• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

"Caitlyn Jenner says she opposes transgender girls competing in girls’ sports"

P

PlayerRep

Well-known member
"Caitlyn Jenner, a former Olympic decathlon champion who is among the country’s most prominent transgender women, said Saturday she is opposed to transgender girls competing in girls’ sports.

Jenner, 71, described it as a “question of fairness” and declared that girls’ sports require protection. She was making her first public comments on the issue since announcing her candidacy to replace California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) in a potential recall election."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2021/05/02/caitlyn-jenner-says-she-opposes-transgender-girls-competing-girls-sports/
 
Last night I saw just a glimpse of the story and thought he/she took the opposite view and saw in the paper that my assumption was totally wrong. Common Sense folks on the Women's Sports thing and why we should demand that it is ONLY Women competing with Women! Just my $5 Bucks Worth!
 
Caitlyn Jenner has stated the thing that shocks people most about her is that she is a conservative republican.
 
I really don’t feel like having a billion people jump down my throat again a couple weeks ago, but someone answer this question for me honestly. Why was the legislature spending so much time obsessing over something that has only happened once in the 131 year history of the state of Montana? Seems like a stretch to put so much on the line over a virtual non-issue. Now if it was happening all the time and really was plaguing women’s sports in MT, then sure I could understand that. This to me just feels like something that shouldn’t be addressed until it really is a problem in MT and right now, it is far from that. Can we at least all agree on that?
 
Griz til I die said:
I really don’t feel like having a billion people jump down my throat again a couple weeks ago, but someone answer this question for me honestly. Why was the legislature spending so much time obsessing over something that has only happened once in the 131 year history of the state of Montana? Seems like a stretch to put so much on the line over a virtual non-issue. Now if it was happening all the time and really was plaguing women’s sports in MT, then sure I could understand that. This to me just feels like something that shouldn’t be addressed until it really is a problem in MT and right now, it is far from that. Can we at least all agree on that?
Click to expand...

Because its a slippery slope that other states have slipped down. Better to end it before it starts
 
Paytonlives said:
Griz til I die said:
I really don’t feel like having a billion people jump down my throat again a couple weeks ago, but someone answer this question for me honestly. Why was the legislature spending so much time obsessing over something that has only happened once in the 131 year history of the state of Montana? Seems like a stretch to put so much on the line over a virtual non-issue. Now if it was happening all the time and really was plaguing women’s sports in MT, then sure I could understand that. This to me just feels like something that shouldn’t be addressed until it really is a problem in MT and right now, it is far from that. Can we at least all agree on that?
Click to expand...

Because its a slippery slope that other states have slipped down. Better to end it before it starts
Click to expand...
I see what you’re saying Peyton but is it really worth potentially losing millions of dollars in federal education funding and potential for future boycotts from not only the NCAA, but who knows who else? I’m inclined to wait this out like North and South Dakota did until this becomes more pressing matter. Right now it’s just not worth it IMO with everything at stake.
 
Griz til I die said:
I see what you’re saying Peyton but is it really worth potentially losing millions of dollars in federal education funding and potential for future boycotts from not only the NCAA, but who knows who else? I’m inclined to wait this out like North and South Dakota did until this becomes more pressing matter. Right now it’s just not worth it IMO with everything at stake.
Click to expand...

Let me put this in a more individual frame if reference. Suppose a group told you to stop posting your shit, or you'd end up with broken hands and fingers, or arms and legs so you couldn't earn a living. Extortion, right? Same group tells Montana, and other states not to pass such and such laws, or dire consequenses would be inflicted on the state. Extortion, right?
 
tourist said:
Griz til I die said:
I see what you’re saying Peyton but is it really worth potentially losing millions of dollars in federal education funding and potential for future boycotts from not only the NCAA, but who knows who else? I’m inclined to wait this out like North and South Dakota did until this becomes more pressing matter. Right now it’s just not worth it IMO with everything at stake.
Click to expand...

Let me put this in a more individual frame if reference. Suppose a group told you to stop posting your shit, or you'd end up with broken hands and fingers, or arms and legs so you couldn't earn a living. Extortion, right? Same group tells Montana, and other states not to pass such and such laws, or dire consequenses would be inflicted on the state. Extortion, right?
Click to expand...
It’s funny, Republicans during this whole pandemic (and really always) have touted themselves on a strong economy. Creating jobs, making sure there’s opportunity for businesses to succeed and finding ways to create every opportunity for businesses to grow. Now here’s a bill that could severely hurt the economies of Bozeman and Missoula and republicans are ok with that. Why? Let’s wait until this actually becomes a problem that plagues women’s sports in MT. It’s way too premature.
 
