Liberal Forum

*Huey » Today, 11:40 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 11:40 am

Is that your stand?  Yes or no?

Blackvegetable » 58 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

58 minutes ago

You say it is....and you even say it is consistent.

But you run from having done so.

Yes...it is my stand and it is very easy to illustrate why it is reasonable.

But nothing can be done as long as you run from everything. 
 

 

*Huey » 51 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

51 minutes ago

FINALLY!  You support males participating in female sports.

*Huey » 51 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

51 minutes ago

FINALLY!  You support males participating in female sports.

FINALLY!  

And your weak stand has always been let sanctioning body regulate it.  

Blackvegetable » 50 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

50 minutes ago

Notice how it is edited?

Even the question.

Ask me why.

Blackvegetable » Today, 11:06 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 11:06 am

I wear cowardice like it's a boy scout merit badge. 

• Projection as a Defense Mechanism:
  They unconsciously project their flaws onto others to avoid facing uncomfortable truths about themselves. It’s easier to say “you’re the narcissist” than admit they are.
• Avoiding Accountability:
  Accusing others flips the spotlight away from them. It deflects criticism, stops hard questions, and puts others on the defensive.
• Control Through Confusion:
  By accusing you of their own behavior, they muddy the waters. Now the issue isn’t their dodging, lying, or arrogance—it’s yours. Classic gaslighting.
• Weaponizing Hypocrisy:
  Narcissists think that if they point the finger first, they “win” the narrative—even if the accusation is absurd. It’s not about truth—it’s about dominance.
• Fragile Ego Protection:
  Deep down, they fear being exposed as weak or flawed. Blaming others is a way to prop up their false sense of superiority.
• Testing Your Boundaries:
  Repeating outrageous accusations is a way to wear you down. If you start defending yourself constantly, they’ve shifted the power dynamic in their favor.
• Delusional Self-Image Maintenance:
  They need to see themselves as “the smart one,” “the victim,” or “the righteous critic.” So if they lie, you’re the liar. If they dodge, you’re the coward. It keeps their fantasy intact.

Blackvegetable » Yesterday, 9:40 am » wrote: ↑

Yesterday, 9:40 am

The amended complaint, which named Fleming and described her as “a male who identifies as transgender and who claims a female identity” — thereby outing her a second time — was a bombshell. It claimed that in practices Fleming’s spikes traveled “upwards of 80 miles per hour,” faster than Slusser “had ever seen a woman hit a volleyball,” thus putting “everyone on the team at risk of serious injury”; and that when Slusser brought these concerns to Kress, he “brushed Brooke off and would not talk further about it.” (The 80-miles-per-hour claim was later removed from the lawsuit after ESPN analyzed video of five of Fleming’s spikes and found that the fastest was estimated to travel 64 miles per hour and the average was 50.6 miles per hour — on the high end, but still within the normal range for women’s college volleyball.) The filing drew the attention of OutKick, Fox News and Megyn Kelly, the prominent conservative podcast host.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/20/maga ... ports.html

Sound familiar?

Yea....the "dramatic brain injury trauma" trauma.

This allegedly principled, religious chick - demanding respect for her faith - casually lied under oath to dramatize her personal trauma.

Then The Stupid Machine went to work mobilizing the brain strangling nematodes.

If you think that exhausts the irony, consider that the witness was the "setter" for the trans athlete in question, who earns her scholarship by positioning the ball to allow her trans teammate to earn a "Kill" (that is the official name for the closely monitored stat). The most effective kill is one that is driven squarely in the face of the opposing setter. Think "spotter/sniper".

This is a suit all about someone doing nothing more than performing within a sport's standard parameters...it has NOTHING to do with "safety", or "women's rights"...it's all about profit and political currency.

None of which would be nearly so profitable but for the vast herd of morans roaming our fruited plains.

https://youtu.be/6WjoMgZmvPg?si=8bdP8AyOFxVd7ptq

https://youtu.be/KHJbSvidohg?si=v9dbELgOzmqUVzHN
 

*Huey » 43 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

43 minutes ago

I’m good.  For both your posts.  I don't expect much from one who can’t define what a women is.

what a women is.

Blackvegetable » 17 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

17 minutes ago

Geebus.

Now run off....take this "participation L" with you..

