NCAA - North Carolina

#1
J

Joefoxx

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2013
Messages
291
Likes
256
#1
Based on the NCAA's commitment to fairness and inclusion, the Association will relocate all seven previously awarded championship events from North Carolina during the 2016-17 academic year. The NCAA Board of Governors made this decision because of the cumulative actions taken by the state concerning civil rights protections. I wonder if the Belk Bowl will be next?:mf_surrender:
 
#3
#3
I will fully back this move by the NCAA when they modify their gender requirements to allow anyone who "self identifies" as female to compete as a female and earn athletic scholarships for women's sports.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#4
#4
We play West Virginia in Charlotte in 18. If they start moving bowl games I assume it'll be next.
 
#8
#8
That is where the gender-muddled argument leads logically, yes.

Man, my nephew is gonna be hell on wheels on the women's track team. Record-breaking good! I'll bet he's gonna be pretty good at basketball, volleyball and field hockey, too: the boy, I mean the ze, is taller than all the competition!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#9
#9
Wouldn't it be fun if, just for a moment, you could have General Neyland awaken and asked him what he thinks about all this?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#10
#10
OrangeWayOfLife said:
NCGOP killed the NCAA
Click to expand...

No they didn't. Even better that it came from NC where their flagship University has been shown to use fake classes to keep these athletes eligible. Bunch of useless state politicians "peacocking" for their mouth-breathing constituents

Just realized that came from the same woman who went after Kaine's Honduran flag pin :lol:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 people
#12
#12
utvolpj said:
No they didn't. Even better that it came from NC where their flagship University has been shown to use fake classes to keep these athletes eligible. Bunch of useless state politicians "peacocking" for their mouth-breathing constituents

Just realized that came from the same woman who went after Kaine's Honduran flag pin :lol:
Click to expand...

Perhaps you'd like to argue against the actual points in the NCGOP statement instead of attacking the messenger.

Then again, maybe you wouldn't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#13
#13
FatherVol said:
Perhaps you'd like to argue against the actual points in the NCGOP statement instead of attacking the messenger.

Then again, maybe you wouldn't.
Click to expand...

The messenger is an idiot and the message is ridiculous from the start. It's full of false choices and useless comparisons. How could anyone find this credible?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#15
#15
FatherVol said:
Such as?
Click to expand...

Do you honestly believe their goal is to have one, unisex team operating out of one locker room?

Do you honestly believe the ncaa is incapable of handling more than one issue at a time?

Also the irony of calling out the ncaa's political peacocking when this only became an issue because of the political peacocking of the NC gop is hilarious. They started it, got slapped around and laughed at and are now trying to point fingers
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#16
#16
The Obama Administration's official position is that, it is a violation of Title IX to discriminate against anyone who "self identifies" as a female even if their birth gender is male. The requirements do not go beyond self-identity. No medical diagnosis, no requirement for hormone treatments, no established pattern of behavior -- just self identity. The Justice and Education Departments issued directives saying exactly that.

For athletes who were born male, but want to compete as female, the NCAA requires they undergo hormone therapy while competing. Under the rules of the Obama Administration, the NCAA is in violation of Title IX.

Let the NCAA get in compliance before they start taking actions against anyone else.

Hypocrites.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 9 people
#17
#17
Official position? Under the rules? Cite the statute they're violating

Maybe you'd like to address my points. Then again, maybe you wouldn't.
 
#18
#18
And, the NC GOP didn't start it. Charlotte did, when they passed a law that would have prohibited me, as a store owner, from stopping a bearded man from hanging out in the women's restroom -- even if my female customers or children were frightened by "his" presence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#19
#19
FatherVol said:
And, the NC GOP didn't start it. Charlotte did, when they passed a law that would have prohibited me, as a store owner, from stopping a bearded man from hanging out in the women's restroom -- even if my female customers or children were frightened by "his" presence.
Click to expand...

An issue that really wasn't one anyways. Of course it does nothing to stop that from happening in the men's restroom where my boys are does it? Seems pretty short sighted to not protect all children

Are the people in Charlotte repubs or Dems? I guess that's an easy question since you claim they aren't gop
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#20
#20
utvolpj said:
Official position? Under the rules? Cite the statute they're violating
Click to expand...

Sorry. I thought you were informed about the topic you were discussing. Take the 15 seconds needed to use a search engine to find out about it yourself. Try: "Obama gender policy title ix"
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#21
#21
FatherVol said:
Sorry. I thought you were informed about the topic you were discussing. Take the 15 seconds needed to use a search engine to find out about it yourself. Try: "Obama gender policy title ix"
Click to expand...

