What's Worse? Women Or Transgenders In Sport?

[Maximilian]

Your scenario of the Germanic female surgeon leaving everything behind her out of her own accord in order to marry a shorter and poorer Ecuadorian waste disposal coordinator could, perhaps, constitute a mediocre plot for a romantic novel

Not even "mediocre." The consumers of romance novels are 99% women, and they would never buy a book like that. You wouldn't sell even 1 copy. No woman fantasizes about this kind of relationship. Such a relationship could never happen because it would never be imagined in the first place by the woman.

[coffeeandcigarette]

This still (I am getting exhausted now) does not prove that men were created more intelligent as a whole than women. It proves that God gave men greater capacities in some areas than women, just as he gave women greater capacities in some areas than men.

The list of intellectual activities in which women predominate ... ?

I'm not coming up with any. Men predominate in every area of intellectual activity, as far as I can see. Perhaps you could provide a list those intellectual fields you have in mind where over the centuries women have dominated over men.

"Over the centuries" is exactly the point. We are just now experiencing women attending university as a given, as a social norm. Higher education for women is brand new in the grand scheme of things. I could say "give women a few centuries in university education and see what happens." That would be arguing for something I don't believe in though. I don't think that is a good idea. I think everyone really should avoid university if possible. I think women should avoid it especially. Considering that most women will get married and have children, it only makes sense that she pursue high level academics on a free/self-guided bases. You don't want to be saddled with debt. I also don't think women should necessarily spend their most fertile/energetic years studying if they want to be wives/mothers. Spend those years establishing your family instead. I don't need women to prove that they have the same intellectual acumen as men. It does stand to reason however, that they do. There is no God-given proof that they don't. He never thought intellect was worth talking about period.

I think it is funny that trad men slag feminists. I can't count the number of times I've heard "the problem with feminism is that they don't want to be equal, they insist that they are better." Yes, yes they do, because they are weak, vain, and proud. That is what weak, vain, proud people do.

[awkwardcustomer]

If a 5' 10,' Germanic surgeon gives up her job to marry a 5' 6" Equadorian waste disposal coordinator and raise their children, it is really beautiful

This is an impossible scenario for two reasons:

1. She is taller than him;
2. Women don't marry down the social scale. They can have affairs with men of inferior social status but not an actual marriage.

Your first point is incorrect because as coffee and cigarettes has posted and as I have also observed more than once, tall women do marry short men.

And your second point is questionable, since all that's required is a little imagination.

For example, suppose the tall, female, German surgeon is looking for meaning in her life and decides to spend a couple of years helping the poor in somewhere like Equador.  She finds herself in the middle of a local dispute between a corporation which is dumping toxic waste in the river and the local population which is campaigning against it.

The short, Equadorian, refuse disposal coordinator - c&c did say coordinator - actually manages an established and successful waste disposal company started by his grandfather.  He is also a leading campaigner against the corporation.  The tall, German surgeon joins the campaign, falls in love with him and, after seeing off the corporation, they live happily ever after.

I think this would sell.

[Maximilian]

Here are 3 threads from the past where the same subject was discussed:

https://www.suscipedomine.com/forum/index.php?topic=7809.msg165939#msg165939

https://www.suscipedomine.com/forum/index.php?topic=7907.0

https://www.suscipedomine.com/forum/index.php?topic=17139.0

And here is a classic from one of those threads:

[TheReturnofLive]

Ever heard of Poe's Law?

[Chestertonian]

So the conservative Catholic media outlet Church Militant is concerned with young men born XY competing in girl's sport at the high school and college level. Why?

I think it's great that the trannies are wrecking this for women as women should not be competing in team sports that mimic what were  traditionally known as male or individual sports like wrestling that were once the exclusive domain of boys and men. Nor do I think it right that girls sometimes make it on to the boy's football teams. We've had a number of girls do that at our local high school over the years.

One of the biggest concerns by the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) in the recent article at Church Militant is the following:

"It will deny women and girls fair opportunities to compete in sports, to ascend to the winner's podium, and to receive critical scholarship."

Good I say. Women shouldn't be getting scholarships for competing in sports and neither should any male that is in a sport that doesn't produce revenue for the school. Why should normal students, you know the ones paying full price to receive an education, be subsidizing non-revenue producing sport? Tuition is high enough.

What happened to parents instructing young women in things like home economics? I would think most Catholics would value a girl being able to mend socks, sew a button, and cook than head a soccer ball into a goal. Wouldn't you?

Wouldn't it also make sense that girls imitating boys in sports activities were the original gender-benders? I say turnabout is fair play!

Girls should be supporting boys in sports by attending games and cheering for them. Then they may have a chance of becoming suitable wives one day rather than competing with their husbands in other areas and learning to provide nurturing environments in their future homes for their families.

