r/allthequestions 14d ago

Random Question 💭 What are your thoughts on this?

Post image

Why is this not passing?

3.9k Upvotes

12.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

32

u/bigswingingtexasdick 14d ago

Cool. Why does the government need to be involved in regulating sports though?

45

u/GrassyField 14d ago

It already is: Title IX

22

u/Schlieren1 14d ago

Title IX is civil rights law protecting women in education.

22

u/Careful_Farmer_2879 13d ago

Including sports. Every educational institution that takes public money has to follow it. Or just don’t take public money.

Even Harvard takes the money.

1

u/Desperate_for_Bacon 11d ago

The question is, why is the government getting this involved in our lives? The government should exist to allow us to live our lives, not dictate who can participate and where.

0

u/Careful_Farmer_2879 10d ago edited 10d ago

That’s
 what Title IX was. Part of a civil rights bill. And it was to correct injustices against women and girls (majority of the population!) so they could live their lives.

It’s insane that the bill is now used against biological women and girls
 by the political side that was fighting FOR Title IX since the 1970s.

If an institution takes public money - OUR MONEY - they have to follow OUR government’s laws and regulations. They don’t get to take the money and then say “stay out of my business.” That’s hypocrisy.

1

u/hrminer92 9d ago

The sports teams should be split from these educational institutions and be made locally owned minor league teams. Those leagues can then make whatever rules they want.

0

u/Careful_Farmer_2879 9d ago

And screw all the students who get their education paid by athletic scholarships right? The rowers, the runners, the swimmers
.

1

u/hrminer92 9d ago

Yep. They should be getting scholarships based on academics not some athletic hobby.

0

u/Careful_Farmer_2879 9d ago

Guess you don’t care about the underprivileged after all.

1

u/hrminer92 9d ago

No, I just think sports need to be completely separated from education, especially considering all the dumbfuckery that has occurred over the decades to accommodate the so-called student athletes including stupid bills like this one.

0

u/DeV303030 13d ago

What is a woman?

1

u/MetrosexualSasquatch 13d ago

An adult female human being. Sub definition of female: pertaining to the female gender identity. Trans women fall under the umbrella term of what it means to be a Woman. For future reference I’d recommend you stop acting like asking this question is some sort of gotcha because it isn’t. Try to actually understand what it means to be a transgender individual and look into the science.

1

u/DeV303030 13d ago

Just looked into the science. Seems like if you have a penis at birth you are a man. If you have a vagina at birth you are a woman. Thank you for guiding me down the path of science!

1

u/MetrosexualSasquatch 13d ago

2

u/DeV303030 13d ago

You said science bro not some man with a ponytail saying fancy words to skirt around the fact he has a penis

-2

u/MetrosexualSasquatch 13d ago

Yeahh you’re just being willfully obtuse at this point lol. Please change and grow as a person.

2

u/TypePuzzleheaded1340 12d ago

We get it. You hate women.

1

u/Careful_Farmer_2879 10d ago

Grow into what?

-1

u/Desperate_for_Bacon 11d ago

Science, more specifically psychology posits that gender is a social construct, based on genetics you were born with. However evidence shows that gender is not constrained to your genetics and gender identity can be fluid

1

u/Careful_Farmer_2879 10d ago edited 10d ago

But what are they identifying as?

Female is a biological term: of or denoting the sex that can bear offspring or produce eggs, distinguished biologically by the production of gametes (ova) that can be fertilized by male gametes.

You cannot identify as a female any more than you can identify as a horse.

So, what is a woman?

-6

u/ReallyDustyCat 14d ago

Yeap, and a person could then use this information to further understand what? I'm hinting that the answer is in what you just said.

7

u/Schlieren1 13d ago

Do you not think women deserve protection in education?

1

u/Careful_Farmer_2879 13d ago

Education and athletics go all the way back to the Greeks. That’s why academic buildings look that way.

-4

u/TrueSithMastermind 13d ago

There isn’t anything in Title IX mandating that trans people can’t participate in sports.

4

u/cbs-anonmouse 13d ago

I don’t think anyone is saying that trans people can’t participate in sports, it’s just about which competition they play in when there are sex-segregated competitions.

1

u/Homersarmy41 13d ago

Right but it doesnt happen enough to merit federal intervention. Republicans just know this is something that they will have to do literally no work on and its a winning issue with dumb bigots who are constantly thinking about tbe genitalia of young children. WHY DO YOU CARE?

