Poll: What should women do about transdudes in female sports?

What should women do about transdudes in female sports?

  • 1. Continue to compete, honoring transgenders.

  • 2. Don't show up at all.

  • 3. When the starting whistle blows, all the women just take a knee.


Results are only viewable after voting.
eah, we're biased all right.

We're biased against violent fucking leftards that try to kill us. And put our children in fear for their lives.

Good on Kyle. He's going to be a rich man at leftist expense. We need more like him.

Actually, Kyle needs to worry about civil suits from the people he maimed and killed. Maybe his mommy can drive him to court.

Then everything comes in....
 
Oh, I don't think you can cure bigots of their bigotry. Just make you social pariahs is good enough for me. The problem is, you are already there. Go to work tomorrow, and then start doing your rantings about gay people and see how long you still have a job.

Most normal people are fine with gays. It's the homophobic who are the outliers.

Not supporting the LGBT lifestyle doesn't make someone a bigot. I have a much bigger problem with thugs than I do gay people. I have like 3 gay friends, and no thug friends.
In your delusional rants about how bad straight white males are, you forget to understand that 99.9999% of us aren't as bad as you make us out to be. This is the problem with you RP's (radical progressives). Trying to make yourselves out to be better than the rest of us. That you're idea's and beliefs are better. In short, you're just a bunch of whiney crybabies claiming to be victims of something that doesn't even exist.

Do you know how long it takes to get annoyed by whiney people like yourself, who's always claiming the sky is falling just on you? About that long.

So you can stop with the arrogant snobby attitude and realize that normal gay people aren't the ones we're annoyed with. It's you pushy queer's who always claiming to be a victim of something.
 
Right. So when a white woman gets two weeks at a Club Fed and a black woman gets five years, just remember, the "laws" are the same... it's the application that's the problem.

Why do you come up with such bullshit stories? Two people with two entirely different crimes and two entirely different criminal histories. One never had an outstanding parking ticket in her life and the other one was hooking up people for drug sales and awaiting her trial for that crime when she committed another one.

Well, you can think that, but it's simply not true. Trump didn't win the popular vote in 2016 and he didn't win it in 2020. Polls before Covid saw Biden (and every other Democrat) easily beating him.

The only thing rallies showed was that Trump was such a narcissist that he was willing to risk the lives of his followers in mass spreader events and Biden was a decent human being.

WTF does the popular vote have to do with anything. We don't use that in this country for President and never have. It's 100% meaningless. Yes, I do think that the only way a person could get that many votes is by stupid voters. You'd have to be completely stupid to vote for a guy that had no accomplishments in his 40 years in federal government who's son was under an FBI investigation in matters he too was involved with. Morons don't pay attention to politics and the more people like that, the more commie votes.
 
Not supporting the LGBT lifestyle doesn't make someone a bigot. I have a much bigger problem with thugs than I do gay people. I have like 3 gay friends, and no thug friends.
In your delusional rants about how bad straight white males are, you forget to understand that 99.9999% of us aren't as bad as you make us out to be. This is the problem with you RP's (radical progressives). Trying to make yourselves out to be better than the rest of us. That you're idea's and beliefs are better. In short, you're just a bunch of whiney crybabies claiming to be victims of something that doesn't even exist.

Uh, guy, most straight men aren't bigots like you are. And the "some of my best friends..." is almost always the last cry of a bigot.

The very fact that you are so threatened by gay people that you want to censor even mentioning them says quite a lot.

Do you know how long it takes to get annoyed by whiney people like yourself, who's always claiming the sky is falling just on you? About that long.

Says the guy who thinks the sky if falling because he paid $4.00 for gasoline?

So you can stop with the arrogant snobby attitude and realize that normal gay people aren't the ones we're annoyed with. It's you pushy queer's who always claiming to be a victim of something.

First, I'm straight.
Secondly, you only get stuff in this country by being pushy. - i.e. pointing out the absurdity of the status quo.

