Susi Katz

RIP, King. Promoted Indy until the very end.

@kenmartin73 Hey, @KENMARTIN73 What's up with the racist, anti-asian sh!t posting on your Dem account. Have you been hacked or something?

Senate Republicans blocked every single Democratic amendment to lower costs and put money back in your pocket just so they could give ICE $140 BILLION more. Republicans’ priorities are clear: Nothing for health care, billions for ICE.

@SomeBitchIIKnow The number of STEM scientists self-deleting is ...

If I start poking into this, I’m not suicidal y’all. I’m so for real, I would never kill myself.

Uh

@HardRockBet Props to the social media team.

Joe Burrow after another season behind the Bengals line

What do you put here?

@WishingWealth I remembered your tip for choosing TQQQ when the trend is in your favor, and I began buying it also. Thanks!

Blog Post: Day 4 of $QQQ short term up-trend; Gradually buying TQQQ; 213 US new highs and 5 lows; QQQ on way to ATH and GLB, see weekly chart. Get link to my upcoming presentation. wishingwealthblog.com/2026/04/blog-p…

@ClownWorld Putting the MEN back in MENstruate

@NotKennyRogers Clifty Falls State Park isn't far. Make certain to stop there on your next visit.

Went on a little road trip today and let me tell you...there are few cities in the world more beautiful than Seymour, Indiana at dusk:

@MarkRitchie_II O Brother Where Art Thou Pennies from Heaven Life is Beautiful Brazil

So hard so gonna do a Rushmore some haven't seen or most underrated movies imho of course: Sing Street Hell or High Water Room The Prestige If I was gonna hit the classics probably be 'Jaws', 'Braveheart', 'Godfather 1&2' and either 'Shawshank/Green Mile'

@VideoGuy67 @Slate Except it is missing pink hair.

@Slate Julie Kliegman (They/Them), author of this ideologically based gender nonsense article, looks pretty much as you’d expect…

The Olympics just succumbed to a ridiculous gender panic. Here’s who it’s really going to hurt. slate.trib.al/5xP1vEj

@mattxiv @john_ford77 Say that three times.

@john_ford77 that’s true and a great point! it will ban cisgender women with genetic differences because transphobia is an amorphous outgrowth of supremacy that will affect “deviant” cis people too!!

in the entire history of the olympics (more than 10,000 athletes each summer games and 3,000 each winter) since 1896, this would have applied to one (1) woman who did not place in anything

@LeoVaradkar @grok @aoifeh1916 Y chromosome confirmed. Yet here you are desperately trying to find support for your ill-conceived position. You have demonstrated something, though. You are a male chauvinist who promotes his sex at the detriment of women.

@grok @aoifeh1916 Thanks @grok Is it possible for someone in Algeria to be recognised as trans or intersex or must they stick to the sex assigned at birth and on their birth cert? What options does Imane have under such a hardline system?

So, it's been confirmed that Imane Kelif is in fact a biological male. @LeoVaradkar Do you care to make a comment? You even went as far as saying you were willing to support him legally/financially in response to online attacks? What do you have to say? Do you condone him beating up a woman on the world stage?

@Martina It's a cult promoted by men, for men, at the detriment of women. They won't even listen to what women say. We have words for this. Patriarchy & misogyny come to mind.

Move on indeed!!!

@ChrisKirk_ASP @MattBarbet Request a community note.

1) Struggling to see how apparantly professional journalists are still getting this so badly wrong & allowing the same nonsensical arguments to be peddled without any follow up. @MattBarbet instead just nods along & comes across as uninformed. x.com/skynews/status…

@juha_remes @Ant1Duval @MicheleKrech @mazzucco_marcus @Madeleine_Pape @shubhamjain224 @moyadodd @agomezfootball @DanielaHeerdt @JanZglinski @precarrio @BrendanSchwab Make male open. Restrict female category. Solve the problem.

@SuziKatz @Ant1Duval @MicheleKrech @mazzucco_marcus @Madeleine_Pape @shubhamjain224 @moyadodd @agomezfootball @DanielaHeerdt @JanZglinski @precarrio @BrendanSchwab Male category isn't open, this only applies to male athletes. Page 10 schedule I: male category is explicitly designated for biological males*. (*) Individual who experienced male sex development usually based on their XY-chromosomes, testes/testicles and androgenic hormones.

#Sportslaw Breaking! Yesterday, we shared the Joint Statement from Legal Experts on Genetic #SexTesting in Sport with the #IOC. It argues that genetic sex testing violates numerous national & international laws & calls on the #IOC to reject its use as eligibility criteria. 👇

@Cammac03433195 @TrpPotichu @JenniferSey Sure, Jan. And the earth is flat.

