Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

AIBU - Transgender 'athletes'

440 replies

HappyHippo1234 · 06/04/2023 00:38

To start off - I have no issue with trans people at all. The only issue I have is transgender females (male to female) competing in women sports.

Yes, they may have been taking hormones and they have lost some muscle and gained some fat. But, they have stronger bones and bigger spines, hands, feet, lungs and hearts. Basically trans females have an advantage over biological females.

What I absolutely HATE about the situation, it the trans athletes attitude, it honestly disgusts me. Did they never take biology as teenagers or learn about puberty?
For them to sit there with their wins and say that they have no advantage just p*sses me off. Are they stupid or ignorant? There's no way they don't know they have an advantage. Do they not realise they are taking wins away from girls and woman who have spent their whole lives training for a sport only for it to be taken away from someone who was a mediocre male.

Look at Lia Thomas, she was somewhere in the 400-500th best college male swimmer or something like that. She is now trans and BAM she is number 1 and winning everything.

It just annoys me to no end. Especially the trans woman who you can tell that they KNOW they have a major advantage and are cheating the system and then sit there with a SMUG GRIN on their faces. I mean every Caitlyn Jenner said it's wrong.

Sorry for the rant. My DD15 has been upset all week as on the weekend another girl beat all the girls by a huge stretch in her cross country meet (her team is usually 1st but were bumped to 2nd). At first everyone thought this girl was great, until one mom heard the group the girl was with discussing the results and how it was great for the team that this girl came out as trans and was boosting their results etc! Fair to say that news travelled quickly and there were MANY parents complaining to officials. But surprise surprise nothing was done about it. So at the award giving ceremony everyone waited as everything up to 1st place was given out and as soon as they got to the 1st team, I would say 95% of people walked away. It felt harsh but necessary!
(Also the girl was 16 and had only recently transitioned from what we could gather and when you actually looked at her you could tell she had gone through at least some portion of male puberty). Again nothing against the girl just don't think she could compete.

And to get around all these discrimination lawsuits, I think they should change the categories! Have an XX category and an XY category, that why there is no debate and no 'discrimination' as you can't identify as XY if you are XX! (And then also have an open category where trans, non-binary etc. can compete).

SORRY THAT WAS SO LONG. NOW FOR THE VOTE:

YABU - Trans (XX) women are woman and should be allowed to compete with XY women, even though they scientifically have an advantage.

YANBU - They will always have an advantage and so should not compete with XY women.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
21
Helleofabore · 06/04/2023 12:18

SquidwardBound · 06/04/2023 11:40

So you think that people don’t get to comment on the - often highly political, and with real implications in terms of the exclusion of women and girls - policies of governing bodies?

Do you realise how ‘now calm down ladies. Just accept that all these male-dominated bodies just know better than you. Stop getting yourselves so upset. It’s unladylike!’ you sound?

I know! Right?

Male athletes taking female athletes opportunities is NOT a women's rights issue? Are we clear?

Male people taking roles designated for female people due to equal representation or the fact that female people need another female in that intimate service is NOT a a women's rights issue? Are we clear?

Male people entering spaces set up specifically to protect female people from all male people, regardless of that male person's gender, NOT a women's rights issue? Do we understand yet?

It is just not strategic wims!! It was never a rights issue according to Mark, we got it horribly wrong!

itsgettingweird · 06/04/2023 12:21

Please explain how teeing off alongside a man will worsen my handicap?

I have no idea about golf but handicaps we're to make non elite golfers compete equally?

Please explain how any female boxer being punched in the face by a 6 foot 100kg woman is safe, but if it's by a 5 foot 70kg man it's unsafe?

A 100kg man wouldn't fight against a 70kg man. They have different weight categories for safety. This is same sex as well as opposite.

Please explain why equal representation by sex on the podium is more important than equal representation by any other criterion?

In sports that rely on strength, speed and athletic endurance the sex criterion is based on biology and hormonal puberty. In a straight out race this is the fairest way to do it. Hence why the worlds sports bodies do it this way.

Please explain why greater chances of competitive success is more important than greater participation and greater inclusion?

In elite sport of you compete to win to compete to win fairly. And inclusion does exist. You compete as a woman or open category now for most sports. It includes everyone as the open category is for anyone that isn't a biological female and doesn't want to compete as a biological female.