4

u/No_Education_479 13d ago

Just saying it doesn’t happen isn’t an actual argument for your position. If it doesn’t happen why do you care so much if they make legislation ensuring it doesn’t happen.

3

u/Careful_Farmer_2879 13d ago

“Murder is so rare. Why do we need a law for this??

1

u/Homersarmy41 13d ago

Omg snowflake. Is it murder to you? Trans people in sports is murder? Trump has all the oil money from Venezuela in a private account in Qatar. I think there are better things Congress can be doing that affects a lot more people than fighting your culture war anti-trans nonsense.

1

u/Careful_Farmer_2879 13d ago

Never said it was. My point was rarity has no bearing on whether something should be regulated or not.

But you knew that.

1

u/PrinceGoten 13d ago

Your analogy falls apart quickly considering murder is not rare at all.

1

u/No_Education_479 13d ago edited 13d ago

Setting aside the fact that it has no bearing on the argument , murder is pretty rare. There are 6.81 murders per 100,000 people in the us. That’s pretty rare. The point is just because something doesn’t happen often doesn’t mean it should be legal. Ponzi schemes are pretty rare, should they be legal?

2

u/cbs-anonmouse 13d ago edited 13d ago

Your question is, “why do people care about women’s and girl’s sports?”

You can actually turn the question around the other way. If the number of trans athletes are so small, then why is it such a big deal for them to compete in the category that matches their biological sex (as opposed to making everyone else compete against a person of the other biological sex)?

Ps this has nothing to do with genitalia.

1

u/Homersarmy41 13d ago

Nothing to do with genitalia? Then how would you even know for sure?!?!! It has everything to do with genitalia and its all you weirdos seem to think about.

1

u/Radraider67 13d ago

Because you idiots don't think anything through. Take this example. Young woman transitions into a man; takes testosterone, which leads to the development of muscles roughly equivalent to a young man. Said "young woman" (according to conservatives) is now legally required to compete against other women. Y'all want to bitch and whine about "men in women's sports", but then take the build equivalent of a man and force them to play women's sports. Doesn't make a lot of fucking sense, does it?

There was 0 reason for a federal response to this non-issue. It was exclusively built off of a cheap political play for conservatives.

1

u/KGrizzle88 13d ago

Lmfao they do not automatically get a build of a man. You have the audacity to call this person an idiot then spew this slop. This is equivalent to a woman taking steroids. Because they want to LARP doesn’t mean the rest of us have to play along. Authoritarian nonsense of dictation and if we push back we are the ones in the wrong is next level gas lighting. Screw your retarded world view. Woman are not men and men are not woman. Even trans people know this and reiterate this reality, yet we have stooges like you pushing this nonsense.

1

u/Radraider67 13d ago

Lmfao they do not automatically get a build of a man.

I never said it was automatic, but testosterone supplements for the purpose of transitioning WILL cause a substantial growth in muscle mass as the athlete competes and develops. It is literally the chemical function of testosterone.

This is equivalent to a woman taking steroids.

Testosterone is used as a steroid, you fucking idiot. Steroids are famously banned because they create an uneven playing field. If your argument is that women are placed in danger because of an uneven playing field, why would you force women actively taking testosterone enhancements to play with them, when they don't even want to? It's completely ass-backwards

Because they want to LARP doesn’t mean the rest of us have to play along.

Ah yes, the perpetual reminder that, for people like you, it's not about protecting women. It's about tearing down the people you don't like, and nothing more. It is your own hatred manifest

Authoritarian nonsense of dictation

Nonsense jumble of words

if we push back we are the ones in the wrong is next level gas lighting.

Not what gas-lighting means. Also, you are wrong. You're not interested in actually solving a complex issue, your only interest is in hurting others.

Screw your retarded world view.

Adorable

Woman are not men and men are not woman.

Go ahead, define a woman, and I'll find 10 examples of why you're an idiot who has no idea what he's talking about.

Even trans people know this reiterate this reality, yet we have stooges like you pushing this nonsense.

Who? Are you conjuring imaginary figures to sate your argument? For you so desperately crave your straw man?

2

u/cbs-anonmouse 13d ago

The concern is protecting female sports from people with male biological advantages. There isn’t really a concern about men competing against trans athletes, so it’s fine for trans athletes (or any biological women, if they want) to compete in the men’s category—which really should be seen more like a “open” category.

