"Assigned media" has never claimed to be a science journal. So why don't you address the actual points made by the article instead of attacking the messenger?
I called the review article as "junk science" because it propagates the nonsense of how trans girls grow up to be gay men and trans boys grow up to be lesbians.
We have been told how trans women are sexual predators and they will attack women in public restrooms because they are sexually attracted to women. So they were not trans girls who grew up to be gay men, right? Where were those sexual predators when they were minors?
I'd also say as to this part that the concern isn't entirely that "trans people" will attack women in bathrooms, if you actually read what women say, they're mainly afraid that allowing anyone to use either bathroom based on how they feel, and not enforcing single-gender spaces generally, is opening the door to any evil dude to dress up as a woman, access the women's space, and assault them.
As to your question about trans "girls" not growing up to be gay men, do you know anything about people who claim to be trans? They come in a wide variety - some trans "women" are attracted to women (the trans "women" say they are trans lesbians) while others are attracted to men (they say they are "straight trans women.") I'm sure it's the same among trans "men." The studies don't say "ALL trans-identified kids grow up to be gay, non-trans people if left alone," they suggest that at least some kids who are encouraged to transition because they show cross-gender affinities or interests would grow up to be normal gay people if left alone.
Also, it turns out some trans people do hide out in bathrooms and assault people. A Google search for such things first reveals a 2018 study claiming it never happens, followed by articles about sexual assaults committed by Sean Ojeda aka Alicia Gray in 2019, followed by articles about unnamed (under 18) trans assaulters of girls in Edmond, OK and Brevard, FL in 2022 just among the first few hits. I've heard of plenty more over the past few years.
Those men who attack women in public bathrooms are criminals, whether they are dressed like women or not. Criminals are not likely to care whether they are legally allowed to enter public bathrooms. They certainly don't care whether assaulting women is legal or not.
In other words, the danger of being attacked by men always exists whether trans women are allowed to use women's bathrooms or not. Yes, some trans women are bad people. Just like some cis men are bad people. But being trans does not make them more dangerous to women. If anything, cis men are probably more dangerous.
The increase of trans people is probably due to more information. More young people know what "transgender" is from early ages. As is often said, you cannot become what you cannot see.
A huge problem is that people are highly fallible and very opposed to being shown that they are fallible. As long as their being wrong doesn't lead them into making irreversible decisions and their actions affect nobody else then fair enough live and let live. The problematic part it that is a callous disregard of other people to not entertain the idea that someone can be entirely certain of something and be wrong. As an example - A person hellbent on jumping to their death can be certain they are correct and annoyed that someone prevents them - are they right?
If "fairness" in sport doesn't matter - particular women's sport, as we see in this discussion - because "life is unfair" (get over it, girls) - then there can be no argument against doping. But indifference to unfairness can go further than that, which is that some runners should try to start sooner than others (oh, yeah - the sprints), but also cut corners (whoops, definitely can't do that on the track, you'll be seen - can't even step outside your lane) or even take a ride part of the way in a car (like some marathon runners have done), or maybe trip up or otherwise impede other runners (yup). But for some reason a line is drawn in those examples above but not in allowing men to beat up on women in women's sports. The reason is politics - the politics of gender, where once again women come off as the losers.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
Definitely need more trans people in women’s sports. Just one trans person in the WNBA and can you imagine how packed the arena would be? They could probably sell out a game on letsrun alone.
Class C cross country in Maine is drawing a more passionate fan base than any other area at any level. Some might claim it’s about protecting women’s sports, but they only seem interested in class c in Maine so seems like they are passionate about teenage transgender individuals. I mean like really passionate. Go live your best life guys:
Definitely need more trans people in women’s sports. Just one trans person in the WNBA and can you imagine how packed the arena would be? They could probably sell out a game on letsrun alone.
Class C cross country in Maine is drawing a more passionate fan base than any other area at any level. Some might claim it’s about protecting women’s sports, but they only seem interested in class c in Maine so seems like they are passionate about teenage transgender individuals. I mean like really passionate. Go live your best life guys:
I agree. I can’t believe that there are still zero transgenders in the WNBA. It would do wonders for their attendance.
There has to be one out there with the ability to dunk. I think that only 6 WNBA players have dunked in a regular game (smaller ball) since inception of WNBA. Imagine if a player dunked 6 times per game.
If "fairness" in sport doesn't matter - particular women's sport, as we see in this discussion - because "life is unfair" (get over it, girls) - then there can be no argument against doping. But indifference to unfairness can go further than that, which is that some runners should try to start sooner than others (oh, yeah - the sprints), but also cut corners (whoops, definitely can't do that on the track, you'll be seen - can't even step outside your lane) or even take a ride part of the way in a car (like some marathon runners have done), or maybe trip up or otherwise impede other runners (yup). But for some reason a line is drawn in those examples above but not in allowing men to beat up on women in women's sports. The reason is politics - the politics of gender, where once again women come off as the losers.
