh to numerous others across the country. They created an entire hysteric movement based on that fraud. It is still on-going, some ugly lunatic is now accusing trump from 22 years ago of an alleged attack that happened “sometime between Fall 1996-spring 1997”. *roll eyes* Oh and that lunatic accused numerous other men as well, of course, decades ago, with zero evidence.
The same is being done with “transgender rights”. How far can they push it? They are pushing 2 + 2 = 5 in an Orwellian fashion. The goal is to see how far they can go, to then push further and further. The absurdity of someone simply declaring whatever gender/rage/orientation they want at any time for any reason and they have access to numerous benefits from using women’s bathrooms to gaining scholarships from women’s sports to supposed “rights” that trump everyone else’s rights. It is as if “transgender rights” exist in a vacuum and takes pretend over everyone else’s rights, especially trumping rights of Conservatives and Christians, of course.
The only good news here is that “transgender” dudes are now taking women’s lunch money in all sports, sizing their scholarships and ruining their sports. The original point of Title IX was to fund and force female sports on all colleges. If dudes can now declare themselves women at anytime and obliterate women’s sports and the dudes are breaking Guinness World records in female sports. LOL 🙂
The dudes are now turning the tables on feminists and female privilege and are are getting benefits women have enjoyed, unchallenged for decades. Taking away a woman’s privilege is one thing women will not tolerate.
Take heart, friends. This may be a turning point in this “transgender rights” war in our favor.
And hysterical it is, but that doesn’t mean is isn’t effective. Witness the success of the Hulu show The Handmaid’s Tale. It doesn’t matter that there has never been a time like that in Christendom (though Islam is like that), viewers are eating it up, and it fans the flames of anti-Christian hatred. It works so well that many people actually believe that’s how society will turn out unless Christianity is eliminated.
One of them, trans or feminists, is going to win that culture war. Either way, everyone else loses. Most likely the trans are going to win. Witness how feminist mothers happily take their small children to “Drag Queen Story Time” at the local library. Feminists will have to be content with the Silver medal. They’ll lose some of their Title iX privileges, but the state will still have their backs in family courts.
“Drag queen story hour” is definitely a national wedge issue.
https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2019/jun/15/spokane-public-library-hosts-drag-queens-to-read-t/
Frank, Handmaiden’s Tale is yet another preposterous concept… a time when Christianity is receding and becoming smaller and smaller in Western Europe and even America, it is a time when fear that a Christian-theocracy would come to power is even more absurd than ever. But you are undoubtedly right, it is about fanning the flames of anti-Christianity. I never watched the show, but watching protestors dressed up like the show tells you the whole story.
Family courts only have power over you, as a man, if you give them the power. Do not get marry and do not impregnate a woman and they have no power over you. It is that simple.
I think the feminists and regular female athelets are going to win over the transgender crowd on the Totle IX sports issue. Why? Because women’s self-preservationist mindset is too hard wired into their brains. It overrides everything else, what they believe in, etc.
Women (and feminists) KNOW women are about to lose bigly in Title IX scholarship money in all sports, no exception. Women are not gonna get “silver” and be OK with it. They are being disqualified from their sports whenever dudes call themselves “transgender” over the weekend and enter their competitions.
Women are not that dumb. They know men can now claim to be “transgender” at any time and get small business loans designed for women, special contracts, preferential college admissions and special dorms, entrance into their bathrooms, female-scholarships, and other financial and legal protection perks, women will lose privilege.
As Dal explains, feminism requires chivalry and men who will support them and give them all sorts of un-earned benefits. The second men start competing with them for real and begging gaming the system to get female-only benefits, “equality for women” calls ad a national panic ensues.
If there is one thing that women calling for “equality” cannot stand is losing their privileges. Lol
RPC
Frank, Handmaiden’s Tale is yet another preposterous concept…
Recall that the book was written when Reagan was in office.
https://infogalactic.com/info/The_Handmaid%27s_Tale
It’s just girls telling ghost stories to each other. The more power feminists gain, the more anxious they get that somehow, some way, some of that power might fade away.
As for Hulu, it’s just making money. No one ever went broke by underestimating the tastes of people.
Women are not that dumb. They know men can now claim to be “transgender” at any time and get small business loans designed for women, special contracts, preferential college admissions and special dorms, entrance into their bathrooms, female-scholarships, and other financial and legal protection perks, women will lose privilege.
Yes, they are that dumb. Test the proposition: ask 10 women you know about the long term effects of tranny rights, I predict that none of them will come up with your list, because they don’t take the long view and most cannot grasp cause and effect.
It will be interesting to see who wins the feminist/trans culture war. The trans have the support of the globo homo velvet mafia, so it’s not like no one has their back. Some feminists have started to push back, and to their shock and dismay they’re getting shouted down. But as I said before, no matter who wins this culture war, we lose.
Next stop, we have pedos shoved down our throats, and we will be lectured that even small children are “sexual beings” and have “needs”.