You RP's can't stand honest justice, can you? You honestly think that only racist thugs have the right to self defense?

I'd be all for honest justice. Let's let every criminal have a million dollar defense like Shooty McFlopsweat did. You'd have half the people being let out of prison instead of being plead into a cell by their inept public defender.
 
If he's assured by his attorneys it's a clear cut case, then they will settle out of court for an undisclosed amount of money and we'll probably never know. But it will be fun to watch.

If the media companies don't offer him a substantial settlement, he has nothing whatsoever to lose by taking his chances in court. And the media companies know it. Conversely, they really have nothing to gain by letting it go to court, because you can never be sure what a jury's going to do, and dragging out the public discussion of this whole issue can only hurt them. It doesn't even matter what the media's lawyers think of his case; it's far more cost effective for them to negotiate a large settlement - which is still less than he's asking - which makes it all go away.
 
Even Covid 2.0 can't stop the slaughter in November.

Yeah but they're trying anyway:



 
Why do you come up with such bullshit stories? Two people with two entirely different crimes and two entirely different criminal histories. One never had an outstanding parking ticket in her life and the other one was hooking up people for drug sales and awaiting her trial for that crime when she committed another one.

Um, yeah, not really.

One defrauded hard working students out of the chance for college because she didn't make her daughter work very hard.
The other just got her kid out of a school where students are being shot.

The disparity in their sentences shows how racist our system is.

WTF does the popular vote have to do with anything. We don't use that in this country for President and never have. It's 100% meaningless. Yes, I do think that the only way a person could get that many votes is by stupid voters. You'd have to be completely stupid to vote for a guy that had no accomplishments in his 40 years in federal government who's son was under an FBI investigation in matters he too was involved with. Morons don't pay attention to politics and the more people like that, the more commie votes.

Frankly, the stupid voter is the one who looks at corpses being hauled away in freezer trucks, riots in the streets, wildfires burning the west, and double digit unemployment and says, "Wow, what a great job he is doing, let's give him four more years!"

The reality is, the numbers didn't really move that much. Voter participation was higher on both sides, Trump got the exact same percentage of the vote Republicans have been getting for years. The only difference was in 2016, a bunch of arrogant people voted third party because the media told them Hillary had this in the bag. Oops. We forgot we use a dumb system devised by slave owners to pick a president!
 
If the media companies don't offer him a substantial settlement, he has nothing whatsoever to lose by taking his chances in court. And the media companies know it. Conversely, they really have nothing to gain by letting it go to court, because you can never be sure what a jury's going to do, and dragging out the public discussion of this whole issue can only hurt them. It doesn't even matter what the media's lawyers think of his case; it's far more cost effective for them to negotiate a large settlement - which is still less than he's asking - which makes it all go away.

If it goes to court it will be public record and everybody will know the verdict against the media companies. If they settle out of court, part of the deal will be a non-disclosure agreement where he'll be bound by contract no not tell anybody about anything.
 
If the media companies don't offer him a substantial settlement, he has nothing whatsoever to lose by taking his chances in court. And the media companies know it. Conversely, they really have nothing to gain by letting it go to court, because you can never be sure what a jury's going to do, and dragging out the public discussion of this whole issue can only hurt them. It doesn't even matter what the media's lawyers think of his case; it's far more cost effective for them to negotiate a large settlement - which is still less than he's asking - which makes it all go away.

He doesn't have a leg to stand on.

Unlike Sandman (AKA Smirky McBitchslap), they have tape of Rittenhouse murdering people. They have tape of him expressing his desire to murder a black man running out of a CVS. They have video tape of him beating the snot out of a 14 year old girl. They have pictures of him hanging out with the Racist Proud Boys.

Stuff the criminal jury wasn't allowed to hear about.

but if they claim they slandered him by calling him a racist or a murderer, all the media companies have to do is roll out those images.
 
Um, yeah, not really.

