I'm a Democrat and I spoke out against it. One of the previous posters is correct in saying that there is a difference between liberal and radical.
I'm a Democrat and I spoke out against it. One of the previous posters is correct in saying that there is a difference between liberal and radical.
Something is hinky about LRC tonight. Links to PubMed are being blocked, and previous link to World Rugby findings on the issue of trans-identifying males in female sports also didn't come through. So I'll try a different route.
To see excellent graphics summarizing the differences between the physical abilities pertaining to sports of females, males and males who are on on testosterone suppression and cross-sex hormones, go to this article and at the very bottom click on where it says
SUMMARY OF TRANSGENDER BIOLOGY AND PERFORMANCE RESEARCH
RunRagged wrote:
SDSU Aztec wrote:
It's also not an issue because there aren't any transgender female distance runners.
I dunno what your definition of of "distance runners" is, but June (formerly Jonathan) Eastwood of the U of Montana trounced all the female competitors in the mile at an NCAA regional event in February of this year:
https://youtu.be/acEwFJBerIU
She graduated so it's gone from one TGF runner back to zero and it might be years before we see another at the NCAA level.
In her case, the hormone treatment resulted in her being at about the same competitive level as a woman.
My point is that people on LR are getting worked up over an issue that will never come anywhere close to having a significant impact on women's sports. TGFs are only .3% of the population.
SDSU Aztec wrote:
RunRagged wrote:
I dunno what your definition of of "distance runners" is, but June (formerly Jonathan) Eastwood of the U of Montana trounced all the female competitors in the mile at an NCAA regional event in February of this year:
https://youtu.be/acEwFJBerIUShe graduated so it's gone from one TGF runner back to zero and it might be years before we see another at the NCAA level.
In her case, the hormone treatment resulted in her being at about the same competitive level as a woman.
My point is that people on LR are getting worked up over an issue that will never come anywhere close to having a significant impact on women's sports. TGFs are only .3% of the population.
You say Eastwood's "hormone treatment" put Eastwood "at about the same competitive level as a woman." So how come Eastwood so easily trounced virtually all the actual women that Eastwood competed against in Eastwood's female persona?
What is this magical "hormone treatment" you presume Eastwood and other males horning on female sports have had? To be compliant with current NCAA rules for "transgender inclusion" in sports, a male such as Eastwood need only take an estrogen pill once in 12 months to be eligible to compete in the female category.
Pray tell, what is the "hormone treatment" that can undo the physical effects of human male adolescent puberty - and the "mini-puberty" that male humans go through in infancy - that give male humans enormous advantages over female humans in sports?
You seem to be unaware that the vast majority - 75% - of males who take testosterone blockers and high-dose cross-sex hormones per "trans" protocols are not able to achieve T levels in the female range. A quarter of such males achieve no appreciable reduction of testosterone at all.
https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/893280https://www.bumc.bu.edu/busm/2018/02/20/medicine-alone-does-not-completely-suppress-testosterone-levels-among-transgender-women/It's odd but telling that you've ignored all the posts and links I've made previously from objective, scientific sources that show males who suppress their testosterone and/or take cross-sex hormones do not lose the athletic advantages over females that male puberty confers.
You say males using gender identity claims to participate in female sports is "an issue that will never come anywhere close to having a significant impact on women's sports. TGFs are only .3% of the population."
So how come so many of these male "transgender" athletes are cleaning up and breaking records in a wide number of girls' and women's sports?
Why do two male teens who ID as trans - Terry Miller and Andraya Yearwood - now hold 15 records and many more medals and awards in CT girls' HS track?
Why is middle-aged male weight lifter Laurel Hubbard from New Zealand beating the pants off women half his age in international competition?
Why is master's track cyclist Rachel McKinnon, now Veronica Ivy, setting women's records in the female division he's decided to invade?
Why did Cece Telfer come in first in the 400m women's national NCAA Division 2 hurdles when as Craig just months before Telfer wasn't a national contender at all?
Why did a male who identifies as "trans" in the UK brag to the press that when playing female rugby he gets to "fold (female) competitors like deck chairs"? Why did his coach say said athlete would be an asset if only s/he could stop injuring teammates - and coaches - during practice?