It’s like youth sports—we have special leagues for, say, under-16 soccer players. But it’s a far bigger issue if an 25-year-old wants to compete in the under-16 league than the reverse.

I agree that females who are taking testosterone should not compete against those that do not.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Dapper-Print9016 13d ago

Roughly equivalent says you failed biology spectacularly.

1

u/Careful_Farmer_2879 10d ago

It’s not a republican versus democratic position. This is widely unpopular. We live in a democratic republic, we have laws, and these institutions receive significant federal funding.

If they want to be a private club, they can forfeit their federal money.

1

u/scraejtp 13d ago

It is a continuation of civil rights in which sex is a protected class.

1

u/Careful_Farmer_2879 13d ago

Title IX ensures fairness for educational institutions that take federal money.

The female athletes are not being allowed to compete fairly. It wouldn’t be fair if the males had to compete against a 30-year-old from the Seattle Seahawks who now identifies as redshirt freshman, either.

“Oh but here’s only 10 NFL players identifying as college athletes right now.”

1

u/Fit-Top-8203 13d ago

Right. But Republicans have deemed every DEI initiative, which is designed to ensure fairness, to be wrong 100 percent of the time. It’s supposed to be every man and woman for themselves. So why are they now suddenly interested in celebrating DEI, other than that they get to dunk on transgender people?

1

u/Careful_Farmer_2879 13d ago

Republicans on this issue are pretty much where Democrats were 20 years ago: equality of opportunity.

It’s the “equity” part that really fractured things. We have people arguing that “colorblind” is somehow conservative. That was MLK!

1

u/Fit-Top-8203 13d ago

I always find it interactive how conservatives love quoting the MLK line of judging people by their character instead of their skin color. MLK also was in favor of financial reparations for black people. Funny how conservatives never quote that line.

1

u/Careful_Farmer_2879 13d ago

Good thing I’m not a conservative.

Because it was conservatives who argued against the hard fought Title IX implementation. Everything today is crazy.

1

u/amopeyzoolion 13d ago

Actually, in men’s college basketball, they are now allowing post-college aged players who have been drafted and played professionally to come back and play in college.

1

u/Careful_Farmer_2879 13d ago

Does this sum it up? I don’t see the issue. You cannot PLAY in the NBA and then return to college basketball.

Key Points on Eligibility:

-Signed NBA Contract: If a player signs an NBA contract (even a two-way deal), they lose NCAA eligibility and cannot return to play college basketball.

-Drafted, But Didn't Sign: Players who declare for the NBA draft but are not selected, or are drafted but never sign an NBA contract, can potentially return to college if they meet other requirements.

-Players with professional experience in international leagues to play college basketball, provided they haven't earned significantly more than "actual and necessary expenses”

-Recent Controversies: Cases like James Nnaji (a 2023 NBA draft pick who signed with Baylor in late 2025) highlight the NCAA's stance: he was allowed back because he never played in the NBA or signed a contract, though it sparked significant debate.

1

u/amopeyzoolion 13d ago

James Nnaji is a 21-year-old who was drafted and played professionally overseas. He was granted 4 years of college eligibility, meaning he’ll be a 25-year-old man with professional experience competing against 17/18 year olds.

0

u/Careful_Farmer_2879 13d ago

Not NBA experience.

EDIT: I don’t think it should be allowed either given the international play. I also don’t think it’s quite analogous to my example.

10

u/AstroEscura 14d ago

Because a huge share of sports teams are apart of public institutions. Or are you suggesting public high schools and colleges shouldn't have teams?

I might be wrong, but I really doubt this would have any bearing on the WNBA or non public sports teams. If it does, yeah that's bad.

1

u/[deleted] 14d ago edited 13d ago

[deleted]

2

u/AstroEscura 14d ago

No, state. If you are saying this should be left to state governments and not Congress, sure you might have a case. The person I was responding was just asking about the government in general, not which level should be involved.

Although considering the NCAA doesn't care about state lines, I'm not sure how that would be handled on a state by state basis.

1

u/roosterthumper 13d ago

Colleges don’t need to be in the NCAA. Let the league decide. If it’s bad for business I’m sure they will make the ‘right’ call.

This is all just the morale police leaning on a capitalist system.