Certainly true in the present, but what if a bachelor’s tax is created, to help fund all those food stamps, WIC, medicaid bennies and section 8 vouchers? There is such a demand for section 8 that in some locales the waiting list is years long, because of a lack of funding. Still, it will probably be a better deal to pay a bachelor tax than to pay child support and alimony on imputed income you don’t have.
@ Anon
Reading incomprehension, and doubling down, meet projection.
Here’s what I wrote, which is still true.
@ Red Pill Christianity
Anonymous Reader is right. Women really are that dumb. They really don’t comprehend cause and effect. See, for example, the following case from 2012-2013.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/11-year-girl-allowed-play-football-archbishop-philadelphia/story?id=18732119
Families sued schools to force girls to play on boys’ teams in Utah….
https://archive.sltrib.com/article.php?id=5438621&itype=CMSID
… and New Jersey.
https://www.nj.com/union/2017/02/girl_who_sued_to_be_on_boys_team_thrown_out_of_sch.html
The same women who are whining now that men are competing in women’s sports cheered these girls when they won the “right” to play on boys’ teams.
I bet you couldn’t have found one woman in 100 that would’ve predicted that suing to let girls play on boys’ teams would eventually lead to men competing in women’s sports. In fact, I bet you can’t find 1 woman in 10 today that can see the link between the two.
If you doubt me, try it. Then come back and report your results.
It will be interesting to see who wins the feminist/trans culture war.
Trans have already won. There is no way that the progressive left will “turn back the clock” on trans issues. Women are clearly being told that they need to accommodate trans, that’s it.
The real “friction” point comes when trans make demands to be seen as romantic partners by non trans women and men. That conflicts with the prime directive of contemporary progressive thought, which is the absolute untouchable primacy of sexual self-determination and choice. This is why, for example, while attitudes that are vocally against interracial dating have been banned as hate speech, actually forcing people to date interracially and shaming people who do not choose to do so has not happened, and is not likely to happen. There’s a lot of not-subtle suggestion going on in advertisements (a majority of whom present interracial couples, even though interracial couples are a tiny percentage of the population of couples), pornography and so on. But there isn’t a lot of in-real-life shaming of people who don’t date interracially (i.e., most people), as long as those people don’t *discourage* others from doing so. We all know that most people are very, very racist when it comes to picking sex and relationship partners — it’s just tolerated, because that racial preference (which is another way of saying racism backwards) falls before the higher progressive directive of the absolutely sacrosanct nature of unfettered individual sexual choice. I suspect we will end up with the same modus vivendi when it comes to trans dating — that is, a bit of nudging here and there in ads and porn and movies and so on, but not in real life shaming of people who do not actually do it, as everyone can see with their eyes.
@ Red Pill Christianity
Here’s another article, straight from the horse’s mouth, that demonstrates women’s inability to connect cause and effect.
https://everydayfeminism.com/2014/07/myths-women-non-traditional-employment/
Here are a few choice quotes.
Frank,
You also have to not live with her and possibly not even have too much sex with her. The courts can be very aggressive.
You may avoid child support, but not alimony. And sexual “protection” does fail (accidentally and on purpose).
Yup. And that’s why I support it to some degree. People almost always have to learn the hard way. And with how entitled and narcissistic these bitches are they deserve it.
They’re so insanely entitled and narcissistic they just think the entire world is going to bend to their will. Cunts are gonna cunt.
Keep telling yourself that silly little girl. And when you get in a physical confrontation with a bad boy he;’s going to give you the beat down of your life. Then you can come back and tell us how much of a social construct your ass beating was.
That’s how I see it, hence my earlier remark about feminists now having to settle for the silver medal.
My understanding of proposed bachelor taxes is that they are intended to to milk men who avoid women altogether, to fund said women’s lifestyles. I’m sure that courts will soon be awarding cash and prizes to live in girlfriends (I think they already do that in Australia).
<<<>>>
I thought that was well underway here already. ‘Common Law’ marriage, isn’t it? And the length of relationship time required for a woman to claim some form of alimony/support will get shorter and shorter. Proof required to show that a live-in relationship occurred will skew very strongly towards “Believe all women,” i.o.w no proof required. We’re nowhere near rock bottom. What a time it will be when the recipients of entitlements will also hold a huge voting majority.
My parentheses were meant to hold this quote;
“I’m sure that courts will soon be awarding cash and prizes to live in girlfriends (I think they already do that in Australia).”
Common Law Marriage has gone the way of the horse and buggy in the US. Only Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, and the District of Columbia still have it. And in most of those states, living together isn’t enough, you need to have joint finances (like say shared bank accounts) or joint ownership of property.
Anyway, my understanding is that in Australia they have what is called a “de facto relationship” where presenting as a married couple is not required. In fact, you can already be married and if you move in with another woman, you will have a de facto relationship with her. And you can have more than one de facto relationship. And from what I have been told, if you break up with her, she gets cash and prizes. I have also heard that it takes only a few months of cohabitation to establish a de facto relationship.
Bachelor taxes were supposed to force men to be responsible and get married after a certain age. Of course, they also coexisted/would have coexisted with a much more pro-husband family court system that didn’t treat families as investment products to be liquidated after a vesting period.