Why is a male MMA fighter who identifies as "trans" boasting on Twitter how he loves to break the skulls of women who don't believe males can become female?
Over the past 20 years, the previously female sport of roller derby has been invaded and entirely taken over by males who claim to be "trans." You are naive to think this won't happen in other sports if current trends aren't checked.
Tulsi doesn’t really care about fairness - it’s all about getting those sweet altright white knight votes - all those grown men that suddenly started showing an interest in high school women’s sports; from their computer though, not the stands.
Isn’t tulsi also just some nobody again? Didn’t she lose her Congress seat?
She is a Democrat.
go go go wrote:
She is a Democrat.
Only because Hawaii turned blue. She was writing anti-gay propaganda for her republican dads campaigns before she changed to a democrat.
Just an opportunist
RunRagged wrote:
You say Eastwood's "hormone treatment" put Eastwood "at about the same competitive level as a woman." So how come Eastwood so easily trounced virtually all the actual women that Eastwood competed against in Eastwood's female persona?
You say males using gender identity claims to participate in female sports is "an issue that will never come anywhere close to having a significant impact on women's sports. TGFs are only .3% of the population."
So how come so many of these male "transgender" athletes are cleaning up and breaking records in a wide number of girls' and women's sports?
Why do two male teens who ID as trans - Terry Miller and Andraya Yearwood - now hold 15 records and many more medals and awards in CT girls' HS track?
As a guy Eastwood trounce most the guys he competed against. The level of performance was roughly the same with the lower depth of woman's fields leading to slightly higher placings.
What type of treatment were the CT teens on? I have never seen that published (and yes to some extent it is private) but without knowing that they had been doing drug treatment for a year, it has nothing to do with the NCAA rules. And given they ran indoor as a boy and outdoor as a girl, I sort of doubt that there was a year of hormones before competing....
SDSU Aztec wrote:
My point is that people on LR are getting worked up over an issue that will never come anywhere close to having a significant impact on women's sports. TGFs are only .3% of the population.
Intrasex athletes are only a small fraction of the population but they have had a significant impact on the woman's 800m. If there is a big enough advantage so that a 5% talent (i.e. a boy who can run say 2:00 in HS) as a buy can beat a .5% talent (say a 1:50 runner) after transistioning, you might end up with gross over representation. Again I doubt the transadvantage is that large if they are following the NCAA rules.
In the end you really only need 1 person to show up to bring the issue to the front. If the transwoman is finishing in the middle of the pack nobody will care. Start scoring or winning, and questions of fairness will be raised. It would be nice for all involved to figure out the rules ahead of time.
RunRagged wrote:
SDSU Aztec wrote:
She graduated so it's gone from one TGF runner back to zero and it might be years before we see another at the NCAA level.
In her case, the hormone treatment resulted in her being at about the same competitive level as a woman.
My point is that people on LR are getting worked up over an issue that will never come anywhere close to having a significant impact on women's sports. TGFs are only .3% of the population.
You say Eastwood's "hormone treatment" put Eastwood "at about the same competitive level as a woman." So how come Eastwood so easily trounced virtually all the actual women that Eastwood competed against in Eastwood's female persona?
What is this magical "hormone treatment" you presume Eastwood and other males horning on female sports have had? To be compliant with current NCAA rules for "transgender inclusion" in sports, a male such as Eastwood need only take an estrogen pill once in 12 months to be eligible to compete in the female category.
Pray tell, what is the "hormone treatment" that can undo the physical effects of human male adolescent puberty - and the "mini-puberty" that male humans go through in infancy - that give male humans enormous advantages over female humans in sports?
You seem to be unaware that the vast majority - 75% - of males who take testosterone blockers and high-dose cross-sex hormones per "trans" protocols are not able to achieve T levels in the female range. A quarter of such males achieve no appreciable reduction of testosterone at all.
https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/893280https://www.bumc.bu.edu/busm/2018/02/20/medicine-alone-does-not-completely-suppress-testosterone-levels-among-transgender-women/It's odd but telling that you've ignored all the posts and links I've made previously from objective, scientific sources that show males who suppress their testosterone and/or take cross-sex hormones do not lose the athletic advantages over females that male puberty confers.
