War on men continues. College Baseball player booted from team for calling Mo'ne Davis a "slut"

[RoshawnMarkwees]

(The usual feminist penis routine.) Tell the girls-only teams your explanation.

You are the one who is saying that she stole a spot from a person with a penis. It was you who made it about genitals you dumb fuckwit

I said nothing about genitals you ******* moronic fascist. There is way more to gender distinctions than genitalia. Can't tell a feminist that. They still think it's 1967.

Who the **** said she stole a spot from a boy? It was you. It's you who believes that a person with a penis is better qualified for her spot simply because that person has a penis.

I never said anything about genitialia. You did. I spoke of gender.

So it would be ok with you for her to play on the team if she identified as a boy?

If she was a boy. Is it OK for you if girls play on a girls team?

 

[CynthiaZ]

You are the one who is saying that she stole a spot from a person with a penis. It was you who made it about genitals you dumb fuckwit

I said nothing about genitals you ******* moronic fascist. There is way more to gender distinctions than genitalia. Can't tell a feminist that. They still think it's 1967.

Who the **** said she stole a spot from a boy? It was you. It's you who believes that a person with a penis is better qualified for her spot simply because that person has a penis.

I never said anything about genitialia. You did. I spoke of gender.

So it would be ok with you for her to play on the team if she identified as a boy?

If she was a boy. Is it OK for you if girls play on a girls team?

No no no. I said if she identified as a boy. If she was transgendered and identified as a boy would you be ok with her playing on the boys team?

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

I said nothing about genitals you ******* moronic fascist. There is way more to gender distinctions than genitalia. Can't tell a feminist that. They still think it's 1967.

Who the **** said she stole a spot from a boy? It was you. It's you who believes that a person with a penis is better qualified for her spot simply because that person has a penis.

I never said anything about genitialia. You did. I spoke of gender.

So it would be ok with you for her to play on the team if she identified as a boy?

If she was a boy. Is it OK for you if girls play on a girls team?

No no no. I said if she identified as a boy. If she was transgendered and identified as a boy would you be ok with her playing on the boys team?

If she was a boy. Is it OK for you if girls play on a girls team?

 

[CynthiaZ]

Who the **** said she stole a spot from a boy? It was you. It's you who believes that a person with a penis is better qualified for her spot simply because that person has a penis.

I never said anything about genitialia. You did. I spoke of gender.

So it would be ok with you for her to play on the team if she identified as a boy?

If she was a boy. Is it OK for you if girls play on a girls team?

No no no. I said if she identified as a boy. If she was transgendered and identified as a boy would you be ok with her playing on the boys team?

If she was a boy. Is it OK for you if girls play on a girls team?

You are evading the question. is it ok for transgendered boys to play on a boy's team even if they do not have male genitalia?

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

She stole a boys spot. The boy can't take the spot she vacated from a girls team.

She did not steal anyone's spot. The league she is in is not a boy's league in the first place, it's gender inclusive. You earn your place on a team based on your skill and not your genitals. It would make no sense whatsoever to exclude a talented girl from playing in favor of a less than talented boy just because he has a penis.

(The usual feminist penis routine.) Tell the girls-only teams your explanation.

You are the one who is saying that she stole a spot from a person with a penis. It was you who made it about genitals you dumb fuckwit

I said nothing about genitals you ******* moronic fascist. There is way more to gender distinctions than genitalia. Can't tell a feminist that. They still think it's 1967.

Who the **** said she stole a spot from a boy? It was you. It's you who believes that a person with a penis is better qualified for her spot simply because that person has a penis.

She DID steal a spot from a boy.

What if a boy was to join a girls softball team? Wouldnt that be a spot a girl wouldnt get to play? Yes or no?

 

[CynthiaZ]

She did not steal anyone's spot. The league she is in is not a boy's league in the first place, it's gender inclusive. You earn your place on a team based on your skill and not your genitals. It would make no sense whatsoever to exclude a talented girl from playing in favor of a less than talented boy just because he has a penis.

