DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Biden administration says schools may bar trans athletes from competitive teams

100% agree- a different poster stated- physicals given/required- since when isn't that required....AND if a male identifies as a female- great- but don't try to win women's events- you got hangers- you don't qualify as a woman. Period.

As an old guy- I can't tell you what all the "new genders are"- male and female....and some folks born with both sets...etc, etc. All the differences- odd plumbing- make up what 2% or less- why are THEY controlling stuff- MAKES NO SENSE.

That didn't last long 😂😂😂

It makes sense if you are a communist and want to keep Americans in turmoil. Keep people focused on all the BS things we get in a uproar over and fail to keep our eye on what is headed our way.

I never pegged you as a conspiracy theorist. Or were you talking about when an an election us successfully overthrown coming our way?

Their heads are stuck in their collective behinds because they are consumed w/spreading hate against fellow Americans that don't agree w/their beliefs. Trash.

You mean like this post of yours? Once again anyone who disagrees with you is trash? I think it's you who forgot how civilized people talk. You are the perfect example of what you accuse others of.

Kind of proof of what I just posted on the other thread. There is very little constructive conversation going on inside these pages. Everyone is guilty of making asinine, disingenuous posts and insulting others.

NOT EVERYONE. Some posters can't see the insults they hurl. Some can't see how wrong their side is any of this. Putin and Trump used these clowns to take America to her knees. And they still can't see it.

And yet, who among us seems to gravitate towards commies? Trump loves Putin and other leaders like him. Boebert and Green and Gaetz seem to side with Putin all the time. How many on the right lead towards these dictators?

Now, if you would, tell me who on the left thinks that Putin and his kind are the way to go?

https://nypost.com/2023/04/13/megyn...yn-jenner-instead-of-dylan-mulvaney/amp/

I didnt want to create a new topic, but I agree with this take on the budlight drama.

Here's the thing. What difference does it make? Bud Light is like any other company. They try to advertise to and attract all demographics to buy their product. Paying an influencer is much cheaper than running TV commercials. In case anyone has missed it, they already have the redneck Republican aspect covered. Caitlyn Jenner is simply another Republican who shares their same views. That's not really expanding their audience.

Megyn Kelly is simply making up excuses because the person Bud Light used to sponsor their product doesn't belong to her own tribe. And the redneck community overall thinks Bud Light is wrong to include advertising to everyone. Especially a group that they despise. So they are throwing a tantrum over it and losing their ever loving minds.

Did you read the article, bro?

I most certainly did. There wasn't a whole lot to it. It does however make excuses to attack Bud Light. Making the excuse that if they had chosen someone who was “genuinely dysphoric” it would have been fine. You know that's total BS.

It's strange how everything that tests our point of view is an "attack".

She has no right to her opinion?

I think the point of the short article is that it probably pretty likely that many women and many transexuals (gender dysphoric, whatever term you want to use), find it pretty cringeworthy that Bud chose a rep that "dresses like a little girl and prances around fake hotel rooms, throwing her legs up in the air as though this is what a woman is".

Do you really find it that hard to believe that many would find that demeaning?

So what do you call the Kid Rock video? What do you call all of the nasty things people are saying on social media? Is there a term you would prefer?

Let me tell you what just a few of the issues are here. They made it quite specific "who they would have preferred". They chose a Republican who shares their politics. They chose someone who didn't go through the surgical procedures until she was in her 60's. They chose someone who was wealthy and had the means to pay for such a procedure.

If you can't see that Caitlyn Jenner is in no way anything close to the target audience they were trying to reach I can't help you.

I wasn't the one who used the term “genuinely dysphoric”. That's the term Megyn Kelly used. And let's not forget that Megyn also said she was "obnoxious".

So sure, when an entire community of people keep harping on one young, liberal social media influencer it certainly appears to be an attack. When they claim a Caitlyn Jenner, a conservative in her 70's would be a better example to target a young progressive audience it's insane.