No, please cite the law (can be passed or just proposed) that states all college teams are unisex and can only use one locker room. That is what was stated in the gop letter I called idiotic and you're defending.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#23
#23
utvolpj said:
No, please cite the law (can be passed or just proposed) that states all college teams are unisex and can only use one locker room. That is what was stated in the gop letter I called idiotic and you're defending.
Click to expand...

PJ, you're wrong on this one.

Here's the May 13, 2016, joint Dept of Justice / Dept of Education letter that has caused such consternation in North Carolina (and plenty of other places):

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-201605-title-ix-transgender.pdf

First, read the opening paragraphs: you'll see that the intent of the letter is to carry the force of law--more specifically, to outline how DoJ and DoE are interpreting and enforcing compliance with Title IX as concerns transgender issues.

Then pay particular attention to numbered paragraph 3 under the "Compliance with Title IX" section. Here, I'll quote and isolate the key parts for you:

"When a school provides sex-segregated activities and facilities, transgender students must be allowed to participate in such activities and access such facilities consistent with their gender identity....

"Athletics. Title IX regulations permit a school to operate or sponsor sex-segregated athletics teams when selection for such teams is based upon competitive skill or when the activity involved is a contact sport. A school may not, however, adopt or adhere to requirements that rely on overly broad generalizations or stereotypes about the differences between transgender students and other students of the same sex (i.e., the same gender identity) or others’ discomfort with transgender students. Title IX does not prohibit age-appropriate, tailored requirements based on sound, current, and research-based medical knowledge about the impact of the students’ participation on the competitive fairness or physical safety of the sport."
Click to expand...

In short, that last bit says, "you can keep trans-gender "girls" off girl teams, and trans-gender "boys" off boy teams if you can prove that doing otherwise would be unfair or unsafe. Prove it, that is, using "sound, current, and research-based medical knowledge."

Who defines what is "current" or "sound" or "research-based"? Well, Joe Blow sure can't walk out and say, "Hey, boys can run faster than girls, you can't have boys on the girls' track team!" That's not research-based.

Has there been sufficient research on these types of questions? Current research? "Sound" research? That's in the eye of the beholder.

And who is the beholder? Why, the federal government. It is a federal law, they're the ones to enforce it (or not, as they wish). So they get to say what's "sound" and what's "current" and what's "valid".

Can you begin to see why some institutions and programs are worried about the direction DoE and DoJ are taking on this front?

It wasn't North Carolina that started this. It was our very own federal government, with these new interpretations and applications of Title IX into a realm it was most certainly not originally passed to address.

This is a can of worms. And it's going to get messier before it gets cleaned up.



p.s. Right before the section on "Athletics" is the section on restrooms and locker rooms. You'll notice that it explicitly says trans-gender students must be allowed into the restroom of the gender they identify as.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#24
#24
That's not what the NCGOP letter states. Please cite where this is going to form unisex teams using one locker room. That is their argument and it's ridiculous

It also isn't just a choose male on Monday and female on Tuesday thing. It must be declared by the student or their parents. Believing this is going to cause a mass movement of boys declaring to be girls in order to play sports is completely idiotic. This decision will follow them

It is also yet to be challenged in court where it would surely lose if there was no evidence behind the students claims.

This is simply being used by the NCGOP to get their supporters down from the hills and in a voting booth
 
#25
#25
utvolpj said:
That's not what the NCGOP letter states. Please cite where this is going to form unisex teams using one locker room. That is their argument and it's ridiculous

It also isn't just a choose male on Monday and female on Tuesday thing. It must be declared by the student or their parents. Believing this is going to cause a mass movement of boys declaring to be girls in order to play sports is completely idiotic. This decision will follow them

It is also yet to be challenged in court where it would surely lose if there was no evidence behind the students claims.

This is simply being used by the NCGOP to get their supporters down from the hills and in a voting booth
Click to expand...

Maybe, but -- unless you're more focused on North Carolina politics than NCAA athletics (and isn't this forum supposed to be about the latter?), that doesn't matter.

Nor does it matter whether there are "mass movements" or not. All it takes is one self-identified girl with real athletic talent and the musculature/skeletal build of a boy to destroy women's track and field. Bring it down like a house of cards. Make all of America sit up and say, "what the heck are we doing here?"

Same for volleyball. And swimming. And field hockey. Just one, in each of those sports, and you might as well throw away every women's sport record book. A whole new world.

All it will take is one 6'6" "girl" with a talented boy's musculature and skeletal build to destroy women's basketball. Boy, I sure hope that's the Lady Vols, don't you? Get themselves another NCAA championship. Do it for Pat!

I already cited the letter for you, PJ. If you chose not to read it, or can't understand its implications in full, say so and I'll try to help you through it. But that is most certainly what it opens the door to.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top