(The usual feminist penis routine.) Tell the girls-only teams your explanation.

You are the one who is saying that she stole a spot from a person with a penis. It was you who made it about genitals you dumb fuckwit

I said nothing about genitals you ******* moronic fascist. There is way more to gender distinctions than genitalia. Can't tell a feminist that. They still think it's 1967.

Who the **** said she stole a spot from a boy? It was you. It's you who believes that a person with a penis is better qualified for her spot simply because that person has a penis.

She DID steal a spot from a boy.

What if a boy was to join a girls softball team? Wouldnt that be a spot a girl wouldnt get to play? Yes or no?

So you are saying that she should give up a spot she earned with her talent to someone else just because they have male genitals?

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

(The usual feminist penis routine.) Tell the girls-only teams your explanation.

You are the one who is saying that she stole a spot from a person with a penis. It was you who made it about genitals you dumb fuckwit

I said nothing about genitals you ******* moronic fascist. There is way more to gender distinctions than genitalia. Can't tell a feminist that. They still think it's 1967.

Who the **** said she stole a spot from a boy? It was you. It's you who believes that a person with a penis is better qualified for her spot simply because that person has a penis.

She DID steal a spot from a boy.

What if a boy was to join a girls softball team? Wouldnt that be a spot a girl wouldnt get to play? Yes or no?

So you are saying that she should give up a spot she earned with her talent to someone else just because they have male genitals?

I have in fact said no such thing. I have rather , merely stated that a boy absolutely did lose a chance to play on that team because a girl was picked to. So the statement that "no boy lost a spot on the team" is incorrect and intellectually lazy.

 

[CynthiaZ]

You are the one who is saying that she stole a spot from a person with a penis. It was you who made it about genitals you dumb fuckwit

I said nothing about genitals you ******* moronic fascist. There is way more to gender distinctions than genitalia. Can't tell a feminist that. They still think it's 1967.

Who the **** said she stole a spot from a boy? It was you. It's you who believes that a person with a penis is better qualified for her spot simply because that person has a penis.

She DID steal a spot from a boy.

What if a boy was to join a girls softball team? Wouldnt that be a spot a girl wouldnt get to play? Yes or no?

So you are saying that she should give up a spot she earned with her talent to someone else just because they have male genitals?

I have in fact said no such thing. I have rather , merely stated that a boy absolutely did lose a chance to play on that team because a girl was picked to. So the statement that "no boy lost a spot on the team" is incorrect and intellectually lazy.

No. Let's us disregard the gender of the players. A person who didn't have talent on par with Mo'ne Davis was not qualified to earn a spot on the team. that is all there is to this. No one had anything stolen from them.

 

[manifold]

She DID steal a spot from a boy.

What if a boy was to join a girls softball team? Wouldnt that be a spot a girl wouldnt get to play? Yes or no?

How do you know for a fact that the last person cut from the team (or didn't make the team) wasn't another girl?

 

[manifold]

I have in fact said no such thing. I have rather , merely stated that a boy absolutely did lose a chance to play on that team because a girl was picked to. So the statement that "no boy lost a spot on the team" is incorrect and intellectually lazy.

I disagree. I think it's intellectually dishonest to claim anyone on the team "stole" anything from anybody. There is no gender requirement.

I repeat, there is no gender requirement.


I repeat again, there is no gender requirement.

Therefore, using your argument, every boy who made the team stole the opportunity to play from a girl.

 

[ChrisL]

If a grown woman called a 13 year old boy a slut I would personally kick her ass.
She didn't steal any spot. She earned it

She stole a boys spot. The boy can't take the spot she vacated from a girls team.

She did not steal anyone's spot. The league she is in is not a boy's league in the first place, it's gender inclusive. You earn your place on a team based on your skill and not your genitals. It would make no sense whatsoever to exclude a talented girl from playing in favor of a less than talented boy just because he has a penis.

(The usual feminist penis routine.) Tell the girls-only teams your explanation.

Hello? The LL World Series IS NOT GENDER EXCLUSIVE you humongous twit.

