NCAA’s Woman of the Year Award Parody

1. 84

   GA Andersonposted 3 years ago

   Parody was the most polite word I could offer. I also resisted using the Red pin to forewarn of the coming bias, but, what the hell.
   
   UPenn Nominates Transgender Swimmer Lia Thomas for NCAA Woman of the Year Award
   
   "Lia Thomas, the transgender swimmer who dominated the 2021-2022 NCAA women’s swimming and diving season, has been nominated by the University of Pennsylvania to receive the NCAA’s Woman of the Year award. Up to two female athletes can be nominated by eligible schools and this year, there is a total of 577 nominees.
   
   The award is designed to recognize “female student-athletes who have exhausted their eligibility and distinguished themselves in their community, in athletics and in academics throughout their college careers.”
   
   I bet it is fair to say that most conservative folks think this is nuts and that the enlightened critical thinkers that support it are nuts too. I do.
   
   GA

   replyreport
   1. 69

      IslandBitesposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Thanks.
      
      
      
      But that's ok. I bet most of Us "enlightened critical thinkers nuts" think those who call us nuts because of that are bigots.

      replyreport
      1. 84

         GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

         Bigots for thinking the UPenn nomination was nuts?
         
         The most charitable definition requires, at a minimum, a foundation of unreasonableness. Even though you disagree, (?), do you think a belief that this issue is wrong is too unreasonable to hold?
         
         I will lay claim to a conservative bias that says this nomination is nuts because it is intentionally political and appears to ignore the criteria for the award. This swimmer's only claim to fame appears to be the masculine physical domination of female swimmers.
         
         The brief descriptions of the award's purpose and selection criteria speak to a college history of academic and community involvement and achievement.
         
         Without any negative implications intended, a brief walk-about through this swimmer's public information didn't find any notable achievements or contributions—prior to this trans controversy, that would warrant this nomination.
         
         I don't think my perspective on this, (the one I projected onto conservatives in general), is unreasonable, obstinate, or purposely antagonistic.
         
         I did look around a bit to try to not stub my toe here, but I found nothing to support this nomination beyond politics, so yep, I do think that supporters of it are nuts. I thought I had put the bigotry of my early years behind me, but I guess I missed some because I'm pretty unshakable on this one.
         
         You know I'm usually a reasonable guy, and my "nuts" descriptor was unburdened with personally negative connotations, your "bigots", seems differently intended.  Want to try to show me where I'm wrong, or what I misunderstood?  ;-o
         
         GA

         replyreport
         1. 69

            IslandBitesposted 3 years agoin reply to this

            Nah, you're never wrong... Only that one time.
            
            I supposed you checked out the record of the other 576 candidates, right? So it is not only the "masculine physical domination of female swimmers", the "trans controversy" that bother "conservatives" about her nomination, huh?
            
            Then, I stand corrected. Not all who call us nuts are bigots.

            replyreport
            1. 84

               GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

               Yes, (once again, donning the mantle), it is the "trans controversy" and, seemingly, apparent 'unfairness' of this issue that bothers us.
               
               Although the trans competition issue is separate from the point of the OP, it is the foundation this argument sits on and the OP doesn't claim to be totally free from it. Even with that,  'we' think it is unfair from a perspective of biological reality, so of course, we also think it is wrong and unfair from a 'merit' perspective.
               
               I didn't look at the other nominees, I don't think it is necessary with such a large number of them to set the parameters of scale. There is no indication that this swimmer would land anywhere near even the top 100 candidates. That's intended as a description, not a condemnation. It's just the reality of this issue.
               
               If the original point stepped back a level and included that mentioned foundation, with all of its connotational baggage, we could have a good round arguing your initial 'bigot' thought, but it didn't. It addressed the point specific to the award. Masculine physical ability has no place in this consideration.
               
               So yeah, that's what is bothering us. There's more, but that's a different conversation.
               
               (Hey now, I felt the wind of that first swipe)
               
               GA

               replyreport
   2. 75

      tsmogposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I firstly, ask aren't the conservative folk 'enlightened critical thinkers'? Of least most certainly I think you are.
      
      Personally, I am not for transgenders competing in their 'new' sex identity. I think if it has to that should be determined by DNA. Having run track in high school and at my community college along with cross-country I am vehemently opposed to transgender females being on those teams and competing as a female, though a male.
      
      But, that is a long way from the Lia Thomas issue with her nomination. I think it is a ploy in a sense of U of Penn to say, "Hey . . . look at us we're progressive". Nothing more and nothing less. I would bet my bottom dollar if a committee there most certainly were dissenters, yet they are going along just for the ride. Of course I may be way off base too.
      
      Does she have a chance. No way in hell as I see it. At least I hope not while hope the voters of the award do not try to make a political statement and weigh all 577 of them fairly and impartially. Fingers crossed. I like track athletes more anyway and there are great choices for that today.
      
      The top 10 women's track and field performances from the season's first half
      https://www.ncaa.com/news/trackfield-ou … first-half

      replyreport
      1. 84

         GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

         About that "critical thinkers" thing . . . I think that if one says it about themselves, then they haven't thought it through, so they really aren't.
         
         As for the rest of your comment—the part about the nomination, I agree. She shouldn't win, and it is a political ploy.
         
         GA

         replyreport
   3. 84

      Sharlee01posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      As a biologically born woman, that education is mainly in the science of human anatomy, and all that is involved or indicates what differences exist between males versus females. I have just a couple of words for the NCAA  --- Oh, I can't say that, I would be banned.

      replyreport
      1. 84

         GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

         Relative to this nomination issue, use my 'safe' words: It is nutty crazy bizarro world-thinking.
         
         GA

         replyreport
         1. 84

            Sharlee01posted 3 years agoin reply to this

            Yes, I find the entire matter very supercrazybizarronuttyragilisticexpialidocious...
            ,

            replyreport
2. 73

   abwilliamsposted 3 years ago

   Where are Gloria Steinem and Jane Fonda and other lets-get-loud, feminists? Now that they finally have something worthy of their efforts, they are M.I.A.!!
   Where is all of the patriarchal pushback and bashing now?
   They thought bras and lipstick were the great oppressors....now men are in bras and lipstick and dominating them in sports too!
   Hello!?!

   replyreport
   1. 69

      IslandBitesposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Over 465 feminist leaders sign open letter standing in solidarity with transgender women and girls, including Gloria Steinem
      
      "...we write this letter as feminist leaders in advocacy, business, entertainment, media, politics, and social justice who stand as, with, and for transgender and nonbinary people. Trans women and girls have been an integral part of the fight for gender liberation. We uphold that truth and denounce the ongoing anti-transgender rhetoric and efforts we witness in various industries.
      
      We acknowledge with clarity and strength that transgender women are women and that transgender girls are girls. And we believe that honoring the diversity of women’s experiences is a strength, not a detriment to the feminist cause. All of us deserve the same access, freedoms, and opportunities. We deserve equal access to education, employment, healthcare, housing, recreation, and public accommodations. And we must respect each person’s right to bodily autonomy and self-determination..."
      
      https://www.glaad.org/tdovletter

      replyreport
3. 73

   abwilliamsposted 3 years ago

   There you go, good-for-nothing feminists!

   replyreport
4. 75

   wildernessposted 3 years ago

   UPenn nominates a male swimmer that dominated women's swimming, and has now been banned from competing in any more women's swimming, for woman of the year???
   
   What have we come to in this country?

   replyreport
   1. 84

      Sharlee01posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Amen...

      replyreport