Quote (Djunior @ Aug 6 2024 09:01am)
See this is exactly what I mean. Oh hes just exceptionally built for his sport from his GENETIC advantage from birth, which isn't limited to just his limbs but also the chemical process (probably isn't the correct term) in that he generates far less lactic acid than a normal human.
Genetic advantages exist, giving a thumbs up to 1 and a thumbs down to another because you think its fits the woke agenda does note advance the argument in my opinion but only weakens it.
I am firmly in the slot you are what you are when you're born, that's your washroom, that's your sports league (if separate leagues exist), etc., etc. But I absolutely believe some will dominate because of their genetics and that's all this is.
But if they took performance enhancing drugs, sure toss them out, strip any winnings, etc. But if they didn't and they are just "well built" as you say, I don't see the issue.
I think this is a very odd road to go down when were talking about such a tiny, tiny, miniscule % of people that have this genetic condition, even smaller that have it and choose to do sports, even smaller that have it and are actually good at a sport. I think this one is let go and stick to the main arguments for men in female sports.
This post was edited by SBD on Aug 6 2024 09:11am