Things That Are Bullsh*t (14 Viewers)

IMG_3293.jpeg
 
BarrieJ3 said:
I should’ve never said this was my fav thread.

Ever since then it’s like watching my grandparents learn to use internet and Facebook all over again.
Click to expand...
I couldnt agree more. Its like when someone discovers a sitcom that began 24 years ago and drones on & on about it :yawn:
Time for the retirement home
 
NotRealNameNoSir said:
Oooooh this belongs in the politics section when its just silly boomer Facebook memes. She's a woman who has lost to many women previously. Lol at purest form of evil, good God.
Click to expand...
Just because this person didn't know they had XY chromosomes for much of their life doesn't make them any less male. They have like 10x the normal level of testosterone compared to women.

Also, this has nothing to do with politics and everything to do with bullshit.
 
TX_Golf_N_Poker said:
They have like 10x the normal level of testosterone compared to women.
Click to expand...
Where did you see this? Source?

And if you think any decision the IBA or IOC makes has "nothing to do with politics" then we are at an impasse, they are political organizations and many of their decisions can belong in this thread, sure; I protested when they were floating the idea of removing wrestling lol.

We can discuss the situation but when it's led with silly claims like root of all evil, those discussions break down.
 
TX_Golf_N_Poker said:
Just because this person didn't know they had XY chromosomes for much of their life doesn't make them any less male. They have like 10x the normal level of testosterone compared to women.

Also, this has nothing to do with politics and everything to do with bullshit.
Click to expand...
All the swimmers that have lost to Michael Phelps, the most decorated Olympian, would like a word with you.

You know, since he has genetic mutations that give him a huge advantage over swimmers, like his rare condition concerning lactic acid. Of course he still has to train and put in the work, but that doesn’t change the fact that due to mutations he has no control over, he has a large competitive advantage.

Oh wait, people didn’t have an issue with that? Hmmmm….
 
BarrieJ3 said:
All the swimmers that have lost to Michael Phelps would like a word with you.

You know, since he has genetic mutations that give him a huge advantage over swimmers, like his rare condition concerning lactic acid. Of course he still has to train and put in the work, but that doesn’t change the fact that due to mutations he has no control over he has a large competitive advantage.

Oh wait, people didn’t have an issue with that? Hmmmm….
Click to expand...
Lmao comparing the two is the definition of the parasitic mind lol

I applaud those who have courage to discuss this and fight against men in women’s sports. Protect women’s rights.

Far too many people discuss this privately but are afraid to speak up for being labeled “right wing” or “insensitive”. This isn’t political. This is science.
 
doublebooyah85 said:
Lmao comparing the two is the definition of the parasitic mind lol

I applaud those who have courage to discuss this and fight against men in women’s sports. Protect women’s rights.

Far too many people discuss this privately but are afraid to speak up for being labeled “right wing” or “insensitive”. This isn’t political. This is science.
Click to expand...
It’s not comparing the two, it’s meant to exemplify how difficult it can be to maintain universally “fair” competition. How do we balance social construct and continual medical advancement and marry those two into rules surrounding athletics? (There’s way more important questions than this, sad for this to take center stage with current day global issues)

Your language below is extremely misleading and reductive.
doublebooyah85 said:
fight against men in women’s sports. Protect women’s rights.
Click to expand...

And that helps close the point of of course this is political. Why would the issue gain such momentum, why would people randomly pick a side without understanding any of the science or by making it as reductive as above?

I’ve not made my stance known at all on this issue, I simply replied to someone that if they thought, per their post, that increased testosterone levels in an athlete were an issue, well then there’s probably hundreds of thousands of examples they’re about to be upset about and they might as well stop consuming anything competition/athletics based.

It’s not political at all. It just so happens that half my friends, associates, and acquaintances are super passionate about women’s rights during…checking notes…sports competition. Then somehow, magically, despite them still super caring, they manage to suppress the need to share their burning desire for equality and women’s rights the rest of the year.

Edit - took the time to understand the background of parasitic mind. Dependent on where that is coming from, I’d highly disagree. Reading Gad Saad’s interviews and feedback on his publication, I would say my post is the exact opposite. Attempting to understand various situations and applying critical thought to come to an un-predetermined resolution is exactly what he’s supporting.

If you’d like to chat about how the US 2 party system in conjunction with the collapse of objective news and rise in access to read/write capabilities online through internet and social media has created permanently open windows for idea pathogens to take over echo chambers and impact personal belief systems alongside politics, I’m happy to - despite me just saying everything I would surmise and now needing to find out if it’s true.

While I’d say his recent publishing is really just meant for fun reading, that’s really all I do. I’d like to ask him his thoughts on the amount of post secondary educators that are looking to reach masses through making their focus/research/sme consumable this way - podcasts, books for entertainment, etc. He appears to be going the route of an Andrew Huberman, and I’m curious if this isn’t a “if you can’t beat them join them” approach.
 
