Advocacy groups throughout the conservative commentary ecosystem have pushed to get these leagues on record about transgender athlete participation, without success.
Now, these groups are moving beyond just trying to get athlete eligibility questions on record. XX-XY Athletics, the sports apparel group that has used Cunningham’s comments as a way get its brand in front of cameras at WNBA games, is suing Colorado in court saying its state anti-discrimination law prevents the company from marketing its apparel using trans athletes’ deadnames and misgendering them deliberately. The company is at least partially bankrolled by a prominent conservative couple in Colorado with deep ties in Republican politics. The company’s face and CEO, Jennifer Sey, a Bay Area resident, was a national champion gymnast before she gained a following online arguing against COVID school closures and vaccine mandates.
53 Comments
Witchfire@lemmy.world · 95 pts · 1d
Because the modern Nazi party has decided to make trans people their boogeyman, and because they get off to harming one of the most vulnerable populations
athatet@lemmy.zip · 48 pts · 1d
The old nazi party targeted trans people as well.
Witchfire@lemmy.world · 32 pts · 1d
For sure they did, you can read an example here. Unfortunately, that was all lost to history because the Allies didn't really care about queer people either.
village604@adultswim.fan · 11 pts · 1d
In my rural Texas school we were taught that the Nazis targeted queer people too. I would have assumed they'd downplay things since there was a German internment camp not far away, but they even taught about that.
dreamy@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 6 pts · 1d
The U.S. put all the queer people back in the concentration camps after they got the Jews out.
https://www.zinnedproject.org/news/tdih/liberation-of-dachau-concentration-camp-except-lgbtq-prisoners/
Many Holocaust education projects are also against talking about the non-Jewish people killed, even though they were the majority of victims (7M/13M). This is because most of them are Zionist self-victimization projects. Here's an awesome video essay on this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0OkIVyBBVs
Schmoo@slrpnk.net · 0 pts · 1d
Badempanada makes good video essays / explainers. He should do more of those and fewer drama-slop takedowns of other leftists for minor slip-ups or small disagreements.
dreamy@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 0 pts · 1d
The 'Live' channel videos he makes on other supposed leftists (be it AOC or Hasan) are not really minor slip-ups though. If someone is walking back on the simplest policy decisions like "Defund the police" or if they're supporting unrepenting mass-murderers like Graham Platner I WANT to know about that.
Schmoo@slrpnk.net · 1 pts · 1d
If that were the extent of it it would be fine; I even agree with a lot of his criticisms, but it's become nearly his entire output. When F.D. Signifier took issue with Badempanada's use of Nazi dog-whistles he accused him of being a Zionist. He also accused F.D. Signifier of supporting Graham Platner despite F.D. being one of the first to express concern about him. By jumping on single statements that are often ambiguous, assuming the worst, and ignoring any context that contradicts his accusations he is just creating unnecessary conflict with his close ideological allies. Rather than trying to have a normal conversation about things with other leftists he creates a series of videos scrutinizing everything they say and blowing things out of proportion. If you haven't watched his "debate" with F.D. Signifier where he takes advantage of Overzealot's friendship to hijack a stream he was doing with F.D. and make it about him, you should check it out. It makes the toxic way that Badempanada operates very transparent.
dreamy@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 1 pts · 1d
It hasn't become his entire output at all. The Live channel just puts out his livestream clips, and most are against Reich-wingers.
F.D. also DID support Graham Platner:
::: spoiler spoiler
:::
He only made one other video where he was against him ONE month ago, after his discussion with BE and probably after watching his videos, where he denounced Platner for being... white. He also called out Fight Agency for the first time in his life on that video, and couldn't muster up literally anything that he disagreed with in their platform, instead just saying that they weren't platforming black politicians. I don't know if you've watched his videos or if you're just an outsider commenting on this, but if you haven't please do, because I'm not going on an anti-woke tirade here this is quite literally what he did.
BE also never used Nazi dog whistles. Signifier just said he did because he probably read on Wikipedia or something that ZOG was used by Nazis decades ago. Or maybe he is talking about the word Zionist, which he also seems to consider a dog whistle.
And I've watched the complete "debate" as well. F.D. had literally no point, didn't engage with what BE was saying, and just insulted his looks and yelled at BE to call him the hard-r because he was offended by getting called a "ZOG slave", thinking that because it has the word 'slave' in it it has to be racist.
He very obviously doesn't care about the Palestinian cause, instead making pop culture videos defending an extremely privileged group of people against Disney's "AnTiSeMiTiC tRoPeS oF a BiG nOsE aNd StEaLiNg". He's an actual IDPOL slave, and is merely getting backlash for trying to tone-police the people who DO care about this stuff.
CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 1d
Yep. The Nat-C's are just following the Nazi playbook.
TRAHR@quokk.au · 8 pts · 1d
So did the old Nazi party too.
thagoat@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 35 pts · 1d
Say it with me, Manufactured Outrage.
CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 1d
Yeah. It's the "bathroom bills" bullshit all over again.