But the girls only teams are you moron. Geez, you're stupid. You must be a democrat.

How many more times do you have to be told? Having a girl on a boys' team doesn't make for an uneven playing field.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

I have in fact said no such thing. I have rather , merely stated that a boy absolutely did lose a chance to play on that team because a girl was picked to. So the statement that "no boy lost a spot on the team" is incorrect and intellectually lazy.

I disagree. I think it's intellectually dishonest to claim anyone on the team "stole" anything from anybody. There is no gender requirement.

I repeat, there is no gender requirement.


I repeat again, there is no gender requirement.

Therefore, using your argument, every boy who made the team stole the opportunity to play from a girl.

You do understand that there WERE gender requirements until the government stepped in don't you?

Landmark Decision Allowed Girls to Play Little League MomsTeam

What if some guy enrolled at UConn and sued and won the right to play on the woman's basketball team? Would you dishonestly claim "hey there is no gender requirement?" Because if a court ruled that there couldn't be , obviously there wouldn't be. OR would you say "hey, wait a minute - that isn't right?

As a practical matter, this isn't a big deal, very few girls are going to try out for and beat out boys for spots on teams.

However, on the abstract, it is absolutely true that there WERE gender requirements in Little League until big Uncle Sugar stuck his nose into things, and that for every girl who makes a team a boy potentially lost his spot.

 

[manifold]

I have in fact said no such thing. I have rather , merely stated that a boy absolutely did lose a chance to play on that team because a girl was picked to. So the statement that "no boy lost a spot on the team" is incorrect and intellectually lazy.

I disagree. I think it's intellectually dishonest to claim anyone on the team "stole" anything from anybody. There is no gender requirement.

I repeat, there is no gender requirement.


I repeat again, there is no gender requirement.

Therefore, using your argument, every boy who made the team stole the opportunity to play from a girl.

You do understand that there WERE gender requirements until the government stepped in don't you?

Landmark Decision Allowed Girls to Play Little League MomsTeam

What if some guy enrolled at UConn and sued and won the right to play on the woman's basketball team? Would you dishonestly claim "hey there is no gender requirement?" Because if a court ruled that there couldn't be , obviously there wouldn't be. OR would you say "hey, wait a minute - that isn't right?

As a practical matter, this isn't a big deal, very few girls are going to try out for and beat out boys for spots on teams.

However, on the abstract, it is absolutely true that there WERE gender requirements in Little League until big Uncle Sugar stuck his nose into things, and that for every girl who makes a team a boy potentially lost his spot.

Yeah sure, and since she was the team's best pitcher, it's unlikely they would have made it to Williamsport if they dropped her and instead went with a boy worse than their worst pitcher. So you can frolic in the abstract all you like and insist that she cost some nameless boy a chance to play in the LLWS, but in the real world, it's a fact that she helped every other boy on the team actually realize that dream.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

I have in fact said no such thing. I have rather , merely stated that a boy absolutely did lose a chance to play on that team because a girl was picked to. So the statement that "no boy lost a spot on the team" is incorrect and intellectually lazy.

I disagree. I think it's intellectually dishonest to claim anyone on the team "stole" anything from anybody. There is no gender requirement.

I repeat, there is no gender requirement.


I repeat again, there is no gender requirement.

Therefore, using your argument, every boy who made the team stole the opportunity to play from a girl.

You do understand that there WERE gender requirements until the government stepped in don't you?

Landmark Decision Allowed Girls to Play Little League MomsTeam

What if some guy enrolled at UConn and sued and won the right to play on the woman's basketball team? Would you dishonestly claim "hey there is no gender requirement?" Because if a court ruled that there couldn't be , obviously there wouldn't be. OR would you say "hey, wait a minute - that isn't right?

As a practical matter, this isn't a big deal, very few girls are going to try out for and beat out boys for spots on teams.

However, on the abstract, it is absolutely true that there WERE gender requirements in Little League until big Uncle Sugar stuck his nose into things, and that for every girl who makes a team a boy potentially lost his spot.