Please explain why we changed from claiming women were equal to men to now expounding all the reasons why women are weaker?

Equality and fairness are not one of the same.
Quality in pay for doing the same job at the same output level is equality.
Men competing against females where they have a biological advantage isn't equality for woman.

And as a follow on - outside the side-show that is community and college sports - please explain why this battle is the hill to die on, when all that it does is reinforce male prejudices about women's capabilities - prejudices that do so much more harm in other socio-economic areas where it affects the lives of millions. Gender pay gap? Well ... clearly it's justified because women are weaker and tire more quickly and have periods and babies, right?

No it doesn't. It reiterates that woman can be elite sports people and just reinforces what science already tells us about female and male puberty.

And no one is dying on this hill.

The worlds sports bodies have made decisions and we are just agreeing with them.

If you don't agree with the sports bodies then feel free to campaign to them

ReneBumsWombats · 06/04/2023 12:23

Mark19735 · 06/04/2023 12:14

Please explain how teeing off alongside a man will worsen my handicap?
Please explain how any female boxer being punched in the face by a 6 foot 100kg woman is safe, but if it's by a 5 foot 70kg man it's unsafe?
Please explain why equal representation by sex on the podium is more important than equal representation by any other criterion?
Please explain why greater chances of competitive success is more important than greater participation and greater inclusion?
Please explain why we changed from claiming women were equal to men to now expounding all the reasons why women are weaker? And as a follow on - outside the side-show that is community and college sports - please explain why this battle is the hill to die on, when all that it does is reinforce male prejudices about women's capabilities - prejudices that do so much more harm in other socio-economic areas where it affects the lives of millions. Gender pay gap? Well ... clearly it's justified because women are weaker and tire more quickly and have periods and babies, right?

tl;dr:

"But sports carries risk for men too!"

"But I don't understand the concept of competition and finding exceptionalism! You should be inclusive!"

And then the crowning turd, which really tells you all you need to know:

"But you said women were EQUAL! And women's issues aren't important anyway!"

It is honestly all this guy has got. Do you know, I'm actually laughing. Quite apart from everything else, it's just so dated!

SquidwardBound · 06/04/2023 12:27

Please explain how teeing off alongside a man will worsen my handicap?

You are completely disingenuous in all your engagement with points.

The handicap system is ONE way that golf tries to enable fair competition.

The provision of different tees is ANOTHER way.

When combined, they let mixed sex groups of golfers of varying skill and experience to play together and compete in more meaningful ways.

You DO realise this. You’re just playing dumb thinking that it makes all us uppity women look silly.

RACHIEWOO100 · 06/04/2023 12:28

I have no issue if the transgender woman has not been through male puberty, there is little to no advantage over female athletes in that scenario.
There is a reason transgender men (f2m) do not compete often in male sports. They cannot compete.
When you look at the transwomens (m2f) records in their field before transition they were waaaay down the rankings. Ranked over 200th in the world in the cases I've looked at (which is an achievement in itself for a male athlete) but for them to then go to winning gold medals in women's sports proves irrevocably that they have an enormous advantage participating against women.

SquidwardBound · 06/04/2023 12:28

Also… let’s not pretend you are aren’t a man @Mark19735.

PSNonsense · 06/04/2023 12:31

MarshaBradyo · 06/04/2023 11:30

Treating them as women's rights issues is, in my view, a strategic mistake

This is madness. Of course determining who gets to compete in female sports is a women’s rights issue.

Are you male? I’m guessing so. Your posts feel typically male centred and with no thought to women and girls.

Unfortunately the amount of women ready to throw other women under the bus in the name of 'inclusion' and wanting to be part of the Be Kind brigade is depressingly high.

Usually young uni students who think they know everything about life and little about how much oppression women have fought and continue to fight. Also those who come from a place of privilege who (hopefully) will never be in a prison or a rape crisis centre with a penised male.

Obviously not all young uni students but hey, I generalise.

ReneBumsWombats · 06/04/2023 12:31

SquidwardBound · 06/04/2023 12:28

Also… let’s not pretend you are aren’t a man @Mark19735.

Oh, to be fair, he's not hiding that. I mean, good luck if he tried, but that's the only thing he's not being risibly disingenuous about.