One defrauded hard working students out of the chance for college because she didn't make her daughter work very hard.
The other just got her kid out of a school where students are being shot.

The disparity in their sentences shows how racist our system is.

Yes, one cut in line in front of a more deserving student and the other lied stealing taxpayer money putting her lowlife kid in a better school where he can cause problems over there. Her sentence was due to awaiting trial for her first crime while committing a second. It doesn't matter what race somebody is that does that. Judges look down on people that haven't learned their lesson yet.

Frankly, the stupid voter is the one who looks at corpses being hauled away in freezer trucks, riots in the streets, wildfires burning the west, and double digit unemployment and says, "Wow, what a great job he is doing, let's give him four more years!"

The reality is, the numbers didn't really move that much. Voter participation was higher on both sides, Trump got the exact same percentage of the vote Republicans have been getting for years. The only difference was in 2016, a bunch of arrogant people voted third party because the media told them Hillary had this in the bag. Oops. We forgot we use a dumb system devised by slave owners to pick a president!

You mean those corpses in Democrat cities where they didn't lift a finger to stop the riots because they wanted them? And now you make a completely ignorant comment about the west, which is entirely Democrat run, who didn't want to clean up the brush in their forests so they didn't mess up the ecology and they burned down? Then make an even stupider comment about unemployment that was caused by China and commie states closing down their businesses?

See how stupid you look trying to blame a US President for what the Communists here and in China are responsible for?
 
If it goes to court it will be public record and everybody will know the verdict against the media companies. If they settle out of court, part of the deal will be a non-disclosure agreement where he'll be bound by contract no not tell anybody about anything.

Also very true. And if he were to go to court and win, that's just blood in the water for a slew of other cases. It's ultimately far cheaper to settle out-of-court for an amount that would set him up for life - and, as you say, would be under a nondisclosure agreement- than to risk opening those floodgates.

And even if they were to win in court, they still lose in a sense. A court case would be a long, protacted affair, and VERY public. Possibly years spent with every detail picked over and analyzed and discussed on social media? Their reputation is shredded at that point, no matter what happens. And that's not even counting the likelihood of all manner of other stuff that could unexpectedly come to light during that process.

Their legal team doesn't want them anywhere near a courtroom on this, no matter what kind of case they think Kyle can make. In fact, the entire focus of any corporate legal team is to negotiate settlements and avoid court at all costs.
 
Also very true. And if he were to go to court and win, that's just blood in the water for a slew of other cases. It's ultimately far cheaper to settle out-of-court for an amount that would set him up for life - and, as you say, would be under a nondisclosure agreement- than to risk opening those floodgates.

And even if they were to win in court, they still lose in a sense. A court case would be a long, protacted affair, and VERY public. Possibly years spent with every detail picked over and analyzed and discussed on social media? Their reputation is shredded at that point, no matter what happens. And that's not even counting the likelihood of all manner of other stuff that could unexpectedly come to light during that process.

Their legal team doesn't want them anywhere near a courtroom on this, no matter what kind of case they think Kyle can make. In fact, the entire focus of any corporate legal team is to negotiate settlements and avoid court at all costs.

Absolutely. Just bad PR. It's like these guys that get false allegations filed against them by some sexual incident that happened 25 years ago. For rich people it's just easier to pay them off and make it go away instead of dragging it out and giving the Enquirer fodder for the next five years.
 
Yeah, we're biased all right.

We're biased against violent fucking leftards that try to kill us. And put our children in fear for their lives.

Good on Kyle. He's going to be a rich man at leftist expense. We need more like him.

If not for a more obvious preference, I might be tempted to suppose that Incel Joe's probably is that it has the same sort of confusion about the distinction between criminals and human beings that many on the left wrong have about the distinction between men and women.

But it's made it clear enough that it knows the difference, and willfully sides with criminals, against human beings.
 
Says the guy who thinks the sky if [sic] falling because he paid $4.00 for gasoline?