How many people does this affect? A few dozen? And why is it something at the federal level anyway?
None of this distraction will meaningfully change anyone's lives for the better. Why should a rando in the WH decide who plays in what sports? It's beyond ridiculous.
Meanwhile, we have climate change, energy grid, a war in Iran to resolve, we have people who had their healthcare ripped away, we need to deal with water issues, the future of work (AI), and on and on.
Who gives flying fuck about sports FFS?
resipsaloquitur@lemmy.cafe · 27 pts · 1d
Because Donald lost to Iran and needs yet another distraction from the Epstein files.
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 3 pts · 1d
ding ding, he went to first distraction CANADA currently. Iran was having a negative effect on the gop the longer it goes on.
gwulgg@lemmy.zip · 14 pts · 1d
Jingling keys for their 30 IQ base
garretble@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 1d
I don't really like this headline.
The WNBA isn't in an uproar. Some conservative idiots are in an uproar about another boogeyman they made up.
EmpathicVagrant@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 1d
Controlled media, artificial rage, distractions.
CombatWombat@feddit.online · 5 pts · 1d
She-who-must-not-be-named very cynically built her fandom while she was at Iowa from the most conservative people she could get interested in the sport by claiming she was being oppressed for being a straight white woman in a sport with a large Black and lesbian community. She brought them with her to the Fever and now they think they've got something to say. They've also brought an (incorrect) narrative that "people are finally watching women's sports" (we've been here for 30+ years thank you), which the W loves because it gets people in the building and watching the games. Et voila, nous sommes ici.
crystalmerchant@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 1d
Who is she who must not be named? Sophie Cunningham? (Sorry for naming her lol)
handontel@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 1d
The author of the book series that made that phrase popular.
crystalmerchant@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1d
Far as I know JK Rowling did not go to Iowa lol.
I'm just going to guess she who must not be named is Caitlin Clark and leave it at that
CombatWombat@feddit.online · -2 pts · 1d
Nah, I’ll talk my shit about Cunningham until the cows come home — she’s been comfortable putting her name next to awful beliefs in the traditional media, so I’m comfortable dragging her name through the mud on social media.
rustydrd@sh.itjust.works · 6 pts · 1d
Do you mean Caitlin Clark? Because if you do, that's coo-coo flat-earth-level crazy. Why be purposefully obtuse about what you're trying to say, anyway?
crystalmerchant@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 1d
Ok so who is She Who Must Not Be Named?
Treczoks@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 1d
They need to make headlines, and they need to get attention and therefore money from politics.
rhythmisaprancer@quokk.au · 3 pts · 1d
Sports in general seem to be controlled by right-wing people. Teams owned by right leaning folks, league directors who are conservatives, international conglomerates lead by people who are corrupt fascists. I don't know the answer to this, but for some reason competitive athletics have been taken over by terrible people. These things will make it very difficult to find resolution for this, which is frustrating since I feel like women's sports are really growing and this "distraction" isn't a thing. Or shouldn't be, I think.
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · -5 pts · 1d
AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1d
Team sports ≠ politics, despite what the majority of Americans seem to think. In fact I think we reversed sports commentators and political commentators in this country.
Feathercrown@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 1d
That's not what "political" means
funkreddit@lemmy.zip · -19 pts · 1d
Because it’s an unpopular sport desperately in need of staying in the spotlight.
garretble@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 1d
So unpopular the entire league got giant raises to their salaries this year, viewership is up, and more people attended the WNBA all star game than the MNBA's.
AviAdi@lemmy.world · -20 pts · 1d
Ioughttamow@fedia.io · 23 pts · 1d
You’re right, we should stand silently aside while the vulnerable get chewed up by the far right. Something something then they came for me but no one was left to stand up for me
AviAdi@lemmy.world · -12 pts · 1d
Ioughttamow@fedia.io · 23 pts · 1d
Aren’t being killed? My guy…. They have been being killed for a while now…. And hounded into suicide, abused, harassed. The harm is happening now. Yes, it can get worse, but it is already bad. I don’t think standing aside is the winning move you think it is. Stand with your allies. A very liberal solution there
AviAdi@lemmy.world · -8 pts · 1d
So what's the end point? If the left doesn't win then where do we go?
We go towards death. They will kill more and the only hope is resistance. The only hope is we kill as many of them as they kill of us. That's the future down the line! However, most people will go into hiding because they don't want to be hunted down. So either way the only way out to survive is silence, is to lay low and hope democracy prevails. If it doesn't then be ready to run, hide, or KILL
Ioughttamow@fedia.io · 13 pts · 1d
I just don’t get why you think abandoning the vulnerable is a winning move?
