It's simple: Biological boys don't belong in athletic competition with girls. Why can't everyone see that?

RunRagged wrote:

ChopandWhack wrote:

I'm firmly against trans girls participating in sports created for genetic girls, but I'd say we never even consider opening the door based on hormone therapy alone.

Literally have everything that God gave you removed and then we can talk.

Pecker? Gone

Balls? Gone

Then we can think about a conversation that includes hormone therapy.

The number of trans girls in high school sports would be reduced to ZERO overnight.

Over the course of history, untold millions of boys and men have had their testicles and/or peckers removed, unfortunately. It didn't turn them into women/girls. It made them eunuchs.

Female and male human beings are physically different to one another in thousands of ways large and small. It's ridiculous to suggest that when it comes to sports performance and potential, the only things that set apart the two sexes and create advantage/ disadvantage are our respective levels of steroid sex hormones and presence/absence of balls and a dick.

It's also ridiculous to suggest that boys and men can become the equivalent of girls and women anatomically and physiologically by getting rid of their dicks and balls and taking some Big Pharma hormones. That suggestion is based on the insultingly misogynistic view that girls/women are basically the same as boys/men except with lower testosterone, higher estrogen and without the dangly bits hanging between our legs.

When a male person claims to have a trans gender identity gets his balls cut off, has his penis surgically inverted so as to create a cavity in his pelvis that he can pretend is vagina, and takes so-called "hormone therapy" consisting of Big Pharma estrogen and/or progresterone, he doesn't change sex. He simply becomes a eunuch on exogenous cross-sex hormones.

mundus vult decipi wrote:

RunRagged wrote:

Over the course of history, untold millions of boys and men have had their testicles and/or peckers removed, unfortunately. It didn't turn them into women/girls. It made them eunuchs.

Female and male human beings are physically different to one another in thousands of ways large and small. It's ridiculous to suggest that when it comes to sports performance and potential, the only things that set apart the two sexes and create advantage/ disadvantage are our respective levels of steroid sex hormones and presence/absence of balls and a dick.

It's also ridiculous to suggest that boys and men can become the equivalent of girls and women anatomically and physiologically by getting rid of their dicks and balls and taking some Big Pharma hormones. That suggestion is based on the insultingly misogynistic view that girls/women are basically the same as boys/men except with lower testosterone, higher estrogen and without the dangly bits hanging between our legs.

When a male person claims to have a trans gender identity gets his balls cut off, has his penis surgically inverted so as to create a cavity in his pelvis that he can pretend is vagina, and takes so-called "hormone therapy" consisting of Big Pharma estrogen and/or progresterone, he doesn't change sex. He simply becomes a eunuch on exogenous cross-sex hormones.

This is a really misguided post.

While one can argue that male and female exist on a biological level (setting aside the 2% of people born intersex), the definition of man and woman is purely a social construct.

"Women," for example, are not natural. They are made-up, surgically modified, shaved, groomed, bathed, perfumed, etc, etc. If you were to raise a male and female without any social constructs of gender norms, they would look remarkably similar.

Further, how a biological male or female expresses their made-up gender is up to them.

No one in their right mind would want the government to determine gender for you. No one wants the gov't to tell you how long your hair can or can't be. No one wants the government to tell you what soap you can use or what pants you have to wear. No one wants the gov't to tell you what name you have to use.

All that said, a reasonable person can look at gender separated sports and see the issue with mixing biological males into female events. I haven't seen a good answer yet but leave that to people who have thought through the issue better than you.

fickle wrote:

mundus vult decipi wrote:

This is a really misguided post.

While one can argue that male and female exist on a biological level (setting aside the 2% of people born intersex), the definition of man and woman is purely a social construct.

"Women," for example, are not natural. They are made-up, surgically modified, shaved, groomed, bathed, perfumed, etc, etc. If you were to raise a male and female without any social constructs of gender norms, they would look remarkably similar.

Further, how a biological male or female expresses their made-up gender is up to them.

No one in their right mind would want the government to determine gender for you. No one wants the gov't to tell you how long your hair can or can't be. No one wants the government to tell you what soap you can use or what pants you have to wear. No one wants the gov't to tell you what name you have to use.

All that said, a reasonable person can look at gender separated sports and see the issue with mixing biological males into female events. I haven't seen a good answer yet but leave that to people who have thought through the issue better than you.

Verbosa doesn’t believe intersex even exist.

mundus vult decipi wrote:

RunRagged wrote:

Over the course of history, untold millions of boys and men have had their testicles and/or peckers removed, unfortunately. It didn't turn them into women/girls. It made them eunuchs.

Female and male human beings are physically different to one another in thousands of ways large and small. It's ridiculous to suggest that when it comes to sports performance and potential, the only things that set apart the two sexes and create advantage/ disadvantage are our respective levels of steroid sex hormones and presence/absence of balls and a dick.

It's also ridiculous to suggest that boys and men can become the equivalent of girls and women anatomically and physiologically by getting rid of their dicks and balls and taking some Big Pharma hormones. That suggestion is based on the insultingly misogynistic view that girls/women are basically the same as boys/men except with lower testosterone, higher estrogen and without the dangly bits hanging between our legs.

When a male person claims to have a trans gender identity gets his balls cut off, has his penis surgically inverted so as to create a cavity in his pelvis that he can pretend is vagina, and takes so-called "hormone therapy" consisting of Big Pharma estrogen and/or progresterone, he doesn't change sex. He simply becomes a eunuch on exogenous cross-sex hormones.

This is a really misguided post.

While one can argue that male and female exist on a biological level (setting aside the 2% of people born intersex), the definition of man and woman is purely a social construct.

"Women," for example, are not natural. They are made-up, surgically modified, shaved, groomed, bathed, perfumed, etc, etc. If you were to raise a male and female without any social constructs of gender norms, they would look remarkably similar.

Further, how a biological male or female expresses their made-up gender is up to them.

No one in their right mind would want the government to determine gender for you. No one wants the gov't to tell you how long your hair can or can't be. No one wants the government to tell you what soap you can use or what pants you have to wear. No one wants the gov't to tell you what name you have to use.

All that said, a reasonable person can look at gender separated sports and see the issue with mixing biological males into female events. I haven't seen a good answer yet but leave that to people who have thought through the issue better than you.