You say males using gender identity claims to participate in female sports is "an issue that will never come anywhere close to having a significant impact on women's sports. TGFs are only .3% of the population."
So how come so many of these male "transgender" athletes are cleaning up and breaking records in a wide number of girls' and women's sports?
Why do two male teens who ID as trans - Terry Miller and Andraya Yearwood - now hold 15 records and many more medals and awards in CT girls' HS track?
Why is middle-aged male weight lifter Laurel Hubbard from New Zealand beating the pants off women half his age in international competition?
Why is master's track cyclist Rp3nachel McKinnon, now Veronica Ivy, setting women's records in the female division he's decided to invade?
Why did Cece Telfer come in first in the 400m women's national NCAA Division 2 hurdles when as Craig just months before Telfer wasn't a national contender at all?
Why did a male who identifies as "trans" in the UK brag to the press that when playing female rugby he gets to "fold (female) competitors like deck chairs"? Why did his coach say said athlete would be an asset if only s/he could stop injuring teammates - and coaches - during practice?
Why is a male MMA fighter who identifies as "trans" boasting on Twitter how he loves to break the skulls of women who don't believe males can become female?
Over the past 20 years, the previously female sport of roller derby has been invaded and entirely taken over by males who claim to be "trans." You are naive to think this won't happen in other sports if current trends aren't checked.
Come on. Eastwood finished 60th in the XC regionals and ran 4:40ish compared to having run the equivalent of 4:08 as a guy.
The Connecticut sprinters were not taking testosterone suppression treatment and will not be receiving scholarships. If they want to continue competing they will need to sit out a year to meet the NCAA requirements which I doubt will happen. California also allows MTF athletes to compete with the only requirement of a sign off from a mental health professional, but I'm not aware of even a single MTF athlete out of a population of 40M. I believe the reason is that making the transition during HS would be a horrific experience.
Call me selfish but I don't give a crap about middle-aged rugby players, D-2 hurdlers, weightlifters or master cyclists. Isn't Roller Derby fake? All of your examples are at low levels of competition and do not indicate the predicted end of women's sports. Yeah, the rugby MTF should not be allowed to compete and whoever officiates her league should give her the boot.
I don't know if your psychotic MMA has actually fought a woman and achieved her goals, but such a person will never compete in the U.F.C. The U.F.C. is not an equal opportunity employer and will not sign someone that will severely damage their market. Many people would be repulsed by her being allowed to compete and/or appalled by watching biological women being brutally knocked out. The other fighters would have the absolute right to refuse to fight her.
You're giving a handful examples out of the entire world at a low level of sports to support all the rules people here believe necessary to save women's sport. Having a trans division would be similar to one for unicorns at horse racing tracks.
Great. The WNBA WILL NEVER EVER enforce this tho. I'd love to see it tho lol.
Joe Biden wins the election and Trump loyalist Tulsi Gabbard goes home DEVASTATED.
govlie1 wrote:
Isn’t tulsi also just some nobody again? Didn’t she lose her Congress seat?
She didn't lose. She chose not to run for reelection.
adsfdasfasfsafadfa wrote:
SDSU Aztec wrote:
My point is that people on LR are getting worked up over an issue that will never come anywhere close to having a significant impact on women's sports. TGFs are only .3% of the population.
Intrasex athletes are only a small fraction of the population but they have had a significant impact on the woman's 800m. If there is a big enough advantage so that a 5% talent (i.e. a boy who can run say 2:00 in HS) as a buy can beat a .5% talent (say a 1:50 runner) after transistioning, you might end up with gross over representation. Again I doubt the transadvantage is that large if they are following the NCAA rules.
In the end you really only need 1 person to show up to bring the issue to the front. If the transwoman is finishing in the middle of the pack nobody will care. Start scoring or winning, and questions of fairness will be raised. It would be nice for all involved to figure out the rules ahead of time.
If you're referring to Semenya, that is a different issue from transgender. She was considered to be a woman, but is now required to take testestorone suppression to compete in her best events,400-1500, which has effectively ended her professional career.
Regarding the rules, they have already been figured out. The right for transgender females to compete against biological women has already been won in court and that's not going to change. The argument that they can will be recognized as being female, but with the caveat that they can't compete in women's sports, cannot be won in court.