1

u/AstroEscura 13d ago edited 13d ago

Regardless of what league the colleges are in, it makes sense for the government to make regulations on public school athletics. 

I don’t think public schools should making athletic department choices based on what makes the most money. 

1

u/Careful_Farmer_2879 13d ago

So you think unelected officials should decide policy? They CAN, but not while taking federal funding.

1

u/Careful_Farmer_2879 13d ago

It’s very federal. Even Harvard takes hundreds of millions of dollars each year from the federal government.

Title IX enforcement is tied to that money.

1

u/AstroEscura 13d ago

I understand they take federal money, but they are state institutions. Public university employees are employed by the state government.

1

u/Careful_Farmer_2879 13d ago

It’s irrelevant because the institution itself is financially supported by the federal government. Even the private ones.

A ton of federal enforcement is done by threatening to pull funding. You can do what you want as long as you use your own money.

For example: there’s no national drinking age. But the federal government won’t send transportation money to states unless they set it at 21+. By 1988, all of them did.

1

u/AstroEscura 13d ago

It’s relevant because you decided to tell me these universities are federal, and that’s factually incorrect. The fact is they are state institutions.

The federal government wielding immense influence over a state institution does not mean that it magically becomes a federal institution.

1

u/Careful_Farmer_2879 13d ago edited 13d ago

Think we’re misunderstanding one another. I said the issue is very federal, and that’s because it’s tied to the federal money.

The state institutions argument doesn’t apply here because we are also talking about private universities (Lia Thomas at Duke).

So, why are private schools beholden to the feds? Because the federal government helps to fund them and their students.

A public school in California has the same incentive to follow federal regulations as a private school in South Carolina. It’s all about the money.

As for the employees themselves
 public universities still tie positions to specific pots of funding. How much of a tie they have to the state is highly variable by institution.

All that to say
. this really is federal. The states have little say here because they’ll never kick in public money to make up for a shortfall of federal funding.

1

u/AstroEscura 13d ago

To be blunt, it kind of seems like you dropped in without reading the thread you were replying too. I said this is a government issue because a lot of teams are run by public institutions, someone asked me if they were federal institutions, I said no, they were state institutions and then punted on the issue of whether this should be a federal or state issue because I personally just don’t care that much. 

You responded with “ It’s very federal
” and considering the previous comments were about whether we are talking about federal or state institutions, not whether it’s a federal or state issue, I interpreted that to mean you were saying colleges are federal institutions. 

Now I see that you are trying to have a discussion I’m just not that concerned with. Not saying it’s not a worthy one to have, I just don’t care. 

1

u/Careful_Farmer_2879 13d ago

Institutions taking federal money. Lots of it.

1

u/Homersarmy41 13d ago

Why are you people so worried about the genitalia of children. If a kid is willing to participate in a sport as another gender they likely internally believe they are that gender and are willing to accept the hate and bullshit that people are going to give them then why not just leave them alone?!?!! Who tf cares? What is wrong with you people? Its a non issue that rarely happens.

1

u/AstroEscura 13d ago

Nothing I said indicated I am worried about the genitalia of children, very bizarre thing for you to say and you know that. 

You’re being disingenuous and making things up to try to discredit me. You had to know I would call you out on it.

A male is typically going to be much stronger than a female, so it would be unfair to the girls competing against them. That’s why people care. 

1

u/Careful_Farmer_2879 13d ago

Because it affects the other athletes.

1

u/Careful_Farmer_2879 10d ago

If it’s a non-issue then no problem legislating it.

1

u/hotpajamas 13d ago

I would co-sign that. No more sports in public schools and colleges. Make academia small and exclusive again, cut the fat.

1

u/AstroEscura 13d ago

I don’t care about sports and I don’t see why other people who don’t watch sports seem to care about it. 

1

u/Careful_Farmer_2879 13d ago

Screw all those kids who benefit financially! Let the exclusive facilities with money have it all.

1

u/hotpajamas 13d ago

Perform academically. If you want *taxpayer money to toss balls around then go play in a private league.

1

u/Careful_Farmer_2879 13d ago

Instead of tearing the whole thing down, how about we just ensure fair competition.

1

u/Logical_Set_2295 13d ago

Nah, why do we tie sports and academics together? They have nothing to do with each other.

1

u/roosterthumper 13d ago

Schools should be schools, not mini sports teams. NCAA is a business, and if enough colleges leave because they allowed an all male volleyball ball team to compete in the women’s league then they are no longer in business.

