Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2017 23:04:26 GMT -5
Imagine if Tiffany joins the Brazilian NT. They would be winning Gold in everything, Zhu would have to settle for Silver.
|
|
|
Post by volleyball303 on Dec 6, 2017 23:06:47 GMT -5
Imagine if Tiffany joins the Brazilian NT. They would be winning Gold in everything, Zhu would have to settle for Silver. I am not sure she is that good but she could for sure dominate college volleyball. Watching videos I don’t think she would dominate the Olympic level.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Dec 6, 2017 23:07:01 GMT -5
Except sports is what they want to do with their lives, and you don't support it. So if Tiffany wants to come get a college degree in the states you are perfectly okay with her playing for your teams rival school? From every video I have seen she would be the best player in D1 college volleyball. Move over Plummer more over Washington you are not longer in the running for NPOY. For the next 4 years that belongs to Tiffany. Sorry you did not have the advantage of 25 years of male Testosterone and growth... Any woman in the Brazilian top professional league would be the best player in NCAA women's volleyball. What's your point? None of them are eligible because they are all pro athletes and almost all of them over the maximum age limit for the NCAA.
|
|
|
Post by volleyball303 on Dec 6, 2017 23:16:31 GMT -5
So if Tiffany wants to come get a college degree in the states you are perfectly okay with her playing for your teams rival school? From every video I have seen she would be the best player in D1 college volleyball. Move over Plummer more over Washington you are not longer in the running for NPOY. For the next 4 years that belongs to Tiffany. Sorry you did not have the advantage of 25 years of male Testosterone and growth... Any woman in the Brazilian top professional league would be the best player in NCAA women's volleyball. What's your point? None of them are eligible because they are all pro athletes and almost all of them over the maximum age limit for the NCAA. It’s just a matter of time before someone with Tiffany’s ability joins D1 college volleyball. If she ends up on your rival team and waxes them for 4 years your support better stay behind her. That’s all I ask.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Dec 6, 2017 23:23:22 GMT -5
Any woman in the Brazilian top professional league would be the best player in NCAA women's volleyball. What's your point? None of them are eligible because they are all pro athletes and almost all of them over the maximum age limit for the NCAA. It’s just a matter of time before someone with Tiffany’s ability joins D1 college volleyball. If she ends up on your rival team and waxes them for 4 years your support better stay behind her. That’s all I ask. Really? And how is someone going to have 25 years of development with male hormones by the time they are 18 or 19? Kind of a problem with your argument. Anyway, this just goes back to the same argument. Stanford and Texas and Penn State already stock up with all the best athletes anyway. All it would mean is that they would have one less scholarship and so some other team might get somebody that would otherwise have gone to them. Might even the recruiting out more than anything else, actually.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Dec 6, 2017 23:25:09 GMT -5
Stopped reading here. You're being willfully obtuse. No, you are uncharacteristically arguing like an idiot. You are taking a very complicated problem, simplifying it until the simplification hides all the complication, and then declaring it a simple problem. That rhetorical BS, and I'm calling you on it. The only gross oversimplification here is your boiling sex down to a "competitive advantage" like any other that differentiate athletic ability.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Dec 6, 2017 23:26:02 GMT -5
It’s just a matter of time before someone with Tiffany’s ability joins D1 college volleyball. If she ends up on your rival team and waxes them for 4 years your support better stay behind her. That’s all I ask. Really? And how is someone going to have 25 years of development with male hormones by the time they are 18 or 19? Kind of a problem with your argument. Anyway, this just goes back to the same argument. Stanford and Texas and Penn State already stock up with all the best athletes anyway. All it would mean is that they would have one less scholarship and so some other team might get somebody that would otherwise have gone to them. Might even the recruiting out more than anything else, actually. Based on this (and your quip regarding co-ed ultimate), I don't think you appreciate how different men's and women's volleyball are.
|
|
|
Post by Fight On! on Dec 6, 2017 23:33:03 GMT -5
Someday one of your daughters, granddaughters, or your favorite team will lose at the hands of a man on the opposing team & maybe, just maybe it will click. Where’s the benefit? Besides for the team he is on & the person living his dream tearing it up in a women’s league, what gives? Do you know anything at all about what HRT does to the body of a trans woman? People have been having sex changes since the 1950s. In 75+ years there hasn’t been a major outbreak of “men” dressing up like women to play sports. Will it ever click for you that you are making a mountain out of a mole hill and being unnecessarily dramatic?