This will be my final statement on this matter cause quite frankly, I’m getting tired of this topic. Gianforte is a businessman. That’s why you and many others on this board voted for him. He was different and you all believed he would bring change to MT. So far, he’s signed many bills that have helped Main Street businesses. We will see how important he thinks helping MT small businesses is vs. an issue that could be addressed far down the road when it becomes a much bigger matter. This will be his first true test as governor. Will he help businesses in Bozeman and Missoula make much more money for home games by virtue of deep playoff runs (we’re talking millions), as well as making sure public schools retain the millions in education funding? Or will he decide to take place in the culture wars on something that has only occurred one time in MT in our 131 year history? The ball is now in his court.
 
Paytonlives said:
Griz til I die said:
I really don’t feel like having a billion people jump down my throat again a couple weeks ago, but someone answer this question for me honestly. Why was the legislature spending so much time obsessing over something that has only happened once in the 131 year history of the state of Montana? Seems like a stretch to put so much on the line over a virtual non-issue. Now if it was happening all the time and really was plaguing women’s sports in MT, then sure I could understand that. This to me just feels like something that shouldn’t be addressed until it really is a problem in MT and right now, it is far from that. Can we at least all agree on that?
Click to expand...

Because its a slippery slope that other states have slipped down. Better to end it before it starts
Click to expand...

This is why I’ve long held that Montana should immediately pass legislation banning horses from owning/operating delicatessens. Nip it in the bud.
 
Griz till die, I don't understand or follow this issue or the bills, and don't have an overall view. A few things, tho, in terms of arguments.

If the issue rarely comes up, what's wrong with having a law on it? The law will never come into play (and won't harm anyone).

What's wrong with being proactive? Just because no car has crashed off of a cliff, doesn't mean a speed limit or guard rail isn't a good idea.

I agree on the ncaa argument, unless the bill/governor has the ability to put a halt to the bill. As much as I dislike the ncaa, they have some ability to goof things up here.

While the feds can, in theory, cut off funding, I thought I had read that the feds have never cut off educational funds. I just can't see the feds punishing a whole bunch of kids, and a whole bunch of voters, by cutting off funds.

I agree that there are a lot of bigger issues for the legislature to spend time on, than this one.

I always liked the line that: The MT legislature meets for 90 days every two years. Some people think it would be better if they met for 2 days every 90 years.
 
PlayerRep said:
Griz till die, I don't understand or follow this issue or the bills, and don't have an overall view. A few things, tho, in terms of arguments.

If the issue rarely comes up, what's wrong with having a law on it? The law will never come into play (and won't harm anyone).

What's wrong with being proactive? Just because no car has crashed off of a cliff, doesn't mean a speed limit or guard rail isn't a good idea.

I agree on the ncaa argument, unless the bill/governor has the ability to put a halt to the bill. As much as I dislike the ncaa, they have some ability to goof things up here.

While the feds can, in theory, cut off funding, I thought I had read that the feds have never cut off educational funds. I just can't see the feds punishing a whole bunch of kids, and a whole bunch of voters, by cutting off funds.

I agree that there are a lot of bigger issues for the legislature to spend time on, than this one.

I always liked the line that: The MT legislature meets for 90 days every two years. Some people think it would be better if they met for 2 days every 90 years.
Click to expand...
All fair points. Ultimately what this comes down to for me is the bigger picture. I tend to agree that at some point we probably should take action on this bill but right now is not the time. This will hurt economically and we’re coming off a pandemic and I would think we’d all like to see small businesses get back on track. I’m just worried about the bigger picture that’s all.
 
The better route is for the 5 "power" FCS conferences to get together and decide how to run the playoffs, and tell the NCAA to pound sand. Get a better deal from ESPN, and hold the Natty at that fabulous new stadium in LV. Only in a woke America could the position of protecting women from male athletes with an identity crisis be considered as improper discrimination. Next the woke will want pedophiles to compete in kids soccer and be Scoutmasters. oh wait......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top