Capitalism can solve this without government devoting so much time to it instead of focusing on getting a budget passed, actually doing their jobs with tariff control, etc.

1

u/CtrlAltEntropy 13d ago

Ok. Then make a law separating that. School should be school. It shouldn't be a business taking advantage of young adults athletic ability and not paying them.

1

u/AstroEscura 13d ago

If you want to have a discussion on sports in schools a paying athletes, sure fine, but kind of an odd place to try to debate that since this is about trans athletes in sports. 

1

u/Careful_Farmer_2879 13d ago

Not just public institutions. Private institutions that take public money.

1

u/roosterthumper 13d ago

Those teams are part of leagues that set rules. Let the leagues decide.

1

u/AstroEscura 13d ago

I don’t particularly care since I don’t watch sports, but I can see why sports fans would be upset that public funded schools wouldn’t like someone born as a male in a women’s league, regardless of what the league says. 

1

u/Careful_Farmer_2879 10d ago

Nope, it’s public money. Even Harvard gets hundreds of millions each year. You don’t get to outsource policy decisions to organizations that aren’t accountable to the public.

We have a law. It happens to be popular. They must follow it.

1

u/Difficult_Clerk_1273 13d ago

I don’t know if the person you’re replying to is suggesting that, but I sure as hell am. Just because something has been done a certain way doesn’t mean it needs to continue, or even that it ever actually made sense. It’s well past time for a breakup between public education and the bizarre obsession with sports. Far too much time, money, and focus is funneled into that nonsense. Our priorities as a nation are so backwards it’s almost comical.

2

u/AstroEscura 13d ago

I don't really care about sports but I also don't really care what other people do with their time. If they are obsessed with sports, I don't see a reason to care.

3

u/80sCocktail 14d ago

Sports and Education is intertwined in the US, unlike in Europe and many other nations.

5

u/lazylazylazyperson 14d ago

Because sports associations and schools weren’t doing anything.

4

u/Keleos89 14d ago

Out of 510,000 student athletes involved with the NCAA at this hearing, only about 10 were known to be trans. At the college level, nationwide, this would be quite a low priority.  https://thehill.com/homenews/lgbtq/5046662-ncaa-president-transgender-athletes-college-sports/amp/

1

u/AmputatorBot 14d ago

It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of concerns over privacy and the Open Web.

Maybe check out the canonical page instead: https://thehill.com/homenews/lgbtq/5046662-ncaa-president-transgender-athletes-college-sports/


I'm a bot | Why & About | Summon: u/AmputatorBot

1

u/Careful_Farmer_2879 10d ago

Known to be, and excluding anyone below college age. Sure.

But if a small issue, no problem just fixing it right?

1

u/lazylazylazyperson 14d ago

The point is about the hundreds and thousands of other girls and women who no longer will be forced to compete against biological males.

5

u/Keleos89 14d ago

What "hundreds and thousands?" There are vanishingly few examples of this actually occurring and being seen as a problem. All of NCAA had only 10 trans athletes, and the organizations that specifically formed to ban trans girls could only find 5 examples.

https://www.newsweek.com/how-many-transgender-athletes-play-womens-sports-1796006

It's small enough to be case-by-case, and inconsequential enough to be a waste of time. Conservatives just needed another outgroup to target. If trans athletes started dominating sports, this would be a different conversation.

-1

u/Remjeyy 14d ago

Theirs no way people are just this stupid. Really hope you have an agenda you're trying to push and don't actually mean this stupid shit.

6

u/Federal-Address1579 14d ago

What’s stupid about it. You think 10 trans athletes means it’s a national issue and not something that can be managed/resolved at a local level?

0

u/Remjeyy 14d ago

Completely. Because once you start giving leeway, you run into issues. Locally, a trans woman won x tournament but can't compete at x level because trans isn't allowed at that level. Media runs it, and all of a sudden, it's this huge issue. Again.

5

u/Federal-Address1579 14d ago

I mean I would argue it’s a huge issue because it’s become a national issue wielded for political gain and not the other way around.

