H.R.5 - Equality Act

Because the Democrats clapped like seals when Biden brought it up at the SOTU last month.

I will write you have a point that there's a story going on out there that had a man, not even presenting as a woman, changing his clothes in a ladies changing room saying he identified at the moment as being a woman and management didn't know what to do about it due to existing anti-discrimination laws.

But even so, I'm also hearing that states and organizations are finally banning bio men from women's spaces. Will that continue should this "failed" bill become law? Is there a time limit on bringing it to a vote in the Senate? If so, I don't think Biden would have mentioned it but could be wrong.

But it could be worse than bio men in women's dressing rooms. The Left is looking to normalize child rape, calling those that would do it, "MAPs", Minor Attracted Persons and claim it to be just another orientation. Would this law, that specifically calls for bans on discrimination based upon orientation, grease the skids towards de-criminalizing and normalizing child rape? Before you answer, remember: they took a law banning unwarranted searches and seizures and said it banned laws regulating abortions.

 

If you say so. I had no idea he brought up a bill which was killed 3 yrs ago. Is there a reason I should care Biden brought something up in SOTU?

I only came here to say there was no need for that bill, so it deserved to die.

If you say so.

 

Sports is actually the easy one. You find a criteria that puts people on an equal playing field, and then you don't let sex or race or anything like that factor in. Yes you will probably get a level where it will be 99% men, but if there is that outlier woman who can actually keep up and compete at that level, she's in. And then there will be of course mixed levels but they are still competing on a level playing field.

 

"Pedophilia is an unchangeable sexual orientation"


Interesting how hard it is to find this Tedx talk by simply searching for it at youtube. Seems to have been buried.

Yes, Biden brought up what he called the, "tran equality act".


If you think biological men should be barred for women's spaces, you should care that Biden et. al. want to pass this bill, which did pass the house and appears to have the power to be brought up in the Senate at will and then signed into law by Biden or his replacement should MAGA lose in 2024.

Right now, we've finally regained our sanity and are barring men from women's spaces. If this law were to pass, I don't think that would be legal any longer. You?

 

You found us out. We started with the liberal idea of opening electing their leaders instead of a monarchy, and we've been riding that slippery slope down even since, and now we have corrupted the majority of the world! But wa ha ha ha ha!

 

President don't pass bills, and I'll say it for the FIFTH and last time: There was no need for this bill.

I have no clue why you argue as if I supported the bill, when I literally said (repeatedly) that it deserved to die.

 

This idea would pretty much erase women from sports. Title IX is supposed to give them a fair and equal opportunity to compete amongst themselves.
Do you support repeal of Title IX?
I do but for different reasons (Women weren't nearly as interested in sports as men. When it was decided there must be gun point "equality" it was easier in many cases to shut down boys programs than produce more girls programs).

I've written that we are finally regaining our good senses and banning bio men from women's spaces. Do you support banning bio men from women's spaces? If so, I think this bill would put us back on the insane path of pretending bio men can be women. Do you support being on that path?

 

The law should not discriminate or allow discrinination based on being trans-gender, although I don't agree with the stipulation about bathrooms being open based purely on gender identity which can't be quantified.

Perhaps amend the law to say that if you have completed sex reassignment surgery THEN you can use the bathroom of your new gender. It may not stop every single person who would take advantage of that law to be creepy and commit crimes, but it will stop most since they won't actually want to transition in order to do it.

 

Others in this thread argue that the law should already due what the "trans equality act" would do so there is no need for it. As it hasn't passed, we'll see what the result of this ends up being:

 

Thank you for explaining this act... I was not sure what it actually was.

I do NOT SUPPORT this act!

On the other hand.....

https://near-death.com/christian-andreason-nde/

 

Sorry for the delay. Meant.to get to this earlier, but then life happened.