When I say “sports aren’t fair,” I don’t say it because “life is not fair.” If sports were “fair,” then I would be able to train identical to and beat Jakob in a 1500m.
Here is where you draw the line - did the athlete run the full course and not impede any other runners?
Cutting the course means you literally didn’t run the race - that should be a DQ.
Tripping another runner - that’s a DQ
A transgender athlete running a race - did they run the full distance? Then no DQ.
An athlete “doping” - did they run the full distance? Then no DQ.
All sports have rules. All sports are also unfair. Just because they are unfair, that doesn’t mean you should throw out the rules.
When I say “sports aren’t fair,” I don’t say it because “life is not fair.” If sports were “fair,” then I would be able to train identical to and beat Jakob in a 1500m.
Here is where you draw the line - did the athlete run the full course and not impede any other runners?
Cutting the course means you literally didn’t run the race - that should be a DQ.
Tripping another runner - that’s a DQ
A transgender athlete running a race - did they run the full distance? Then no DQ.
An athlete “doping” - did they run the full distance? Then no DQ.
All sports have rules. All sports are also unfair. Just because they are unfair, that doesn’t mean you should throw out the rules.
Now I understand the entire premise of your position on this. You believe that sports are inherently unfair because the average person cannot train to become as good as a world class athlete. And if sports are inherently unfair, then what is one more unfairness thrown onto the pile?
Most people, of course, completely reject your definition of what constitutes fairness in sports. If you had to race while wearing a five pound weight around your waste and Ingebrigtsen didn't, then that would be an unfair race. But him destroying you in a race in which neither of you have a five pound weight is completely fair -- he is just better than you are at running, regardless of how much training effort you put in.
Hopefully you can now understand why the vast majority of people do not agree with your position. It is not that they hate trans people (although some do), it is that they have a fundamentally different viewpoint than you do about fairness in sports.
Definitely need more trans people in women’s sports. Just one trans person in the WNBA and can you imagine how packed the arena would be? They could probably sell out a game on letsrun alone.
Class C cross country in Maine is drawing a more passionate fan base than any other area at any level. Some might claim it’s about protecting women’s sports, but they only seem interested in class c in Maine so seems like they are passionate about teenage transgender individuals. I mean like really passionate. Go live your best life guys:
I agree. I can’t believe that there are still zero transgenders in the WNBA. It would do wonders for their attendance.
There has to be one out there with the ability to dunk. I think that only 6 WNBA players have dunked in a regular game (smaller ball) since inception of WNBA. Imagine if a player dunked 6 times per game.
We have different beliefs. I think there would be no tickets sold if a dominant transgender athlete joined a team as it would be horrible to watch. WNBA is a business, has no obligation to sign one, and never will.
When I say “sports aren’t fair,” I don’t say it because “life is not fair.” If sports were “fair,” then I would be able to train identical to and beat Jakob in a 1500m.
Here is where you draw the line - did the athlete run the full course and not impede any other runners?
Cutting the course means you literally didn’t run the race - that should be a DQ.
Tripping another runner - that’s a DQ
A transgender athlete running a race - did they run the full distance? Then no DQ.
An athlete “doping” - did they run the full distance? Then no DQ.
All sports have rules. All sports are also unfair. Just because they are unfair, that doesn’t mean you should throw out the rules.
Now I understand the entire premise of your position on this. You believe that sports are inherently unfair because the average person cannot train to become as good as a world class athlete. And if sports are inherently unfair, then what is one more unfairness thrown onto the pile?
Most people, of course, completely reject your definition of what constitutes fairness in sports. If you had to race while wearing a five pound weight around your waste and Ingebrigtsen didn't, then that would be an unfair race. But him destroying you in a race in which neither of you have a five pound weight is completely fair -- he is just better than you are at running, regardless of how much training effort you put in.
Hopefully you can now understand why the vast majority of people do not agree with your position. It is not that they hate trans people (although some do), it is that they have a fundamentally different viewpoint than you do about fairness in sports.
The runner who won the Maine regional XC race was just better than her competitors were at running, regardless of how much training effort they put in. You are supporting my argument.
It's the "it's unfair" crowd that seems to want a setup wherein every racer has equal opportunity to win. I think that's bogus.
So far, every person against this runner on this thread has called Soren a "biological male" or "him" or "a dude." Some do this and simultaneously claim they don't hate trans people, but it's pretty hateful to call a transfemale a "male."