|
|
|
Post by Fight On! on Dec 6, 2017 23:36:31 GMT -5
Any woman in the Brazilian top professional league would be the best player in NCAA women's volleyball. What's your point? None of them are eligible because they are all pro athletes and almost all of them over the maximum age limit for the NCAA. It’s just a matter of time before someone with Tiffany’s ability joins D1 college volleyball. If she ends up on your rival team and waxes them for 4 years your support better stay behind her. That’s all I ask. That is all the people who are against Tiffany say ... It is a matter of time. It has been matter of time for almost 4 generations of athletes. Maybe it isn’t actually a matter of time.
|
|
|
Post by volleyball303 on Dec 6, 2017 23:43:27 GMT -5
It’s just a matter of time before someone with Tiffany’s ability joins D1 college volleyball. If she ends up on your rival team and waxes them for 4 years your support better stay behind her. That’s all I ask. That is all the people who are against Tiffany say ... It is a matter of time. It has been matter of time for almost 4 generations of athletes. Maybe it isn’t actually a matter of time. Well a year or 2 ago I have heard nothing about transgender athletes playing in women’s sports but I can think of at least 10 cases in the last year or so. There is definitely a movement going on.
|
|
|
Post by Fight On! on Dec 6, 2017 23:45:00 GMT -5
That is all the people who are against Tiffany say ... It is a matter of time. It has been matter of time for almost 4 generations of athletes. Maybe it isn’t actually a matter of time. Well a year or 2 ago I have heard nothing about transgender athletes playing in women’s sports but I can think of at least 10 cases in the last year or so. There is definitely a movement going on. Nope. You were just uninformed. Again, look up Renee Richards.
|
|
|
Post by Vacation on Dec 6, 2017 23:45:13 GMT -5
Did Brittney Griner ever play volleyball?
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Dec 6, 2017 23:46:56 GMT -5
No, you are uncharacteristically arguing like an idiot. You are taking a very complicated problem, simplifying it until the simplification hides all the complication, and then declaring it a simple problem. That rhetorical BS, and I'm calling you on it. The only gross oversimplification here is your boiling sex down to a "competitive advantage" like any other that differentiate athletic ability. This verges on the incoherent. Are you saying men don't have a competitive advantage? I was sure you were saying they did. What I'm saying is that they don't have just one single advantage, and they don't have each advantage to the same degree as individuals compared to individual women. Are you disagreeing? WTF are you saying, anyway? I kind of seems like you are arguing for some mystical inherent "maleness" that is just always going to have an advantage of "femaleness". If it doesn't come down to height, strength, jumping, reflex speed, etc. as individual traits, what does it come down to? And if it does come down to individual traits, you can't deny that everyone is always part of a spectrum on those individual traits. There will always be some women with more advantages in some or all of those traits than other women. If you want to convince me that Tifanny is just too much for the league, show me some numbers that say she is dominating more than other top players have done in the past. And if she's *not* a top player, then what's the argument about?
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Dec 7, 2017 0:20:01 GMT -5
The only gross oversimplification here is your boiling sex down to a "competitive advantage" like any other that differentiate athletic ability. This verges on the incoherent. Are you saying men don't have a competitive advantage? I was sure you were saying they did. What I'm saying is that they don't have just one single advantage, and they don't have each advantage to the same degree as individuals compared to individual women. Are you disagreeing? WTF are you saying, anyway? I kind of seems like you are arguing for some mystical inherent "maleness" that is just always going to have an advantage of "femaleness". If it doesn't come down to height, strength, jumping, reflex speed, etc. as individual traits, what does it come down to? And if it does come down to individual traits, you can't deny that everyone is always part of a spectrum on those individual traits. There will always be some women with more advantages in some or all of those traits than other women. If you want to convince me that Tifanny is just too much for the league, show me some numbers that say she is dominating more than other top players have done in the past. And if she's *not* a top player, then what's the argument about? It is a competitive advantage, it is not a competitive advantage on the same level as those other advantages you're referring to. It's of a much greater magnitude. And there's no "mystical" aspect to the secondary sex traits that males gain over puberty and put them on a different level athletically. Here's the issue with this case - someone playing semi-pro ball in the Belgian 2nd division took a few years off, hit the wrong side of thirty, and then walked into Serie A2 to score 6+ points per set and got a contract in Superliga. She doesn't need to be the best player in the league for it to be unfair to the competition or to the elite female player(s) who are missing out on the economic & competitive opportunities that she is taking. Segregated women's competition exists precisely to preserve opportunities for elite female athletes, and that's not happening here.
|
|
|
Post by alhorford90 on Dec 7, 2017 0:22:02 GMT -5
Good for her
|
|