What I found in this article is someone who is not a transsexual speaking for the transsexual community when she has nothing in common with them and has no idea how they feel. Obviously it seems you found something different.

And of course everyone has a right to their opinion. Just like everyone has a right to question their opinion and question the reasoning behind that opinion.

I don't call any of those things anything. I don't even pay attention to them. Couldn't give a crap less what Kid Rock thinks or what "people are saying on social media".

Not that any of that has anything to do with this article or point of view.

And she wasn't just speaking for transexuals, she was speaking for women. The article was posted by a woman, who agreed with it. Is that allowed? Or only transexuals and rednecks can comment??

jc

IMO, social media narrative was formed quickly and spread, which fed the many small minds in America that, rather than look at the issue for themselves, take what others tell them as gospel and run with it.

In the end, it is a corporation marketing their product. Did they stop all other advertising campaigns? Are they only focusing on this one group?

If not, then is there really an issue?

Do I care who they advertise too? no, I think they spend way too much on advertising, I don't know anyone that drinks a certain beer based on ads, it may draw some to try it, but it's not the basis of ones choice of beer.

So aside from Bud Light tasting like pig swill, who cares?

You hit the nail on the head for 90% of America.


And then pounded it in with the fury it deserves lol.

nah, Bud light is last option out and about, mostly a red ale or a dark beer guy. In a chaotic bar setting I may just order a Yuengling bottle to keep it simple.

Which may have something to do with why you can't connect the dots here and understand that it took days after the event became public for her to come up with this as a further piling on. It's quite common when someone takes an isolated incident and feel that isn't a part of the bigger picture because they haven't been keeping up with what's going on.

I see you failed to address any of the points that make it ridiculous to think that someone who is conservative, in their 70's and wealthy enough to afford such surgery makes it crazy comparison to claim she would have been a better choice to cater your message to a young, liberal audience which was obviously the goal here. Or do you think that too is irrelevant to the discussion?

So anyone who gives an opposing view is "pounding it in"? Pointing out absurdity is nothing of the sort no matter your false portrayal. The only one that seems to be getting aggravated by all of this is you.

You need to cut back on the crazy pills, dog. I'm aggravated? 🤣

First, the "pounding it in" comment was to someone who I agreed with 100%. Alas, we all know you struggle with reading.

You have some strange obsession with thinking everyone should address your comments when most people don't really care. I don't always address my 1yr old granddaughter's gibberish either, for many of the same reasons.

I don't need to connect some dots like this is the Kennedy assassination. I don't care what transpired in the imaginary world of meaningful social media posts to address whether she has a right to her opinion.

Lastly, she used KJ as an example. She's not screaming that KJ was done some injustice. If you don't like her comments, dry your eyes and move on. Sadly, you don't realize that you are part of the problem -- blowing things out of proportion because you don't agree with someone's opinion. Ironic, to say the least.

What other high-profile transexual would you prefer she use to draw a simple comparison? What would meet your requirements for someone offering an opinion that differs from yours?

And this is what it looks like when someone turns a discussion into personal barbs. While those very same people who accuse others of starting a fight.


Yes she did use her as "an example". Specifically. Nobody has blown this out of proportion. While that is your opinion, it's my opinion you are trying to downplay it. You also say dumb crap like "If you don't like her comments, dry your eyes and move on." You see, that's how you have decided to handle this. Mocking those who disagree with you. I understand that you think using someone as an example to replace her that was the total opposite in age, politics and wealth makes sense to you. but in actuality it doesn't.


Someone that is liberal, young and is actually representative of the target audience Bud Light was trying to reach. Not the exact opposite of that.

I didn't request that you address my comments at all other than actually discuss what transpired during our discussion. The fact you avoided them like the plague I consider much more revealing.

If you look back at the beginning, it was you that jumped in here and addressed me from the beginning. Nobody asked you to do that but you're more than welcome to at any point in time. Actually that's the way this place is supposed to work.