Yeah sure, and since she was the team's best pitcher, it's unlikely they would have made it to Williamsport if they dropped her and instead went with a boy worse than their worst pitcher. So you can frolic in the abstract all you like and insist that she cost some nameless boy a chance to play in the LLWS, but in the real world, it's a fact that she helped every other boy on the team actually realize that dream.

See, you want to focus on this ONE girl, instead of dealing with the entire issue because it suits your argument, but that is dishonest.

There have been cases where people have been drunk and got in a car accident and doctors have said they survived solely because they were drunk and there body was loose. Does this then mean that EVERYONE would be better off driving drunk? Of course not.

 

[manifold]

I have in fact said no such thing. I have rather , merely stated that a boy absolutely did lose a chance to play on that team because a girl was picked to. So the statement that "no boy lost a spot on the team" is incorrect and intellectually lazy.

I disagree. I think it's intellectually dishonest to claim anyone on the team "stole" anything from anybody. There is no gender requirement.

I repeat, there is no gender requirement.


I repeat again, there is no gender requirement.

Therefore, using your argument, every boy who made the team stole the opportunity to play from a girl.

You do understand that there WERE gender requirements until the government stepped in don't you?

Landmark Decision Allowed Girls to Play Little League MomsTeam

What if some guy enrolled at UConn and sued and won the right to play on the woman's basketball team? Would you dishonestly claim "hey there is no gender requirement?" Because if a court ruled that there couldn't be , obviously there wouldn't be. OR would you say "hey, wait a minute - that isn't right?

As a practical matter, this isn't a big deal, very few girls are going to try out for and beat out boys for spots on teams.

However, on the abstract, it is absolutely true that there WERE gender requirements in Little League until big Uncle Sugar stuck his nose into things, and that for every girl who makes a team a boy potentially lost his spot.

Yeah sure, and since she was the team's best pitcher, it's unlikely they would have made it to Williamsport if they dropped her and instead went with a boy worse than their worst pitcher. So you can frolic in the abstract all you like and insist that she cost some nameless boy a chance to play in the LLWS, but in the real world, it's a fact that she helped every other boy on the team actually realize that dream.

See, you want to focus on this ONE girl, instead of dealing with the entire issue because it suits your argument, but that is dishonest.

There have been cases where people have been drunk and got in a car accident and doctors have said they survived solely because they were drunk and there body was loose. Does this then mean that EVERYONE would be better off driving drunk? Of course not.

You done gone full retard son.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

I have in fact said no such thing. I have rather , merely stated that a boy absolutely did lose a chance to play on that team because a girl was picked to. So the statement that "no boy lost a spot on the team" is incorrect and intellectually lazy.

I disagree. I think it's intellectually dishonest to claim anyone on the team "stole" anything from anybody. There is no gender requirement.

I repeat, there is no gender requirement.


I repeat again, there is no gender requirement.

Therefore, using your argument, every boy who made the team stole the opportunity to play from a girl.

You do understand that there WERE gender requirements until the government stepped in don't you?

Landmark Decision Allowed Girls to Play Little League MomsTeam

What if some guy enrolled at UConn and sued and won the right to play on the woman's basketball team? Would you dishonestly claim "hey there is no gender requirement?" Because if a court ruled that there couldn't be , obviously there wouldn't be. OR would you say "hey, wait a minute - that isn't right?

As a practical matter, this isn't a big deal, very few girls are going to try out for and beat out boys for spots on teams.

However, on the abstract, it is absolutely true that there WERE gender requirements in Little League until big Uncle Sugar stuck his nose into things, and that for every girl who makes a team a boy potentially lost his spot.

Yeah sure, and since she was the team's best pitcher, it's unlikely they would have made it to Williamsport if they dropped her and instead went with a boy worse than their worst pitcher. So you can frolic in the abstract all you like and insist that she cost some nameless boy a chance to play in the LLWS, but in the real world, it's a fact that she helped every other boy on the team actually realize that dream.