Shit, we actually got "but you wanted equality"! In 2023! In a discussion about why we don't pit men and women against each other in sports!

Even the Twitter loons and halfwits don't try that one any more because it's such an automatic own goal.

I feel almost nostalgic!

Butitsnotfunnyisititsserious · 06/04/2023 12:34

Please explain why we changed from claiming women were equal to men to now expounding all the reasons why women are weaker?

On a whole, men are naturally stronger than women. They have larger hearts and lungs, and typically a higher muscle mass.

Otterseatpuffinsdontthey · 06/04/2023 12:39

Fat fingers - hit wrong vote. Should be YANBU. Is there a way I can reverse this?

SquidwardBound · 06/04/2023 12:44

ReneBumsWombats · 06/04/2023 12:31

Oh, to be fair, he's not hiding that. I mean, good luck if he tried, but that's the only thing he's not being risibly disingenuous about.

Shit, we actually got "but you wanted equality"! In 2023! In a discussion about why we don't pit men and women against each other in sports!

Even the Twitter loons and halfwits don't try that one any more because it's such an automatic own goal.

I feel almost nostalgic!

Except for the whole ‘how would teeing off against a man’ question. Because who else would he be sharing the men’s tee with?

Helleofabore · 06/04/2023 12:51

Mark19735 · 06/04/2023 12:14

Please explain how teeing off alongside a man will worsen my handicap?
Please explain how any female boxer being punched in the face by a 6 foot 100kg woman is safe, but if it's by a 5 foot 70kg man it's unsafe?
Please explain why equal representation by sex on the podium is more important than equal representation by any other criterion?
Please explain why greater chances of competitive success is more important than greater participation and greater inclusion?
Please explain why we changed from claiming women were equal to men to now expounding all the reasons why women are weaker? And as a follow on - outside the side-show that is community and college sports - please explain why this battle is the hill to die on, when all that it does is reinforce male prejudices about women's capabilities - prejudices that do so much more harm in other socio-economic areas where it affects the lives of millions. Gender pay gap? Well ... clearly it's justified because women are weaker and tire more quickly and have periods and babies, right?

Go and read the research. I have provided plenty of it. But obviously not 'golf' specific. But if you lack the capacity to understand science and how bodies work, I cannot help you.

"Please explain why equal representation by sex on the podium is more important than equal representation by any other criterion?"

You seem to not understand the premise of a protected category at all. You also seem to be totally focused on 'equality' being based on outcome.

You miss the point that the equality that we are talking about is the equality for every female athlete to achieve their full potential in a fair competition. That means making a category, as has been established for decades, just for female bodies. And only female bodies who do not enhance their performance through drugs or any other performance enhancement listed as being against regulations.

"Please explain why greater chances of competitive success is more important than greater participation and greater inclusion?"

Because sports performance is awarded for the best performance in the category. Tell us, why should any female sport's person who wishes to win should be told that they should only aim to be inclusive?

There are sports associations out there that are all about and only about inclusion. You are arguing that ALL sports be about inclusion and not about competition.

"Please explain why we changed from claiming women were equal to men to now expounding all the reasons why women are weaker? And as a follow on - outside the side-show that is community and college sports - please explain why this battle is the hill to die on, when all that it does is reinforce male prejudices about women's capabilities - prejudices that do so much more harm in other socio-economic areas where it affects the lives of millions."

Because it is YOU who have misunderstood 'equality' with men.

We have always known and acknowledged that men are stronger. Fuck. I used to work in a job that required different lifting of heavy item limits for women vs men. The issue was not that women were fucking fighting to lift the same weights.

FFS The issue was that women were fighting to get the job with accommodations for their bodies. That woman could still contribute and do the job and may even match a male's productivity with accommodations. Such as using lifting assistant devices, or lifting less.

Also, that women should not be excluded for a job where these accommodations can be made, because a woman may offer different perspectives and different benefits of hiring them.

"And as a follow on - outside the side-show that is community and college sports - please explain why this battle is the hill to die on, when all that it does is reinforce male prejudices about women's capabilities - prejudices that do so much more harm in other socio-economic areas where it affects the lives of millions."

The only person who seems prejudiced here is you.

It is you who expect women to be the super heroes in movies and compete head to head with male people? And you are framing your unrealistic and frankly very clear misrepresentations around your expectations for women and girls. Under the name of 'inclusion'

You cannot even see the hypocrisy in what you write.