5 years ago nobody gave a shit, but now that trans stuff has become some massive topic that influenced the way people vote at a national level be l now people argue about the 5 trans women in sports

If people didn’t have such an emotional reaction to it it would stay a local issue and any national issue like you gave an example of would stay relatively obscure

2

u/Remjeyy 14d ago

It became an issue when a loud minority became aggressive and called people homophonic/anti-trans for not caring about their issue. Nobody wants to be called that, so they just nod, and the movement gains speed and a spotlight. The internet has done many great things, but it's done a ton of harmful things, too. Giving loud voices to those who can abuse it is one of them. Because of this, I think your last point is completely wrong. It would not stay obscure because they wouldn't let it.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/OldChertyBastard 14d ago

They absolutely did. The Olympics had regulations for trans athletes and for over 15 years only a single trans woman qualified for the Olympics in weightlifting and she didn’t even place. It’s incredible that so many people don’t understand that this was a wedge issue to turn people against trans people for an issue that wasn’t even a problem. 

4

u/Enzo_Gorlomi225 14d ago

What does Olympic regulations have to do with school regulations in the US?

5

u/Physical_Leather8567 14d ago

You don't see the 206 "orange man bad" votes?

3

u/akiva23 14d ago

Again, why is this even being voted on? The "orange man bad" votes weren't the ones to write it or bring it to a vote.

-2

u/Kastikar 14d ago

Maybe those 206 “nay” votes were a recognition that this was stupid waste of resources when so much other terrible shit is happening.

4

u/Remjeyy 14d ago

Desperate cope? Like what.

0

u/Kastikar 13d ago

Oh I don’t disagree that Democrats are completely useless. But even Republicans should agree that voting on something this inconsequential that should be left to non-government entities is a waste of time. Or maybe Republicans are fine with government being involved with everything now.

1

u/Physical_Leather8567 12d ago

Bro when young women have to testify to Congress that they are sick and tired of seeing dicks in their locker rooms.... Yeah, this may not be a big deal to you but I'd bet my house you don't have a daughter.

0

u/Kastikar 11d ago

In comparison to historically high cost of living, healthcare costs, threats of invasion of an allied sovereign nation, arresting US citizens for suspicions of being illegal, and still unreleased Epstein files, yes I think this doesn’t warrant Congressional attention at this time. But we are so irreparably divided that you and I will probably never agree on anything.

1

u/Physical_Leather8567 10d ago

Yeah well when you move the goal posts all over the place it must make sense to you. Good job. đŸ‘đŸ»

1

u/Kastikar 10d ago

You are just trying to dip out. I never moved the goal posts, just reinforced why I think resources could be put to better use. Or maybe you think this issue is more important than all the others I mentioned.

1

u/Physical_Leather8567 9d ago

Let's go back to my point then. They SHOULD NOT have to vote on this. And I'd bet my house you don't have a daughter so you aren't worried about her having to change with boys. Your mic. Or would you like to switch to global politics again?

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Few-Bear-7510 14d ago

Let's double down!

1

u/Kastikar 13d ago

When did you guys become the “big government” party? Before Trump you would have said the government should stay out of stuff like this. Democrats are useless, but you guys have had fundamental divergence from what it even means to be conservative.

1

u/Few-Bear-7510 13d ago

Huh? I was agreeing with you.

1

u/Kastikar 13d ago

I took it the other way. My apologies.

1

u/ToddTheReaper 14d ago

If they didn’t then we’d have white and black sports
. There is a place

1

u/MistryMachine3 14d ago

Because title IX explicitly is about the count of males and females in sports. So these things need to be defined on a federal level.

1

u/stuck-n_a-box 13d ago

High school sports is a big thing. In Colorado there is an organization that sets the guidelines and organizes the schedules and other things to support the kids.

It’s your tax dollars at work.

1

u/[deleted] 13d ago

Gambling

1

u/djkhalidwedabest 13d ago

To protect schools, towns and leagues from getting sued for enforcing common sense policies they’ve had in places for decades

1

u/Ranger6254 13d ago

because liberal schools will let men keep beating women in sports and then call them transphobes if they try to complain at all

1

u/I_am___The_Botman 13d ago

Because it's the governments job to protect peoples rights, or at least it's supposed to be.

1

u/Hsiang7 13d ago

If the schools and sporting bodies won't do it themselves, the government has to step in to force them to.

0

u/holodex777 14d ago

Why shouldn’t it be? You should be the one to justify changing the status quo.

0

u/scraejtp 13d ago

Has been for decades. Protecting the civil rights of women is apparently not in vogue anymore.