Nutters at PBS claimed "no evidence men are stronger," now finally admit "Uh, only LIMITED research"

If you're a female and had brothers, were you as strong as they were?  Oh sure, up to age ten or so there's not much difference.  And at any older age you can always find some grown "males" who aren't as strong as females (I'm looking at you "males" at National State Public Radio).

But does any rational adult seriously think highly conditioned men and women have equal strength?  Of course not.  But the pro-trannies at National State Public Radio claimed exactly that--that it was TOTALLY fair for men claiming to be women to compete against women in sports, because (said the communist destroyers at National State Public Radio) THERE IS LIMITED SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE OF PHYSICAL ADVANTAGE.

See their tweet below.  And what's really a hoot is that in "correcting" their earlier utter bullshit--total hogwash; crap; nonsense; insult to your intelligence, they effed up the sentence to hide their earlier bullshit.  If they'd accurately reported their own earlier position, the complete sentence would have read "We claim there is very little scientific evidence that men are stronger than women."

Let that roll around your brain for a minute.

They actually claimed that.  And f they actually believed it (and NPR males might well believe it), it explains why you can't believe anything they say.  I mean, their earlier claim was as nuts as saying the Earth is flat.

And if they DIDN'T believe it, and yet claimed it was true ANYWAY, it explains just as strongly why you can't believe anything they say. 

Starting to get the picture yet?

If you're a Democrat, of course, the answer is a resounding NO.  "NPR said it, so I believe it!" is their version of logic. It's really kind of amusing.

Take a look at this tweet today from National State Public Radio:

So the lying sons of bitches FINALLY admit that "Existing research shows that higher levels of testosterone DO impact athletic performance."  But without knowing more, "impact" could be in either direction.  They simply couldn't bring themselves to say, straight out, "Men are stronger than women, due to testosterone, and possibly cell-level genetics."

And why couldn't they write a straightforward admission?  You already guessed.

It's because for decades the leaders of the Democrat party have been claiming there are no significant differences between men and women.  It's how they can push cities to hire women firefighters who can't carry a 220-pound person down a ladder, yet can be fire chiefs.

It's how the "wokie" U.S. Army can declare that women who can't do 20 "real" pushups are fully combat-qualified.  (And I apply the same standard to males who couldn't do that.)   It's how the "wokie" Navy can put an unqualified female in the front seat of a hard-to-fly, top-of-the-line jet fighter and then try to explain how she mis-handled an emergency that killed her, and came within an inch of killing her back-seater.  (Google "Kara Hultgren")

Yes, I know, male pilots also have accidents.  I soloed at 16 and flew Air Force jets for a decade, and there's very little I don't know about the field.  But in the case of Kara Hultgren, she was rated as qualified even though a male with the same checkride results wouldn't have been put in the front seat of what was at the time the Navy's most difficult fighter.  It was done for "wokie" reasons, to advance the careers of craven high-ranking officers.

The Democrat party's whole-hearted, fawning, slobbering embrace of the tranny movement is a totally predictable result of their claim that there aren't any significant differences between men and women.

Now let me say that I'm not even slightly hostile to women.  I think most women  are wonderful.  I suspect there may be a few percent more dysfunctional men than women.  (Google "fragile X syndrome.)  And there are lots of obvious, critical things women can uniquely do.  But in the Democrat party's ravenous drive to win womens' votes, they've been sneering for decades that men have no such unique role.

Hey, go with that, Democrats.  Let us know how that works out for ya.