Last edited:
BarrieJ3 said:
It’s not comparing the two, it’s meant to exemplify how difficult it can be to maintain universally “fair” competition. How do we balance social construct and continual medical advancement and marry those two into rules surrounding athletics? (There’s way more important questions than this, sad for this to take center stage with current day global issues)

Your language below is extremely misleading and reductive.


And that helps close the point of of course this is political. Why would the issue gain such momentum, why would people randomly pick a side without understanding any of the science or by making it as reductive as above?

I’ve not made my stance known at all on this issue, I simply replied to someone that if they thought, per their post, that increased testosterone levels in an athlete were an issue, well then there’s probably hundreds of thousands of examples they’re about to be upset about and they might as well stop consuming anything competition/athletics based.

It’s not political at all. It just so happens that half my friends, associates, and acquaintances are super passionate about women’s rights during…checking notes…sports competition. Then somehow, magically, despite them still super caring, they manage to suppress the need to share their burning desire for equality and women’s rights the rest of the year.
Click to expand...
It’s not difficult. Chromosomes tells the story. It’s a significant advantage that is deadly and unfair.

Same sex, yes advantages over exists, that is the world we live in.

But everything else you said is very logical fair and Booyah good stuff.

I’ll stop posting on it bc it could be construed as political and I don’t want to nuke this thread.
 
The Internantional Boxing Association (IBA) banned Imane Khelif (Algeria) and Lin Yu-Tang (Taiwan) for failing DNA testing which proved they had XY chromosomes and high levels of testosterone. They failed to meet gender eligibility standards.

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) allows these two to participate based on the age and sex provided on their passports.

And to anyone who feels this discussion is political, I guess discussing whether or not a hot dog is a sandwich is political too.
 
doublebooyah85 said:
It’s not difficult. Chromosomes tells the story. It’s a significant advantage that is deadly and unfair.

Same sex, yes advantages over exists, that is the world we live in.

But everything else you said is very logical fair and Booyah good stuff.

I’ll stop posting on it bc it could be construed as political and I don’t want to nuke this thread.
Click to expand...
How would you view someone with XX Male Syndrome? They have xx chromosones but with male phenotyping (read testicles, penis, body hair, etc) and, while they have lower than normal testosterone levels by a male standard, their testosterone levels are typically higher than normal ranges for females. Often only discovered in adulthood during fertility testing.

Where should they compete?

I don't claim to have the answer to the original question, but I maintain, some issues like sexual development disorders just might be more difficult to classify than things like transgender participation in sports.

And with that, back to chipping for me too.
 
Clearly there are differences between people despite all the rhetoric about everything being the same (or having to be the same). The IOC can figure out what it wants to do and how it wants to proceed in the future. God knows these “leaders” don’t do jack shit to begin with for a living so here’s a chance.

McGuire and Bonds were fun to watch. Then all their achievements were taken away and they’re not even talked about anymore. Regardless of the outcome of these Olympics clearly results can be deleted after the fact like George Russell winning- I mean disqualified from- last week’s F1 race.

I say anything goes. Will make the Olympics (and motorsports) a lot more entertaining to watch.

I should add that in this case if a separate competitive category/delineation for women exists then it should be pretty objectively clear cut. XX- shrug it is what it is for whatever reason assuming no hormone injection. XY- disqualification. Feelings don’t matter for shit.
 
Last edited:
DirtyTIVA said:
Clearly there are differences between people despite all the rhetoric about everything being the same (or having to be the same). The IOC can figure out what it wants to do and how it wants to proceed in the future. God knows these “leaders” don’t do jack shit to begin with for a living so here’s a chance.

McGuire and Bonds were fun to watch. Then all their achievements were taken away and they’re not even talked about anymore. Regardless of the outcome of these Olympics clearly results can be deleted after the fact like George Russell winning- I mean disqualified from- last week’s F1 race.

I say anything goes. Will make the Olympics (and motorsports) a lot more entertaining to watch.

I should add that in this case if a separate competitive category/delineation for women exists then it should be pretty objectively clear cut. XX- shrug it is what it is for whatever reason assuming no hormone injection. XY- disqualification. Feelings don’t matter for shit.
Click to expand...
2 aspects I often hear and would be hilarious to see implemented.

1 - enough with rules for sports. It’s a cat and mouse game, let everyone take and implement everything they want. Injections, robot arms, whatever.

Sosa/McGuire as the biggest thing for baseball I’ve ever seen. I want to see just how fast, strong, etc. a human body can get.