You want to force women to participate with male athletes in some unrealistic view that women are 'equal' to men. Yet, you want a male who has been through male puberty to be able to compete with female athletes based on their self-limited performance.

Really? You think you are presenting a coherent argument and you are simply not even approaching consistency.

"Gender pay gap? Well ... clearly it's justified because women are weaker and tire more quickly and have periods and babies, right?"

It is the SEX pay gap. And you again are showing your complete ignorance.

It is not 'justified' because women have children. It has been identified that negative sexist discrimination occurs because female people have the capacity to have children. And because of that, it does need mechanisms to address it.

I hope that you don't consider yourself as someone who cares about women's rights, because it is very clear to me that you are simply someone who has outsourced your critical thinking skills to someone else on the internet.

Naunet · 06/04/2023 12:53

Mark19735 · 06/04/2023 10:12

Society today prioritises inclusion. When it's SEND kids and kids with ADHD in mainstream classrooms, the MN massive takes a very different view on what 'fairness' is.

If societal rule number one is that every individual should be able to compete in their chosen sport somewhere (the inclusion principle).
And societal and environmental factors mean that there are currently only two divisions within which an adult can compete - men's or women's.
Then the judgment should really be, in which division is it most fair for that individual to compete in?
I don't see why it should be so outrageous for the medical and sporting experts who make these assessments to decide that sometimes that means people born in one sex should compete alongside people born in the other.
In fact, there's a strong case to say that some sports should have classes by testosterone levels, measured before each event (like weigh-ins at boxing).
That'd see men and women competing together in many divisions, but also it would be more nuanced, and more fair - right?

If you want perfect fairness, then sure, let's have 7 billion categories and we can all have a gold medal. That's the illogical end point of intersectionality. But every single point before that absurd outcome requires some choice or judgment of how you define fairness - and that definition will result in some people not getting 'their' gold.

If you take a hard line, ultra competitive, winner-takes-all approach, then there should just be one category - an open one. But the people justifying women's sports as a separate division are loathe to acknowledge that it is having a very limited and specific definition of 'fairness' that creates this issue in the first place.

And the hypocrisy is rank. The same people will also argue that women should be paid the same for winning a best of three sets tennis match (watched by about a million people) than a man winning a best of five sets tennis match (watched by 3 million people). I guess fairness means something different when you're looking to smash the glass ceiling than it does when you are punching down to someone who is mentally ill and struggling to find their place in the world.

Males are already included in male sport, they don’t need women’s as well.

Naunet · 06/04/2023 12:56

Please explain why we changed from claiming women were equal to men to now expounding all the reasons why women are weaker?

This has got to be one of the MOST stupid arguments I’ve ever heard. Women and men are equal, that doesn’t make them the same. Men don’t have the ability to grow life, that doesn’t make them inferior, does it?

Women and men are different, as I’m sure you’re very aware of that when cruising PornHub.

Helleofabore · 06/04/2023 12:57

SquidwardBound · 06/04/2023 12:27

Please explain how teeing off alongside a man will worsen my handicap?

You are completely disingenuous in all your engagement with points.

The handicap system is ONE way that golf tries to enable fair competition.

The provision of different tees is ANOTHER way.

When combined, they let mixed sex groups of golfers of varying skill and experience to play together and compete in more meaningful ways.

You DO realise this. You’re just playing dumb thinking that it makes all us uppity women look silly.

To be fair, this poster is doing so much heavy lifting for women today and I don't even know if they are aware of it.

Has any evidence been presented from them? I may have missed it.

Has even a coherent and truthful argument been made by them?

yet, everytime that we answer some one reading along will think... really... I shall go and check that out because that sounds wrong and they go and find out for themselves.

That is all we can ask. That people go off and find out more if they want to and make up their own minds.

This has been a very good live demonstration of men's rights activism on MN. It is of course, not the feminist board, but I think many women and men would be reading along and thinking.... WTAF?

SquidwardBound · 06/04/2023 12:58

Mark seems to struggle with logic a bit.

So let’s simplify it right down. Equal does not mean the same.

itsgettingweird · 06/04/2023 13:00

-Because sports performance is awarded for the best performance in the category. Tell us, why should any female sport's person who wishes to win should be told that they should only aim to be inclusive?

