This is my entire point. For the vast majority of people this issue will never affect them yet it's front page news quite often. For the record I am on the same page as you when it comes to trans/sports (at least when it comes to actual competitive sports with rewards/consequences). Sports played mostly for fun I don't really care about (i.e. rec leagues, etc.). I will admit that perhaps if I did have children I might have a different perspective, but the culture war stuff is really wearing thin.
Does this not apply to the other parents that might have a different view or have an actual trans kid who's an athlete? Why does skin in the game only matter when you agree? Seems like people apply this selectively here.
No. Its the attitude of a parent. Your the one trying to project. No parent would agree that they have "no skin in the game" with their childrens extracurriculars. It's just nonsense. My children are the most important people in my wife's and my universe. We have ALL our "skin" in that game.
Weird thing to say, but yeah I’ve been and remain active in soccer. I’ve coached at the high school varsity level. I’ve coached competitive youth and I run around the state following my girls. I also still play once a week in a rec league but it gets fairly competitive.
I can see how for some individuals this could actually become a big deal (like if their daughter got hurt by a biological male playing sports).
You literally dont have skin in the game, your kids are their own people, they arent extensions of yourself.
No idea what you mean. Ones skin in the game is certainly myopic and selfish. My kids are most important to me. If my son gets tangled up driving to the lane and both kids go down and hit their heads, im pretty much running to my kid and the other parent will run to theirs. Of course a trans parent has skin in the game. You are the one arguing they dont.
Perhaps cons have the personality traits that make us more cautious and careful people. It makes us cautious but it doesn’t makes us bigots or whatever name you like to call others you disagree with.
Do you understand the term? Skin in the game means you have an actual investment on the line. A risk levied. Nothing fits the term more accurately than parenting.
So basically people with skin in the game cant be objective, their views are clouded by their emotions and personal attachments. Cant disagree with that. So stop using it as a crutch to argue that it makes a person an expert on anything or gives special insight. You just admitted it makes you selfish and myopic.
I think thats the point. Its is a very big deal to those harmed by it. (As small a number as that may be.) But I dont think the smallness of the number should make us shrug it off and 8gnore the potential issue.
If I were the party with no experience parenting, I would probably be the one asking questions to clarify and seeking to understand rather than throw grenades into the discussion. But that’s just me…
So maybe you should ask questions of parents with trans kids to clarify or understand, since that's you, I guess. Show me how its done.
Well, I've never heard someone say "skin in the game" in a serious way when they werent talking about themselves! I think mostly I've heard conservatives use it when it comes to the idea that people who don't pay income taxes shouldnt vote or have certain rights. So yeah, I would say that. Basically the people that use it tend to want to disenfranchise or discount someone to their own gain, which is selfish and myopic. If you dont have "skin in the game" your opinion is worthless, that's usually the context its delivered.
Since it’s just you and I in this discussion maybe you shouldn’t speak for others then…right? If they were on the board I certainly would address it directly.
I didnt mean here, literally anywhere. And if you dont know any here or in real life, that might tell you something about the scope of the "problem" you are obsessed with. Surely there are other problems that affect you, ones you have actual skin in the game on, so to speak.