Those of us who work at honest jobs are adversely affected when the cost of getting to and from those jobs increases as drastically as the Democraps have caused it to increase, lately.

I would not expect you to understand, since you're a worthless parasite, and not an honest worker.
 
He doesn't have a leg to stand on.

Unlike Sandman (AKA Smirky McBitchslap), they have tape of Rittenhouse murdering people. They have tape of him expressing his desire to murder a black man running out of a CVS. They have video tape of him beating the snot out of a 14 year old girl. They have pictures of him hanging out with the Racist Proud Boys.

Stuff the criminal jury wasn't allowed to hear about.

but if they claim they slandered him by calling him a racist or a murderer, all the media companies have to do is roll out those images.

This is what happens when you put the shiny side inward.
Cuckoo_FxxDd3V1qUv0CTwEj85oRm7V2zI@350x350.gif
 
Um, wow, are you like some kind of special retard? I mean, I know your gun is an addiction and stuff, but if you want to make comparisons, we do a lot to prevent smoking. Try smoking pretty much anywhere but your house these days. We have hundreds of police hunting drunk drivers. As opposed to guns, where any crazy loon can buy one, and then we wonder why we have so many gun deaths.
Proper discourse doesn't mean you assume. Which you are. I'm not a crazy gun addict. I only own two small handguns. That's it. My wife and I have done handgun training so that in the even we need to protect our persons or our family we can.

The point that you're failing to see is that many blame guns and therefore want guns removed or overly restricted. The same does not hold true for smoking and drinking. This is evidence by the forum. How many "we need to regulate tobacco and alcohol even more" threads do we see?

As for smoking, I don't, never have, never will. Terrible habit. BUT, when the government decided to tell privately owned businesses what they can and can't do in their own business. I have a problem with that. As terrible as smoking is for someone's health, and second hand smoke, if people want to do that, in a private business that would allow them, then so be it.

I will also ask again, how many drunk driving deaths do we need to see before we need to make alcohol illegal again? If you take away suicides, gun deaths are about 20,000. Drunk driving, 10,000. So when does alcohol become a target to make illegal for you?

Soooo many gun deaths. 40,000 in 2019 if I remember the correct year. Over half of those are due to suicide. So that actual number of deaths by a shooter who is not the victim is lower.
Yet, the over 600,000 deaths in this country by means which the gov't could do more or legislate or even make illegal, some of you don't care about those deaths. The truth is in the data.
 
Right. So when a white woman gets two weeks at a Club Fed and a black woman gets five years, just remember, the "laws" are the same... it's the application that's the problem.

All you have are insinuations. Without providing where and when did it happen, and case numbers, all you have are lies.
There is no institutional racism, but you keep screaming there is. If there is, provide the law that you think is racists.
 
Well, it was a miscarriage of justice.

They mostly excluded black people from the jury. They didn't allow the people he shot to be called victims, and they excluded evidence that Rittenhouse hung out with racists and was pre-disposed towards violence.

The judge even asked the jury to applaud a Defense Witness because he was a veteran. Talk about bias.

Just as I said in post you quoted, you base your opinion on MSM talking points and your own ideological prejudices that expose your own racism and bigotry.
Because jury was not to your liking, they must be racists, despite that both sides are equally responsible in their jury selection.
People who attack others are not victims despite of them being shot. They got what they asked for, when you play stupid games, you win stupid prices.
 
Actually, Kyle needs to worry about civil suits from the people he maimed and killed. Maybe his mommy can drive him to court.

Then everything comes in....

"Maybe his mommy can drive him to court."

I can't quite decide how underdeveloped your brain is, or you just have a crush on Rittenhouse.

There it is, that gasp for air and endless hope that something will go your way, and if it doesn't we're all racists.

Sure, they can sue him, but they will have to prove those convicted felons were innocent, and that Rittenhouse is guilty. Good luck with that.
 

Forum List

Back
Top