The second link in your post #123 of this thread points to a cloudfront.net page which has results of a women's Division I event.
Results 131 to 140 of 165
-
- Join Date
- Nov 2011
- Posts
- 2,610
08-27-2019 10:14 PM
-
- Join Date
- Jun 2016
- Posts
- 1,838
08-28-2019 02:07 AMThat link was given AFTER two links that showed what she DID win, which I posted to clarify your nebulous statement that she won an "NCAA title". When I saw that I went hunting to find out what NCAA "title" she'd won, and it was an NCAA II title. I then pointed out that she did not even compete at the NCAA I finals, to emphasize how mediocre her performances have been.
-
- Join Date
- Nov 2011
- Posts
- 2,610
-
- Join Date
- Jul 2008
- Location
- Abilene, TX
- Posts
- 2,150
08-28-2019 05:52 PMhttps://www.thepostmillennial.com/br...8d9qfHp3KOqcwA
Waiting for "regular" women to start really pushing back. As this cancer spreads more and more women will become victims of transgender agenda.You there, on the motorbike! Sell me one of your melons!
-
- Join Date
- Oct 2005
- Location
- right here
- Posts
- 16,062
-
- Join Date
- Dec 2008
- Location
- Sacramento
- Posts
- 2,102
08-28-2019 08:27 PMSimple (in my mind) solution ... Women's competition should be limited to those with XX chromosomes, and an agreed upon upper limit on t-levels.
Those with gender dysphoria, undescended testes, or other conditions that cause them to fall outside of the above, should be treated with respect, but not be allowed to compete in the women's athletics category. In my mind, that is the approach that best honors the overwhelming percentage of women who compete in the women's category.
-
- Join Date
- Oct 2005
- Location
- Indian Territory
- Posts
- 13,819
08-29-2019 04:38 AMbobguild76 has a logical solution.
-
- Join Date
- Aug 2009
- Posts
- 2,366
-
- Join Date
- Oct 2005
- Location
- right here
- Posts
- 16,062
-
- Join Date
- Aug 2009
- Posts
- 2,366