That trans sexual is not a woman. It's a parody of a woman. It's DEMEANING to women. His behavior degrades us. As a woman I'm tired of that guy being shoved in our faces and being paraded around claiming his behavior is a woman. I won't be supporting any companies that shove that in my face.

So let me ask you this, until the right brought her to your attention, did you even know who he/she was? I didn't. The only people that "shoved that in my face" was those on the right who shoved it in everyone's face. I know most people had no idea who this person was until the far right plastered her all over the internet. Maybe you're confused about who it actually was that shoved this into your face. Maybe not. Maybe you found her while following 20 something year old social media influencers on Tic Tok or something.

+2

I am kind of curious about that same question Eve, and I'm not being antagonist, because I honestly can say I have not seen any of these ads anywhere other than on youtube and websites that are talking about it.

Maybe I don't watch enough TV or whatever, cause I honestly only watch like 1 hr or less of TV a day, the rest is surfing the internet, watching car builds or science stuff on youtube, or playing PC games. I don't have a lot of exposure to video advertisements.


I guess that's why I don't get all the hub bub. If it wasn't all over the internet, I probably wouldn't even know about it.

That guy is plastered in my news feed that comes from all news sources. He is all over the TV also. Sick of him already. Both the left and the right report on him, but for different reasons. I won't be supporting any woke companies.

And the point is it was confined to those who were her followers on the internet. There were no national commercials involving this person. I wasn't being antagonistic with my reply to her either. Nobody other than her followers knew who she was until the right plastered her all over the place. Yet the accusation was that it was being "shoved in her face". Of course there was no reasonable response to that so they used an emoji to avoid a very straight forward question.

Bud Light wasn't pushing this in anyone's face. Bud Light wasn't building some national ad campaign around this. None of the very people that seem so outraged about it asking for Bud Light to be boycotted even knew who this person was. What it all boils down to is they are offended that a product many of them consumed would even be associated with something they disdain on any level.

As I stated, until the right brought this to anyone's attention, only this who were her followers, friends and family even knew who this person was.

Bud Light actually kept this about as low key as a business could when trying to expand their brand to a more diverse consumer base.

Now they are. Nobody was covering it until the right blew it up everywhere. They are who made it news. They are who brought all the attention to it. So if you advertise to everyone you are a "woke company"?

https://finance.yahoo.com/video/anheuser-busch-stock-loses-over-195046945.html



Anheuser-Busch stock loses over $5 billion in market cap following backlash to trans spokesperson

It wasn't just the right. Google is a thing. Maybe you should use it.

The idea of being offended by a "tik-tok "influencer" seems pretty woke to me. If I could give my kids advice that they'd actually listen to and use for the rest of their lives - I'd tell them not to pay any attention to anything on social media, tik-tok, you-tube shorts are any of those platforms ... don't even get sucked into watching what you think you like on them.

It was the right who brought this thing front and center to national media attention. Now everyone is covering it.

So let me see if I get this straight. Any company that advertises to everyone and doesn't refuse to advertise to groups and people you don't like, disagree with or are opposed to is what you consider "woke companies"? They have to exclude certain groups of people and or certain people, and if not they're woke?

The company made an advertising choice. As with all choices, there are consequences. Apparently they are now suffering unintended consequences. The end.

The biggest question here is what is the motivation behind why these consequences are being handed out? Hang in there man you'll get it.

Here, I'll help you.

That's the part I could see people being upset by, but that is not currently how it seems to be framed from the sites I've seen talk about it. In fact only one site brought up the fakeness in the ad of her acting as she is.

But then, isn't absurdities the whole premise of a lot of ads. IE: Dorito time machine. 30's male outsmarted by a 10 year old?

No, it's not. Sorry.

The biggest question is not a question. A company advertised/endorsed to get a new customer base. Some people, of their own free will, didn't like it. the company is now apparently suffering. Period. the end. Happens all the time.

As someone who typically leans right of center, even I have to say?

They were offended by an ad campaign on social media that most of them would probably have never been exposed to? Maybe they need a safe space?