And this is important.

Because all the data out there shows that males are stronger and faster.

No one is asking males to loose their top spots by including woman.

Woman are being asked to move over for males who are proven statistically to be likely to beat them.

itsgettingweird · 06/04/2023 13:03

SquidwardBound · 06/04/2023 12:58

Mark seems to struggle with logic a bit.

So let’s simplify it right down. Equal does not mean the same.

Agree.

I always love this visual representation

AIBU - Transgender 'athletes'
KittiesInsane · 06/04/2023 13:06

RACHIEWOO100 · 06/04/2023 12:28

I have no issue if the transgender woman has not been through male puberty, there is little to no advantage over female athletes in that scenario.
There is a reason transgender men (f2m) do not compete often in male sports. They cannot compete.
When you look at the transwomens (m2f) records in their field before transition they were waaaay down the rankings. Ranked over 200th in the world in the cases I've looked at (which is an achievement in itself for a male athlete) but for them to then go to winning gold medals in women's sports proves irrevocably that they have an enormous advantage participating against women.

A transwoman does not have a female body -- so no periods, no risk of pregnancy, no having to decide to delay starting a family till after their competitive years. It's still not the same.

Bamboux · 06/04/2023 13:11

Mark19735 · 06/04/2023 12:14

Please explain how teeing off alongside a man will worsen my handicap?
Please explain how any female boxer being punched in the face by a 6 foot 100kg woman is safe, but if it's by a 5 foot 70kg man it's unsafe?
Please explain why equal representation by sex on the podium is more important than equal representation by any other criterion?
Please explain why greater chances of competitive success is more important than greater participation and greater inclusion?
Please explain why we changed from claiming women were equal to men to now expounding all the reasons why women are weaker? And as a follow on - outside the side-show that is community and college sports - please explain why this battle is the hill to die on, when all that it does is reinforce male prejudices about women's capabilities - prejudices that do so much more harm in other socio-economic areas where it affects the lives of millions. Gender pay gap? Well ... clearly it's justified because women are weaker and tire more quickly and have periods and babies, right?

A 5 foot male boxer?!

Haha.

0.1 percent of males are 5 foot tall.

Somewhere between 6 to 33 percent of females are under 5 foot tall, depending on age group.

How many 5 foot tall male boxers do you think there are, Mark?

That was a very quick, simple way to show that your grasp of basic human physiology and sexual dimorphism is... shit.

https://allcountries.org/uscensus/230_cumulative_percent_distribution_of_population_by.html

Cumulative Percent Distribution of Population, by Height and Sex statistics - USA Census numbers

https://allcountries.org/uscensus/230_cumulative_percent_distribution_of_population_by.html

Mark19735 · 06/04/2023 13:18

So, here's the thing. My day job involved hours and hours coding transcripts where interviewees answered unstructured questions with free responses. And if you do it long enough, you spot particular traits. These traits are especially pronounced when people are lying or exaggerating or playing devil's advocate or masquerading as something they are not. My suspicion is that there's very few people on these threads pretending to be women who are in fact men. Most men want to be recognised and acknowledged as men. I'd go so far as to say that trans women want to be recognised as trans women. The trans part of their identity is as important as the woman part.

But there are other traits, too. Those traits are like fingerprints. Some people want to come across as more intellectual than their actual academic achievements would endorse, and there's also a recognisable pattern there - use of longer words when shorter words would suffice, use of words out of context and so forth. There's a fair few of them on MN in general - although the most engaged posters on this particular thread are actually rather erudite. It's not the quality of their thinking I oppose, it's their politics. And when they do make errors in their grammar, logic, or rhetoric I don't mock them if I point this out - it's done for clarity, not for point-scoring.

But then there's just idiocy. Jumping to conclusions. Making spurious connections that weren't intended. Running off down rabbit holes. Non-sequiturs. Resorting to abuse. Dismissing challenges as laughable rather then engaging with them. Mocking some aspect of another person's identity. Questioning their motives.

I wonder if anyone might bookmark this thread and re-read it when they've cooled off? Be interesting to compare the ratio of posts that can be coded as belonging in this last category and to correlate this to which side of the debate those posters are on. And then to ask the more erudite ones which audience they are playing to? Just sayin'.