What is also delicious about this "problem" is that it took women having the vote for these issues to come home to roost in the first place. To quote Cardinal Dolan one time talking about a football player who came out as a homosexual I say, "bravo!".

Either way, I think this topic should be of far greater concern to Traditional Catholics than women wearing pants.

Don't you?

Here is a link to the article.

POLL: AMERICANS OPPOSE TRANSGENDERS IN SPORTS

But the conservative Catholic media outlet Church Militant thinks transgenders are stealing from women. I don't think they thought this one through too well. Do you?

First bold segment. According to this logic men should only be taught how to make a wage, build a house, and raise animals..whatever. Playing sports was a male occupation because it was developed and encouraged as an actual study of war. It was study for their job. Grown boys and men running around playing sports now is purely recreational, so do not equate a girl preparing for a vocation to boys playing games.

Studies show that even simple activities like lifting heavy objects boost testosterone enormously. When boys engage in masculine activities like sports and thus become more masculine themselves, they are absolutely preparing for their vocation which will necessarily be masculine as well.

Second bold point. Absolutely NOT.This is a big problem for a few reasons. One, there is a modesty concern. Two, if it is not intellectually appropriate for a women to play sports because wanting to win will make her masculine and ruin her gentle nature ( I am paraphrasing from previous threads on this topic) than how can it be intellectually appropriate to want to see a win, want to see the other team defeated, etc. Oh...is it because she is cheering on boys, and making them feel good about themselves...? Got it...
This is also a problem for family life. You get junior playing sports, he goes to practice a few nights a week, special gear, blah blah, and then the whole family and of course the girls, come to cheer and watch and praise. What female equivalent is there for the girls in the family? When is the whole family going to sit and cheer for the daughter weekend after weekend. Not only does this imbalance nurture sibling resentment, (brother is a boy therefor he gets to do fun stuff and mom and dad cheer him on and act like he is amazing...I get to do nothing and nobody cheers for me ever) but it builds up sports and athletics as a goal to which young trad boys should aspire. Do we want that? Do you want our boys aiming to be NFL players or what have you?

"Making boys feel good about themselves." Yes, exactly. This is one of the many benefits of boys playing sports. Brothers being cheered on by their sisters, far from nurturing resentment, nurtures familial affection. What nurtures resentment is the attitude that there needs to be an "equivalent" supplied for every good enjoyed by one sibling that cannot be enjoyed by another, rather than an attitude of being happy for others.

One of the SSPX seminarians in Virginia at the moment was an all-Ireland hurling champion before he joined the seminary, another was a high school state football champion. There's a former Manchester United professional soccer player who's now a priest and trying to revive the traditional Dominican-rite in the Indult. Athletics were a perfectly healthy aspiration for these men that lead them to even higher aspirations.

"in the indult"

thanks queensaints, that takes me back to 2005 when people talked that way.  It was a simpler time......

[Chestertonian]

Playing sports was a male occupation because it was developed and encouraged as an actual study of war. It was study for their job. Grown boys and men running around playing sports now is purely recreational, so do not equate a girl preparing for a vocation to boys playing games.

Historical falsehood. The Greeks cared more about winning the Olympics than they did about winning wars.

Even as late as St. Augustine around the year 400 AD, he still used the Greek dating system of counting years by the Olympiads. So this was their foundational belief, just like we date our years from the birth of Christ.

Oh...is it because she is cheering on boys, and making them feel good about themselves...? Got it...

Sarcasm is not an argument. Women are created by God to be helpmates to men. Girls who are cheering for boys and "making them feel good about themselves" are preparing themselves for their life's vocation.

Making a man feel good about himself by cheering while he runs after a ball is NOT a women's vocation. Supporting him as a husband and father, respecting him, and building love, honor, and trust for him in the minds on one's children is her vocation. The pride and worth a man feels in his vocation, the times when he feels "good about himself," should come from doing the will of God and raising his family for heaven...not playing a game and fueling his ego. Sports are all about pride and self-image. I agree with Awkward, if men really want to make sure they are super masculine and pump their bodies with testosterone, they should be clearing a few acres of land, stacking a rick of wood a day, or walking/hiking through nature.

I am late to this thread, but I also disagree with the idea that having a girl (especially your sister) "cheer you on" builds up a man's sense of self worth.  I'm blessed to have a wife that's crazy about me, 2 wonderful sisters and a mom who loves me to the point where it's embarrassing, but there's nothing they could say or do to build up my sense of self worth or masculine dignity.  For most teenage boys, you could have 1000 cheerleaders and it still wouldn't make as seeing their dad in the audience and hearing "you make me proud."