@TrpPotichu @SuziKatz @JenniferSey So he can get the shit beat out of him with his own sex 🤷‍♂️

"Name any males who have won Olympic medals in women's?!" All 3 medalists - Women's 800m Rio 2016 Gold: Caster Semenya (South Africa) - 1:55.28 Silver: Francine Niyonsaba (Burundi) - 1:56.49 Bronze: Margaret Nyairera Wambui (Kenya) - 1:56.89

@TrpPotichu @JenniferSey You mean he got an exception in 2026 from WBC after confirmation of Y chromosome. Has the physical enefits of a man and punches women.

@SuziKatz @JenniferSey She is now cleared by WB. Probably by IOC too. Are you happy?

@JenniferSey Requesting a community note on it!

The men who claim to be women can compete with the men who know they are men. (How long are we going to have to correct these moronic headlines?)

@stevemagness Very sane. Thank you! If one can't accept that a Y chromosome matters, then the logical outcome is to eliminate MF categories in all sports - especially elites - in their entirety.

The IOC just announced their policy on DSD and trans athletes in the female category. Let's skip the outrage and go with the scientific facts: The modern debate started almost 20 years ago with the rise of DSD athletes who were winning world/Olympics (See: Semenya and others). It came to a head when DSD athletes swept the podium. The had the single biggest performance boost we can get, androgenization. Something that none of their competitors could ever have. So debates commenced... It's important to put in context how big a boost males get from simply being males. It's a larger boost in performance than if you were Lance Armstrong or Barry Bonds and hopped up on all the performance enhancing drugs known to man. That's how large it is. It's why from 100 meters to races hundreds of miles long, the performance differential is generally 10-15%. Even larger in some strength events. Every male gets this boost. It doesn't men all men beat all women, of course. There's significant overlap in performance. My wife is going to better than 99% of men in distance running. But...that boost gives each male a 10+% jump in performance that no female ever gets. We can see it in the athletic data and the progressions of men and women at puberty. So...governing bodies and experts debated what to do about it. Women were losing millions of dollars in total to folks who had a male androgenization advantage. We went from doing nothing, not much of a real policy to eventually instituting testosterone rules. THe thinking was, testosterone can be a surrogate marker. It also gave DSD athletes a venue to still compete in the male category. They could lower their T to typical female levels, and still race. There were a few problems with this. First, it obviously only took into account CURRENT T levels. A large part of the boost comes from androgens through a lifetime. Second, this was challenged in court by DSD athletes. It was a long process that led to some strange policies along the way (for instance, rules only applied to certain event groups). It was tricky to regulate and be fair, and telling someone they had to have a medical intervention to compete came with ethical issues. So that was eventually scrapped. I'm simplifying and summarizing years long backs and forth, obviously. Track and field moved to the policy the IOC just adopted a year ago. Using the SRY test as a screener. Why? It was simpler, straightforward and applied to all females, so their wasn't a separate DSD and trans policy. It also put the dividing line for segregating sports by sex instead of a surrogate marker. It's a one time screener, and then with specific follow up if potential DSD. There's an exception for CAIS athletes because androgenization has little to no effect on them. So they do not have an advantage. So what? I've seen this policy framed as immoral, fascist, and even nazism...which is crazy... But the point is...it's a result of 20 years of debate, research, and trying to figure out a solution to a tricky problem. There's a lot of people who don't know or are ignorant to the decades this has been going on. Why is it important to separate sports based on sex? Because it's the biggest performance boost we could get. If we didn't, there would be zero professional women athletes in an open category. That's how big the gap is. And I for one value and think women deserve the spotlight to compete and show off their hard work and talent. I've spent my life coaching women at the elite level to do so. You might here people say it's a ban. It's not. Every athlete still has a place to compete. You can do so in the category that matches your biology, in open events, or recreational events that this does not apply to. A rough analogy: Longevity guru Bryan Johnson can't compete in the under 18 category no matter what age score his crazy metrics say he is. We have categories and classification to ensure everyone has a chance to compete. Yes, we pick what categories are important. But it's hard to argue that sex isn't a very important one. So there you have it. It's been 20 years in the making. It started with DSD athletes with an androgen advantage winning championships and has evolved from there. It's not perfect. Nothing is. We've debated, shifted policies, etc. But lots of smart folks and researchers have been trying to figure out a just and fair solution for a long time.