So, I'm off for now - not in a huff, I've just got some plans over Easter that I need to attend to.

Helleofabore · 06/04/2023 13:18

This video is of a male fighter breaking a female opponents orbital bone.

There plenty of these splices by the way. This is a fighter who was legally allowed to fight, I can only assume this was in the same 'weight' class.

Transgender Athlete Fallon Fox breaks skull of her opponent Tamikka Brents in an MMA fight.

Transgender Athlete Fallon Fox breaks skull of her opponent Tamikka Brents in an MMA fight. For more info and an interview with Tamikka after the fight check...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtfDKxHEBu4

Helleofabore · 06/04/2023 13:21

Mark19735 · 06/04/2023 13:18

So, here's the thing. My day job involved hours and hours coding transcripts where interviewees answered unstructured questions with free responses. And if you do it long enough, you spot particular traits. These traits are especially pronounced when people are lying or exaggerating or playing devil's advocate or masquerading as something they are not. My suspicion is that there's very few people on these threads pretending to be women who are in fact men. Most men want to be recognised and acknowledged as men. I'd go so far as to say that trans women want to be recognised as trans women. The trans part of their identity is as important as the woman part.

But there are other traits, too. Those traits are like fingerprints. Some people want to come across as more intellectual than their actual academic achievements would endorse, and there's also a recognisable pattern there - use of longer words when shorter words would suffice, use of words out of context and so forth. There's a fair few of them on MN in general - although the most engaged posters on this particular thread are actually rather erudite. It's not the quality of their thinking I oppose, it's their politics. And when they do make errors in their grammar, logic, or rhetoric I don't mock them if I point this out - it's done for clarity, not for point-scoring.

But then there's just idiocy. Jumping to conclusions. Making spurious connections that weren't intended. Running off down rabbit holes. Non-sequiturs. Resorting to abuse. Dismissing challenges as laughable rather then engaging with them. Mocking some aspect of another person's identity. Questioning their motives.

I wonder if anyone might bookmark this thread and re-read it when they've cooled off? Be interesting to compare the ratio of posts that can be coded as belonging in this last category and to correlate this to which side of the debate those posters are on. And then to ask the more erudite ones which audience they are playing to? Just sayin'.

So, I'm off for now - not in a huff, I've just got some plans over Easter that I need to attend to.

Crikey.

Naunet · 06/04/2023 13:29

Mark19735 · 06/04/2023 13:18

So, here's the thing. My day job involved hours and hours coding transcripts where interviewees answered unstructured questions with free responses. And if you do it long enough, you spot particular traits. These traits are especially pronounced when people are lying or exaggerating or playing devil's advocate or masquerading as something they are not. My suspicion is that there's very few people on these threads pretending to be women who are in fact men. Most men want to be recognised and acknowledged as men. I'd go so far as to say that trans women want to be recognised as trans women. The trans part of their identity is as important as the woman part.

But there are other traits, too. Those traits are like fingerprints. Some people want to come across as more intellectual than their actual academic achievements would endorse, and there's also a recognisable pattern there - use of longer words when shorter words would suffice, use of words out of context and so forth. There's a fair few of them on MN in general - although the most engaged posters on this particular thread are actually rather erudite. It's not the quality of their thinking I oppose, it's their politics. And when they do make errors in their grammar, logic, or rhetoric I don't mock them if I point this out - it's done for clarity, not for point-scoring.

But then there's just idiocy. Jumping to conclusions. Making spurious connections that weren't intended. Running off down rabbit holes. Non-sequiturs. Resorting to abuse. Dismissing challenges as laughable rather then engaging with them. Mocking some aspect of another person's identity. Questioning their motives.

I wonder if anyone might bookmark this thread and re-read it when they've cooled off? Be interesting to compare the ratio of posts that can be coded as belonging in this last category and to correlate this to which side of the debate those posters are on. And then to ask the more erudite ones which audience they are playing to? Just sayin'.

So, I'm off for now - not in a huff, I've just got some plans over Easter that I need to attend to.

Is there some new fetish doing the rounds at the moment for men to come on to Mumsnet and make a total laughing stock of themselves?!

I could get behind that one.

MarshaBradyo · 06/04/2023 13:29

But then there's just idiocy.

This is true but it’s more from those trying to deny female sports categories.

The rest… well it’s self assured I’ll say that