Implemented properly, a gender neutral singles tax that takes effect at 30 as a progressive income tax is a good thing. The state has an obligation to ensure the continuity of the nation. Anyone who refuses to have their own children or adopt so as to raise a new generation to replace them should be treated like a parasite on the future by the state.
They will eventually get overturned, but not gradually and only when the system completely collapses. Things like that have happened before in history and will happen again. The modern lunacy is not sustainable so it will eventually break down.
There is no come back in common law marriage in america. This affects womens favorite sexual relationships “long term monogamy”. If it came back tomorrow it would crash the sexual market. Right around 1.5 years in things are gonna get real tense shes gonna make ultimatums. Most men would walk because it would put womens intentions on a laughably crystal clear timeline. They don’t want it.
However it does not matter our domestic voilence laws are shaped in a manner that girlfriends use them more for abuse than to save themselves from abuse. Emergency protection orders are the worst. The police show at your house and give you one you grab clothes if your lucky takes two weeks for you to get it cleared in that time your girlfirend and her new fling clear out your non tracable valuables. If you try to stop them you will b arested and treated like a repeat domestic abuser. You have no proof of any of this because you do not keep inventory like a store.
This happens every day in almost every state. Nothing will happen to this damsel the judge will not reply to your pleas. She can ransack your place your attorney knows better than to even try to get your assets back. Its a system it is doing what it is designed to do and completing a plan. It cannot b stopped. Everyone involved knows about it and the joke is on you.
Weight classes are a part of pugilistic activities for the safety of the contestants. Yes a larger man has an inherent advantage over a smaller man, especially in boxing. UFC did not originally have weight classes, and was required to by the government, or else it would have been shut down.
As for why a middle weight can get paid as much as a heavy weight, it’s because they put asses in seats and in front of screens. Check out “The War” between Hagler and Hearns. Very good and exciting boxing. The boxers negotiate the best contract they can.
Locust, that is why you never allow a woman to move into your house, common law marriage State or not. Residency is generally established by the Courts, and it is often based on 3 basic principles they look at to determine residency:
1. Claim of primary residency and lack of alternate residency by claimant (woman); 2. Receiving Post Office mail at address; 3. Official address change, through utility bills and updating primary ID (driver’s license and car insurance, for instance).
If you are rental unit, do not ever put woman on the lease. If it comes to it, go to apt complex, explain GF is claiming residency there and she is not on lease, and apt complex may move to court to evict her. Or they will demand woman gets on the lease, which means she is now liable for the rent and damage to unit. You can bail out and if you can afford the hit on your credit report, leave and let her deal with rent payments and eviction. Go underground for a short while. If she likes good credit, she will have to pay up or convince apt complex to terminate the lease early. And yes, apt complexes will go to court to evict an adult living in a unit that is not listed in the Lease.
As for your belongings, yes, tough luck on that, and you will lose some stuff. One strategy is the moment you see problems arise with woman you stupidly allowed to move in with you, start moving stuff that matters to you into storage. Leave for work, give her a big kiss and promise her dinner, the moment she leaves after, go into apt with a small truck you got parked out there and load up the important stuff and bail. If situation with her is critical, move all your stuff out. If she destroy your property, file police report and file insurance claim if you have renter’s or homeowners’ insurance.
Unless you have surveillance cameras inside unit, if she calls cops, even if she does not live there and cannot prove residency, cops will force you out of your own home, regardless of her residency situation at your place, even if you are not arrested for it. If you resist, trust me, you are gonna get tapered, pepper sprayed, billy clubbed, etc and will get a felony charge along with it. Resistance is futile in these instances.
My rule of thumb: if I know a woman is coming to my home, I set-up and turn on all surveillance cameras across the house. It takes me literally 3 minutes using Arlo cameras, they have stands and hidden mounts ready to go when I need them. I can show you guys how to do it with screenshots of my own set-up, it works beautifully.
I personally know a man here whose GF of 3 years went into meltdown mode when he broke off their engagement (one of these pressure engagement things) and she called cops on him and he sat with cops there in living room playing video of the entire day (date stamped and all) when she claimed he hit her and all that and she was standing there shaking that they were seeing the video evidence, unaware there were cameras. Finally officer said “ma’am, would you like to withdrawal your police complaint or do you want us to arrest you and let the court decide?” And she dropped the BS and they walked her out of his apt downstairs and they told her not to go back or she would be arrested. Saved by the bell.
This is why I loved the quote “the juice is not worth the squeeze”. This guy is a case in point.
Roosh said this to me in a forum once and has become a rule in my life: “do not trust any woman, anywhere”. Best advice I have ever heard.
That level of thirst is real, for sure, but it’s not the norm. Not yet…
Naw, homey. Nowadays, paypiggies payin’ to watch fully-clothed hoes lose video games.
Evidence: Twitch.
So many simping cashmoney paypiggies, Amazon acquired Twitch for nearly a billion in 2014.
The thirst is staggering.
THOTs be livestreaming the eschaton.
“Yay, horsies! [poop emoji] Plz super-beastmark! [prayer-hands emoji] [heart emoji] [sickle emoji]”
Who can blame them?