If "fairness" in sport doesn't matter - particular women's sport, as we see in this discussion - because "life is unfair" (get over it, girls) - then there can be no argument against doping. But indifference to unfairness can go further than that, which is that some runners should try to start sooner than others (oh, yeah - the sprints), but also cut corners (whoops, definitely can't do that on the track, you'll be seen - can't even step outside your lane) or even take a ride part of the way in a car (like some marathon runners have done), or maybe trip up or otherwise impede other runners (yup). But for some reason a line is drawn in those examples above but not in allowing men to beat up on women in women's sports. The reason is politics - the politics of gender, where once again women come off as the losers.
When I say “sports aren’t fair,” I don’t say it because “life is not fair.” If sports were “fair,” then I would be able to train identical to and beat Jakob in a 1500m.
Here is where you draw the line - did the athlete run the full course and not impede any other runners?
Cutting the course means you literally didn’t run the race - that should be a DQ.
Tripping another runner - that’s a DQ
A transgender athlete running a race - did they run the full distance? Then no DQ.
An athlete “doping” - did they run the full distance? Then no DQ.
All sports have rules. All sports are also unfair. Just because they are unfair, that doesn’t mean you should throw out the rules.
You completely miss the point of my comment. It is that if unfairness doesn't matter with regard to male participation in female sports - as you and other gender ideologues argue - then there is no argument in principle against any other form of unfairness - which we usually describe as cheating. But with you guys, cheating in the form of male athletes competing against women is ok - because your politics say so. For those of us who prefer sport to be fair, your politics can go take a hike.
A huge problem is that people are highly fallible and very opposed to being shown that they are fallible. As long as their being wrong doesn't lead them into making irreversible decisions and their actions affect nobody else then fair enough live and let live. The problematic part it that is a callous disregard of other people to not entertain the idea that someone can be entirely certain of something and be wrong. As an example - A person hellbent on jumping to their death can be certain they are correct and annoyed that someone prevents them - are they right?
So gender transition is like "jumping to death"?
What is "wrong" about gender transition if the person transitioning does not regret?
You completely miss the point of my comment. It is that if unfairness doesn't matter with regard to male participation in female sports - as you and other gender ideologues argue - then there is no argument in principle against any other form of unfairness - which we usually describe as cheating. But with you guys, cheating in the form of male athletes competing against women is ok - because your politics say so. For those of us who prefer sport to be fair, your politics can go take a hike.
I get the point of your comment. I responded directly to the point of your comment.
You are equating unfairness with cheating. That is an error on your part. It's okay for sports to be unfair. It is not okay to cheat.
Cutting the course is cheating - Not okay
Being a girl who was at one time in her life a boy is unfair - but it is okay. It's not cheating.
When I say “sports aren’t fair,” I don’t say it because “life is not fair.” If sports were “fair,” then I would be able to train identical to and beat Jakob in a 1500m.
Here is where you draw the line - did the athlete run the full course and not impede any other runners?
Cutting the course means you literally didn’t run the race - that should be a DQ.
Tripping another runner - that’s a DQ
A transgender athlete running a race - did they run the full distance? Then no DQ.
An athlete “doping” - did they run the full distance? Then no DQ.
All sports have rules. All sports are also unfair. Just because they are unfair, that doesn’t mean you should throw out the rules.
You completely miss the point of my comment. It is that if unfairness doesn't matter with regard to male participation in female sports - as you and other gender ideologues argue - then there is no argument in principle against any other form of unfairness - which we usually describe as cheating. But with you guys, cheating in the form of male athletes competing against women is ok - because your politics say so. For those of us who prefer sport to be fair, your politics can go take a hike.
Doesn't anybody think we are collectively caring too much about the outcome of a high school race? American kids, both boys and girls suffer from a bunch of frustrated adults treating these meets like they are the Olympic games when they are not. Soren winning this race is simply not the same as Kelvin Kiptum declaring himself Karen Kiptum and taking Sifan Hassan's Chicago title from her. Treating these situations the same in terms of enforcing fairness and having the same outrage is doing a disservice to all of the kids running. NONE OF THEM are going to the Olympics and if any of them do have this talent, then the outcome of the outcome of this race will not matter. I would say this to the boys too if say there was some strange loophole that allowed Kiplimo to race and beat the boys winner by 4 minutes. I ask Armstronglivs how many of these kids racing in the boys or girls race are on adderall? Do these kids have an unfair advantage? Did they get a TUE to compete? No? But is this fair?? We had a thread a thousand posts long about Molly Seidel and adderall. Why do we care if she is on it and not these kids?
While HS XC is not a big deal in the whole scale of things, to these young athletes, it is very important. Many of us park on Letsrun because of our experiences with XC in high school. There is something about being young and forming memories. Many of us will never forget races that may seem insignificant to many, but are very important to a 16 year old. High school coaches know that these races are formative experiences for their charges and that the impact in their lives is far beyond just the times they run. This is why coaching is so satisfying to many. I don't remember my high school typing teacher. The controversy here is that many realize the developmental nature of high school sports and are worried about the message we are sending to kids and this concern is from both sides of the issue.