• Projection as a Defense Mechanism:
  They unconsciously project their flaws onto others to avoid facing uncomfortable truths about themselves. It’s easier to say “you’re the narcissist” than admit they are.
• Avoiding Accountability:
  Accusing others flips the spotlight away from them. It deflects criticism, stops hard questions, and puts others on the defensive.
• Control Through Confusion:
  By accusing you of their own behavior, they muddy the waters. Now the issue isn’t their dodging, lying, or arrogance—it’s yours. Classic gaslighting.
• Weaponizing Hypocrisy:
  Narcissists think that if they point the finger first, they “win” the narrative—even if the accusation is absurd. It’s not about truth—it’s about dominance.
• Fragile Ego Protection:
  Deep down, they fear being exposed as weak or flawed. Blaming others is a way to prop up their false sense of superiority.
• Testing Your Boundaries:
  Repeating outrageous accusations is a way to wear you down. If you start defending yourself constantly, they’ve shifted the power dynamic in their favor.
• Delusional Self-Image Maintenance:
  They need to see themselves as “the smart one,” “the victim,” or “the righteous critic.” So if they lie, you’re the liar. If they dodge, you’re the coward. It keeps their fantasy intact.

Blackvegetable » Yesterday, 9:40 am » wrote: ↑

Yesterday, 9:40 am

The amended complaint, which named Fleming and described her as “a male who identifies as transgender and who claims a female identity” — thereby outing her a second time — was a bombshell. It claimed that in practices Fleming’s spikes traveled “upwards of 80 miles per hour,” faster than Slusser “had ever seen a woman hit a volleyball,” thus putting “everyone on the team at risk of serious injury”; and that when Slusser brought these concerns to Kress, he “brushed Brooke off and would not talk further about it.” (The 80-miles-per-hour claim was later removed from the lawsuit after ESPN analyzed video of five of Fleming’s spikes and found that the fastest was estimated to travel 64 miles per hour and the average was 50.6 miles per hour — on the high end, but still within the normal range for women’s college volleyball.) The filing drew the attention of OutKick, Fox News and Megyn Kelly, the prominent conservative podcast host.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/20/maga ... ports.html

Sound familiar?

Yea....the "dramatic brain injury trauma" trauma.

This allegedly principled, religious chick - demanding respect for her faith - casually lied under oath to dramatize her personal trauma.

Then The Stupid Machine went to work mobilizing the brain strangling nematodes.

If you think that exhausts the irony, consider that the witness was the "setter" for the trans athlete in question, who earns her scholarship by positioning the ball to allow her trans teammate to earn a "Kill" (that is the official name for the closely monitored stat). The most effective kill is one that is driven squarely in the face of the opposing setter. Think "spotter/sniper".

This is a suit all about someone doing nothing more than performing within a sport's standard parameters...it has NOTHING to do with "safety", or "women's rights"...it's all about profit and political currency.

None of which would be nearly so profitable but for the vast herd of morans roaming our fruited plains.

https://youtu.be/6WjoMgZmvPg?si=8bdP8AyOFxVd7ptq

https://youtu.be/KHJbSvidohg?si=v9dbELgOzmqUVzHN

Blackvegetable » 27 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

27 minutes ago

Geebus.

Now run off....take this "participation L" with you..

*Huey » 17 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

17 minutes ago

Lmao!  Idiot, I was a passenger in. **** car when I posted that.

And no, I did not take an L.  You are on record, finally, support males in female sports.

Blackvegetable » 59 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

59 minutes ago

What was your original question, verbatim?

*Huey » 41 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

41 minutes ago

Lmao!  You can find it.  It was posted numerous times.

Blackvegetable » 9 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

9 minutes ago

That's exactly why I ask.

Now take ONE stand..

Blackvegetable » Today, 11:44 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 11:44 am

You say it is....and you even say it is consistent.

But you run from having done so.

Yes...it is my stand and it is very easy to illustrate why it is reasonable.

But nothing can be done as long as you run from everything. 
 

*Huey » Today, 2:54 pm » wrote: ↑

Today, 2:54 pm

My stand is posted as is yours.  Now you want to bait and switch.

do your own work

where you either support or you don't support biological males participating in female sports leagues.

Blackvegetable » Yesterday, 4:15 pm » wrote: ↑

Yesterday, 4:15 pm

Does this look familiar?

Blackvegetable » Yesterday, 4:15 pm » wrote: ↑

Yesterday, 4:15 pm

Does this look familiar?

Blackvegetable » Yesterday, 11:44 am » wrote: ↑

Yesterday, 11:44 am

You say it is....and you even say it is consistent.

But you run from having done so.

Yes...it is my stand and it is very easy to illustrate why it is reasonable.

But nothing can be done as long as you run from everything.