AviAdi@lemmy.world · -4 pts · 1d
Ioughttamow@fedia.io · 10 pts · 1d
I wholeheartedly disagree, and you’re not a friend
cecilkorik@lemmy.ca · 3 pts · 1d
If they win, Democrats might put on a show about "justice" but they aren't going to deliver on it. This goes far deeper than just one rogue president or one political party. Trick question: If you represented a large group of decadent, sociopathic billionaires with essentially unlimited funds and control of the vast majority of information and media, who wanted to infiltrate American politics to regulatory capture and disable all rules that apply to themselves so they can take more and more and push their unpopular agendas, which political party would you infiltrate?
If you answered either "Democrat" or "Republican": you're wrong, the correct and actual answer is "both". Voting itself is not an actual sham (yet?) but you don't get to decide the actual important questions at the ballot box. You get a bunch of theatrics and rehearsed policy speeches to distract you from the fact that you're not being offered any real choices. You get to decide whether your oppressive police nanny state is going to be decorated with scary goons with scary guns, or cheerful rainbows and polite smiles, but you don't get to decide whether your going to end up in an oppressive police nanny state or not. They're both pursuing the same goals, just using different tactics so it doesn't look so obvious how perfectly aligned they both really are while they both keep moving the ball towards the endzone, one play at a time.
queermunist@lemmy.ml · 18 pts · 1d
My rights are not a distraction.
Trans women are now being put into men's prisons and being forced off of their hormones. This is not a "distraction" it's genocide.
The sports thing is just a wedge issue they can use to salami slice our rights away, and when they win here they'll move on to the next thing, and the next thing, and the next thing until all of us are forced to either flee the country or die.
village604@adultswim.fan · 6 pts · 1d
Two things can be true. Conservatism requires a boogieman to distract from the other heinous shit they're doing.
That doesn't detract from the harm they're doing to the distraction.
And when you're campaigning, you have to choose your messaging carefully. Even if you want to stop all of the atrocities happening to the boogieman, changing the conversation away from it can be a good strategy. If you react, you give them talking points and keep it in the news cycle.
El-Sayed did the right thing when he said that it's silly that we're discussing who can play what sports instead of talking about the economic and health care crisis. It's taking power away from the boogieman that has literally nothing to do with them and shifting the focus to a topic that actually affects the most voters.
The whole country needs to be shoved to the left before trans rights are cemented. It's deplorable that it's like that, but it means that it might not be the best strategy to make it the focus of messaging at this point. If they lose more ground by keeping it in the spotlight, it hurts trans people even more.
I know it's frustrating and demoralizing, but just because it's not the main focus doesn't mean work isn't being done to protect you.
AviAdi@lemmy.world · -14 pts · 1d
running_ragged@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 1d
You are making a huge mistake thinking that pro trans politicians are losing. Dems lost in 2024 without ever voicing a position on trans rights specifically.
MAGA talked about it so much, that the dems left it alone and we saw what happened. After that, in by-elections plenty dems who took a strong stance came out ahead.
Also, fuck you for responding to someone talking about their rights being taken away with a ‘Lol’ response.
AviAdi@lemmy.world · -10 pts · 1d
Lol man so did the trans not vote for Dems because they were quiet. In that case fuck the trans if they don't know who their natural allies are. Holy shit, so if Dems don't pander to trans they won't get their votes? No wonder trump won
2hundredpancakes@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 6 pts · 1d
You're saying Trump's victory was dependent on the small percentage of voters who are trans and not the massive percentage of the population that routinely doesn't vote?
Oh, I see, you're one of those. Ta-ta, windbag...
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 1d
trans make up such a small portion of the population, i seriously doubt they have significant voice in the party to make it viable for it to be part of a dem presidency in fact it might even is a death sentence for a campaign, because of how pervasive it is,go ahead and act antitrans. and not ever Dem voter is pro-trans, the ones that lean more to the right are usually very dismissive of them.
queermunist@lemmy.ml · 8 pts · 1d
Article 2 of the Convention: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.
That's the reality of denying essential medical care to trans inmates (thus mutilating their bodies and encouraging suicides) and forcing them into men's prisons (putting them in physical danger of being r*ped or murdered or both), but all you have to say to that is "idk lol whatever buddy" because you do not give a shit if my sisters are tortured to death in federal r*pe dungeons.
AviAdi@lemmy.world · -4 pts · 1d
Lol because it's going to get worse if the Dems to win big in the mid term! Trans peeps should know who their allies are, IT'S NOT THE REPUBLICANS!
toomanypancakes@crazypeople.online · 6 pts · 1d
You're advocating for our allies to be "no one".
AviAdi@lemmy.world · -4 pts · 1d
Huh? So 2024: trans people were complaining that the Democrats didn't pander to them so that's why trump won. I'm saying you would rather let your enemy win instead of someone that will not persecute you (they will not pander to you though)
Trans people don't need to be visible in the democratic party for you to vote for Democrats
toomanypancakes@crazypeople.online · 5 pts · 1d
What the fuck are you talking about?
queermunist@lemmy.ml · 6 pts · 1d
I don't think someone telling me to keep quiet is my ally, actually. If trans voices are silenced and Democrats win, they will take this to mean that they should continue the genocidal policies of the Republicans. The only way I live is if I don't let them silence me.