While HS XC is not a big deal in the whole scale of things, to these young athletes, it is very important. Many of us park on Letsrun because of our experiences with XC in high school. There is something about being young and forming memories. Many of us will never forget races that may seem insignificant to many, but are very important to a 16 year old. High school coaches know that these races are formative experiences for their charges and that the impact in their lives is far beyond just the times they run. This is why coaching is so satisfying to many. I don't remember my high school typing teacher. The controversy here is that many realize the developmental nature of high school sports and are worried about the message we are sending to kids and this concern is from both sides of the issue.
Yes, I loved HS xc and it was very important to me then and now, but 99% of what mattered did not really have to do with whether or I was 2nd or 3rd in the race. I get that when you are 16 this might seem like a BIG deal, but it is the role of us coaches, parents etc to help kids get some perspective. There is NOTHING worse that the classic little league dad treating an American Legion Game like it is the 7th game of the world series. If you are a coach or parent have you not been sickened by parents screaming at refs or heckling other opposing kids (not to do with gender issues). Having some perspective is important. I ask again about the adderall example. It seems WA deems adderall to provide an unfair advantage, but nobody cares at this level of meet. Why not? If the girl who lost said in the paper that she was bummed because she knew that the girl who beat her was on adderall and this was not fair, how would everybody react? I agree that in the narrow sense it is NOT fair that this Soren won, I am just arguing that at certain levels of competition there are things more important than this narrow definition of fair. This goes for the boys and the girls. I am not just saying this because a biological boy beat a girl. I would tell the boys to chill out too and the parents if there was a scenario where a boy lost the race and it was not fair. Say, if another boy was on a medicine that gave him some advantage. Again, if Jared Ward could simply become Jenna Ward and have now been declared the Berlin winner and new women's world record holder instead of Assefa, then that would be OUTRAGEOUS and demanding of condemnation, but this race was not that race.
While HS XC is not a big deal in the whole scale of things, to these young athletes, it is very important. Many of us park on Letsrun because of our experiences with XC in high school. There is something about being young and forming memories. Many of us will never forget races that may seem insignificant to many, but are very important to a 16 year old. High school coaches know that these races are formative experiences for their charges and that the impact in their lives is far beyond just the times they run. This is why coaching is so satisfying to many. I don't remember my high school typing teacher. The controversy here is that many realize the developmental nature of high school sports and are worried about the message we are sending to kids and this concern is from both sides of the issue.
BTW, I very much agree with your last sentence. This is the key IMO.
You can introduce a hundred more strawmen into the conversation but it doesn't change why people are rightfully aggrieved by this situation. Your allegory doesn't even make sense because you'd have to qualify it by saying there's one race for those taking Adderall and one for those who aren't, and then have someone who is taking Adderall but who identifies as not being on it, then going on to compete in the non-adderall race. And if you did that, it's still pointless because the general public just don't (and will never) agree with boys running in girls races; for the same reason they're against men running in boys' races, or heavyweights fighting against middleweights.
When I say “sports aren’t fair,” I don’t say it because “life is not fair.” If sports were “fair,” then I would be able to train identical to and beat Jakob in a 1500m.
Here is where you draw the line - did the athlete run the full course and not impede any other runners?
Cutting the course means you literally didn’t run the race - that should be a DQ.
Tripping another runner - that’s a DQ
A transgender athlete running a race - did they run the full distance? Then no DQ.
An athlete “doping” - did they run the full distance? Then no DQ.
All sports have rules. All sports are also unfair. Just because they are unfair, that doesn’t mean you should throw out the rules.
You completely miss the point of my comment. It is that if unfairness doesn't matter with regard to male participation in female sports - as you and other gender ideologues argue - then there is no argument in principle against any other form of unfairness - which we usually describe as cheating. But with you guys, cheating in the form of male athletes competing against women is ok - because your politics say so. For those of us who prefer sport to be fair, your politics can go take a hike.
I would go further and say that if it doesn't really matter that a boy can enter the girls race because that's still "fair" since the yall ran the same course, why even have girls sports at all? In the same way that dishonest arguers in this thread have said this doesn't matter because Soren would not beat girls out in California, or win the women's Olympics, we could argue that even the actual girls in the race don't count for anything because they wouldn't win the boys race at this same meet, much less make the men's Olympics. So why bother? Just put every athlete, boy or girl, who attends a school in this region of Maine in one race and whoever wins, whether boy or girl, that's who wins.
But as I said, people who try to say trans athletes competing is "fair" are arguing dishonestly, presumably because they have separate beliefs in trans activism/advancement and feel like if they concede this one point, their whole movement collapses.
