Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Ubiquitous <weberm@polaris.net>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: Riley Gaines advocates for women!
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2025 14:35:11 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 64
Message-ID: <vnbbhg$1vb08$2@dont-email.me>
References: <vn4irf$3fstj$1@dont-email.me> <vn704s$cj14$1@dont-email.me> <vn743p$i53s$1@dont-email.me> <vn8blk$11j61$1@dont-email.me> <vn8n2r$163m1$2@dont-email.me> <vn8nr7$15mfk$1@dont-email.me> <2ijhpj1h48rri29m2r7r9g1ptgrqsfj7p1@4ax.com>
Injection-Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2025 20:35:12 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="96992b4defd6ba7c1ca4d1da3642de61";
	logging-data="2075656"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+oOGOooIipQWdZeW4yZi53yrnFHr/ordQ="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:64LG+/5+IGQvlizXg0FpD/pZp10=
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.12N (x86 32bit)
Bytes: 3732

NoBody@nowhere.com wrote:
> moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
>> On 1/27/2025 2:33 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>> "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>> On 1/27/2025 12:03 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>> "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 1/26/2025 9:34 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>>>> "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 1/26/2025 6:23 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>>>>>> "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 1/26/2025 1:55 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> ""Adam H. Kerman"" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>>>  Riley Gaines slams Democrats. Republicans take the moral high 
>>>>>>>>>>>>  ground.
>>>>>>>>>>>>  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kItskvsbizI
>>>>>>>>>>>         
>>>>>>>>>>>   Love Riley. She speaks facts.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>   What law forces a declaration of gender at birth?
>>>>>>>>>       
>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure what video you watched, but this one was about a law
>>>>>>>>> stopping grown men from sexually assaulting female athletes by 
>>>>>>>>> exposing themselves in women's private restrooms and changing 
>>>>>>>>> rooms, and keeping men from taking trophies, scholarships, and 
>>>>>>>>> other benefits in sports by pretending to be women.
>>>>>>>>>       
>>>>>>>>> This is not a law about forcing declarations of gender at birth.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Maybe I misunderstood.  I thought the issue came down to who's male 
>>>>>>>> and who's female, with the debatable certainty of one or the other.
>>>>>>>     
>>>>>>>  If you're a female athlete and there's a penis wagging in your face 
>>>>>>>  in the women's locker room, it's pretty certain what the problem is 
>>>>>>>  there.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  I'm not sure it *is* all that certain.
>>>>>   
>>>>>  Of course you're not. What's brutally obvious to normal people 
>>>>>  continually eludes you.
>>>>>   
>>>>>>  E.g., *any* uninvited crotch in  *anyone's* face is problematic.  
>>>>>>  Regardless, I think the particular social mores you want enforced 
>>>>>>  would need you to define, in unambiguous legalese, who's male and 
>>>>>>  who's female.  Imo, that won't be trivial.
>>>>
>>>> Rather than resort to ad hominem, why not state the "brutally obvious"?
>>> 
>>> The man had his penis exposed in a women's locker room.
>>
>>And that runs afoul of what (proposed?) statute?  E.g., what about a 
>>*woman* who exposes her (new) penis in a women's locker room?
>>
>>Point being that it's not enough merely to say something disgusts you...
>
>Imagine, you attempting to make the obvious confusing....

That's his tell for whenever he has lost a debate.

[Kerman's incorrect foramtting fixed.]

--
Not a joke! Don't jump!