2 - can we please get a normal person next to these folks? Joes vs Pros style, I want to see a weekend warrior dad doing high jump, long jump, 4x4, rowing. Let’s see how far away we are from olympians.
 
BarrieJ3 said:
2 aspects I often hear and would be hilarious to see implemented.

1 - enough with rules for sports. It’s a cat and mouse game, let everyone take and implement everything they want. Injections, robot arms, whatever.

Sosa/McGuire as the biggest thing for baseball I’ve ever seen. I want to see just how fast, strong, etc. a human body can get.

2 - can we please get a normal person next to these folks? Joes vs Pros style, I want to see a weekend warrior dad doing high jump, long jump, 4x4, rowing. Let’s see how far away we are from olympians.
Click to expand...

If only Beerfest was real. Let’s see how far from those Olympians you are @BarrieJ3

1722790751806.jpeg
 
DirtyTIVA said:
If only Beerfest was real. Let’s see how far from those Olympians you are @BarrieJ3

View attachment 1368221
Click to expand...
I’m in. I’ll even run it.

We’ve actually talked about it, something along the lines of while playing poker every XYZ, everyone ABCs. And figuring out equal amounts across substances for those that don’t drink, or don’t tree or don’t whatever it might be.

My only requirements would be it has to be legal, and no one is allowed to die.

Then again, no idea what’s legal in NH.
 
BarrieJ3 said:
I’m in. I’ll even run it.

We’ve actually talked about it, something along the lines of while playing poker every XYZ, everyone ABCs. And figuring out equal amounts across substances for those that don’t drink, or don’t tree or don’t whatever it might be.

My only requirements would be it has to be legal, and no one is allowed to die.

Then again, no idea what’s legal in NH.
Click to expand...
Live free or DIE!!!!!
 
chippitydoodah said:
The Internantional Boxing Association (IBA) banned Imane Khelif (Algeria) and Lin Yu-Tang (Taiwan) for failing DNA testing which proved they had XY chromosomes and high levels of testosterone. They failed to meet gender eligibility standards.

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) allows these two to participate based on the age and sex provided on their passports.

And to anyone who feels this discussion is political, I guess discussing whether or not a hot dog is a sandwich is political too.
Click to expand...
The IBA in recent years has effectively been taken over by Russia. It has been involved in numerous scandals including bout fixing and Russian favoritism, and it was stripped of any involvement in the Olympics by the IOC last year for these reasons.

So yes, it is political.
 
Schmendr1ck said:
The IBA in recent years has effectively been taken over by Russia. It has been involved in numerous scandals including bout fixing and Russian favoritism, and it was stripped of any involvement in the Olympics by the IOC last year for these reasons.

So yes, it is political.
Click to expand...
Why would that be "political"? It has nothing to do with a government or country. It's about an organization.
 
chippitydoodah said:
Why would that be "political"? It has nothing to do with a government or country. It's about an organization.
Click to expand...
Well I did mention Russia a couple of times.

But if you think that the word political only applies to governments/countries and has nothing to do with international organizations like IBA and IOC, then you have a much narrower definition of the word than I do.
 
Schmendr1ck said:
Well I did mention Russia a couple of times.

But if you think that the word political only applies to governments/countries and has nothing to do with international organizations like IBA and IOC, then you have a much narrower definition of the word than I do.
Click to expand...
I think if any more is said on this we will feel the "political" wrath of PCF. Checking out now.
 
Well I'll get away from the politics but I do want to comment on the original post. I'm assuming that's okay since the post still stands in this thread.

I think it's bullshit to discredit the accomplishments of a talented, hard-working female athlete by calling her the "purest form of evil" and "a man beating up a woman," all based on the wholly unsubstantiated claims of a corrupt boxing organization controlled by Russia. Conveniently, these claims were made after she beat a previously undefeated Russian boxer, and her disqualification allowed them to discredit her victory and reinstate the Russian's "undefeated" status.
 
“I hold an opinion on the subject, yet at the same time desperately need ELI5 on the subject matter”.

I guess that’s how opinions are formed and changed overtime, and I certainly am ignorant on many topics, but usually people only choose to show their ignorance in the political section.

Above is what was written previously but I thought eh, give benefit of the doubt. But the latest response shows no, there is no interest in learning. And there in lies the problem online (and often offline) - we aren’t arguing or disagreeing on anything, we’re having completely different conversations.

If someone doesn’t realize (or believe) that organizations are or can be political - whelp their worldview and interpretations are so far from mine there’s really no similar ground to even base a conversation around.

Edit - to say that I don’t think we’re crossing them line on politics, as we aren’t covering any specific stance. If this is somehow an issue, maybe mods should actually moderate the people who continually deposit tongue in cheek political memes throughout the site on an ongoing basis.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account and join our community. It's easy!

Register

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Back
Top Bottom