No it wouldn't. At worse it would make a couple of divisions in which there were some men and some women. But if a given woman is at a level where she is above the average, then she needs to be competing at that level, where it is shared by some men. If all the assertions of opponents are correct, then we'll end up with one division
that that is all men with the rare woman, and one that will be all women, with the very rare man, with a couple more that are mixed in between. Remember that we are grouping them not by an arbitrary criteria such as age, sex, race etc, but by a criteria related to the sport in question that put the players of the division on equal footing. The fact that it would result is at least two divisions that were only one sex or the other will prove opponents correct and prevent others from complaining about sexual discrimination.

I neither support nor oppose Title IX. But as pointed out the majority of women would still be competing against each other. Personally I see no right to not have to compete against men as far as sex goes. The right to compete on equal footing yes, but that's what I'm calling for.

I am all for making sure females get a chance to compete and play in sports. My idea would allow that even in areas where few females want to play. If only 5 females want to play baseball why not fill out the remaining 4 position (simplifying) with males of equal ability? That last part is what is key.

 

It does look like women in women's sports will be erased if biological men are allowed to compete in their spaces. Example: https://womenssportspolicy.org/253-male-victories-in-female-sports/

578+ Male* Victories in Female Sports
*a.k.a Males Who Identify as Trans, or Transwomen
This tally was started in March 2023 in response to the argument, “But there aren’t very many, so what’s the harm?” Actually, there are many male athletes competing in women’s sports. The Washington Stand found that 28 national girls or women’s sports titles were won by trans-identified men between 2003 and 2022, with “the trend accelerating over the past three years.” Each male victory has a multiplier effect, displacing many girls or women from opportunities designed for them.

And that's without even writing of the sense of violation felt by women when they go to women's spaces only to find a man in there who may even present as a man but says he is gender fluid and at the moment, identifies as a woman.

 

That does nothing to address my suggestion. What you are showing here has nothing to it to place males and females in groups of equal footing. If a woman is able to compete against a male in which they are on equal footing, then she has no reason to not compete. We're not talking about putting women up against men who exceed the woman's capability. And as noted, with this system, you would still have the divisions where the vast majority of members are either women or men, with maybe a few exceptions. Only now no one can claim exclusion based on either sex or gender. A transwoman would be grouped with those that they are physically in line with, and can't say that they are in unfair competition. Even if they aren't in a division with cis men, they would still be in one that is mostly males, cis or trans, along with any cis or trans females who can compete.on that same level.

 

We've experienced the reality of this and find that women will simply be erased in sports if we do not stick to a hard and fast rule: you do not mix the sexes in sports. It is why we have Title IX to begin with.

 

Show me where we have tried ability based criteria for making separate leagues within sports to put people of equal ability in those separate groupings.

 

We've had weight based fighting matches where one person was a woman, the other, a biological male and the woman is typically clobbered by the bio-male.
Rules tend to be based upon very broad standards. You may have the best judgement on Earth and we could trust you to murder the right people. But we don't try to make such fine points in law. Just don't murder people, even if you as an individual could be trusted to kill the correct ones that need killing.
In sports, we have a very broad standard: we segregate by sex and that seems to be the best, fairest way to handle it.

 

Interesting. I talk about ability based criteria, and you instead throw out something that is by no means based on ability.

Let me ask you this. Is a woman delivering a punch with 200 lbs of force somehow hitting lighter than a man whose punch deliver 200 lbs of force? Or is 200 lbs of force simply 200 lbs of force no matter the sex of who delivers the blow?

 

Weight classes are about trying to apply some criteria that should make for more even matches. If that's not close enough for you I cannot imagine how many hairs you would split to end sex based sport divisions.
200 lbs of force? How often? How fast the delivery? Stamina? Vision and hearing tests? Reflexes, age, years trained, criteria for over all skill levels? As I wrote before, we make broad standards for most things. Ensuring women have their own sports spaces seems imperative to me and a growing number of Americans.

 

I think only people with a verified Y chromosome should be allowed to vote on that idiocy.