See, you want to focus on this ONE girl, instead of dealing with the entire issue because it suits your argument, but that is dishonest.

There have been cases where people have been drunk and got in a car accident and doctors have said they survived solely because they were drunk and there body was loose. Does this then mean that EVERYONE would be better off driving drunk? Of course not.

You done gone full retard son.

No sir, just making a point. This ONE girl doesn't mean EVERY girl on EVERY team is the best player, and that the team would have sucked without her. You know that.

 

[manifold]

I disagree. I think it's intellectually dishonest to claim anyone on the team "stole" anything from anybody. There is no gender requirement.

I repeat, there is no gender requirement.


I repeat again, there is no gender requirement.

Therefore, using your argument, every boy who made the team stole the opportunity to play from a girl.

You do understand that there WERE gender requirements until the government stepped in don't you?

Landmark Decision Allowed Girls to Play Little League MomsTeam

What if some guy enrolled at UConn and sued and won the right to play on the woman's basketball team? Would you dishonestly claim "hey there is no gender requirement?" Because if a court ruled that there couldn't be , obviously there wouldn't be. OR would you say "hey, wait a minute - that isn't right?

As a practical matter, this isn't a big deal, very few girls are going to try out for and beat out boys for spots on teams.

However, on the abstract, it is absolutely true that there WERE gender requirements in Little League until big Uncle Sugar stuck his nose into things, and that for every girl who makes a team a boy potentially lost his spot.

Yeah sure, and since she was the team's best pitcher, it's unlikely they would have made it to Williamsport if they dropped her and instead went with a boy worse than their worst pitcher. So you can frolic in the abstract all you like and insist that she cost some nameless boy a chance to play in the LLWS, but in the real world, it's a fact that she helped every other boy on the team actually realize that dream.

See, you want to focus on this ONE girl, instead of dealing with the entire issue because it suits your argument, but that is dishonest.

There have been cases where people have been drunk and got in a car accident and doctors have said they survived solely because they were drunk and there body was loose. Does this then mean that EVERYONE would be better off driving drunk? Of course not.

You done gone full retard son.

No sir, just making a point. This ONE girl doesn't mean EVERY girl on EVERY team is the best player, and that the team would have sucked without her. You know that.

Yup, full on retard.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

You do understand that there WERE gender requirements until the government stepped in don't you?

Landmark Decision Allowed Girls to Play Little League MomsTeam

What if some guy enrolled at UConn and sued and won the right to play on the woman's basketball team? Would you dishonestly claim "hey there is no gender requirement?" Because if a court ruled that there couldn't be , obviously there wouldn't be. OR would you say "hey, wait a minute - that isn't right?

As a practical matter, this isn't a big deal, very few girls are going to try out for and beat out boys for spots on teams.

However, on the abstract, it is absolutely true that there WERE gender requirements in Little League until big Uncle Sugar stuck his nose into things, and that for every girl who makes a team a boy potentially lost his spot.

Yeah sure, and since she was the team's best pitcher, it's unlikely they would have made it to Williamsport if they dropped her and instead went with a boy worse than their worst pitcher. So you can frolic in the abstract all you like and insist that she cost some nameless boy a chance to play in the LLWS, but in the real world, it's a fact that she helped every other boy on the team actually realize that dream.

See, you want to focus on this ONE girl, instead of dealing with the entire issue because it suits your argument, but that is dishonest.

There have been cases where people have been drunk and got in a car accident and doctors have said they survived solely because they were drunk and there body was loose. Does this then mean that EVERYONE would be better off driving drunk? Of course not.

You done gone full retard son.

No sir, just making a point. This ONE girl doesn't mean EVERY girl on EVERY team is the best player, and that the team would have sucked without her. You know that.

Yup, full on retard.

^ Translation : " Oops I'm only suited for the FZ, why did I venture up here again?" Attack and run "Mani rules"

LOL

 

[manifold]

BearlySmarterThanrdean is building strawmen that would make Ravi blush.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Yes , you are right bear I should stick to blowing men in the train depot bathroom.

I never said that.