I believe that June Eastwood will be the high water mark for MTF runners in the NCAA. A championship level runner is not going to transgender. Why trade being a top male runner to become a villian? Montana kept Eastwood on a scholarship, but in the future, it's likely that someone transgendering would lose theirs. If I was the parent, I would tell my son to wait until after graduation and that if he gave up his scholarship I would not step in and pay the tuition.
Precious Roy wrote:
effectively has the consequence of banning trans people from collegiate athletics.
Sounds like a great idea!
Trans women should be allowed to compete with biological women, but biological women should be given proper recognition for their achievements.
Never. Women should not be forced to play second fiddle to men in their own races. All the “recognition” would change nothing. They lost the race, the scholarship, the prize $, whatever is at stake. Such an arrangement would be a cruel farce. Everyone pretending that what is actually happening - men of limited ability beating women - is not actually happening.
SDSU Aztec wrote:
I believe that June Eastwood will be the high water mark for MTF runners in the NCAA. A championship level runner is not going to transgender. Why trade being a top male runner to become a villian?
Ummm... ever heard of Caitlyn Jenner? What do you think she would have done, had she been born 40-50 years later?
Just Another Hobby Jogger wrote:
SDSU Aztec wrote:
I believe that June Eastwood will be the high water mark for MTF runners in the NCAA. A championship level runner is not going to transgender. Why trade being a top male runner to become a villian?
Ummm... ever heard of Caitlyn Jenner? What do you think she would have done, had she been born 40-50 years later?
Bruce Jenner would have chosen to transgender to the Heptathlon? Really? He was capable of waiting until he was 65 to transgender so certainly he could have waited until his athletic career was over. He also seemed to be interested in getting married and having children.
No guy capable of winning a gold medal is ever going to transgender during their athletic career. It would cost them a fortune in endorsements and future contracts and they be hated by about half of the population.
Well, Jenner could have won the decathlon, got married and have children, transitioned to be a female, and won the heptathlon all before the age of 35.
Being the only person ever to win both the decathlon and the heptathlon golds would be very tempting for such an attention seeker.
SDSU Aztec: Your responses show that you are poorly informed about this topic, and more important that you don't care about the impact on girls and women's sports. I suspect that might be coz girls and women don't matter much - or at all - to you.
I've linked to scientific papers and sources and given examples of just a handful of the many, many male athletes who've been allowed to use "gender identity" claims to horn in and triumph in girls and women's sports, and your response is, pfft and doesn't count and
Call me seflish but I don't give a crap about middle-aged rugby players, D-2 hurdlers, weightlifters or masters cyclists.
What you don't seem to get is, this not about you or what you want! Girls' and women's hard-won rights are not for men like you to give away, roll back or remove and dismiss with a wave of your imperious or couldn't-care-less hands. We aren't asking your permission to be allowed to keep the rights and sports we fought hard for. We're drawing a line in the sand and saying, "No, no, no can do, can't go for that" like the Hall & Oates song:
When in 2014 MMA "trans" fighter Fallon Fox entered a fight without informing officials that he is a male former soldier and father who "transitioned" in his 30s, then proceeded to break the skull of his female competitor, Tamika Brents, it was very big news. It also elevated the public profile of Joe Rogan considerably. The fact you don't know this indicates you are far from an authority on this topic.
You say with utter confidence,
The right for transgender females to compete agains biological women has already been won in court and that's not going to change
You seem to be referring here to the the case brought and won by tennis player Renee Richards (Richard Raskin) in the New York State Supreme Court against the United States Tennis Association in 1976/77 - a case Richards now says it was wrong to pursue because Richards has come to realize that males who "transition" post-puberty retain enormous sports advantages that no amount of hormones and cosmetic surgeries can undo.
Significantly, Richards brought that case at a time when Title IX was still in its initial implementation period - and girls and women in schools in the US were just beginning to have a chance at fair play not just in sports, but in PE and a wide array of academic programs in which we were previously allowed to participate in only small numbers, or we were excluded entirely. I was in college/uni at the time, and girls and women were still having to fight tooth and nail for something approaching parity in sports programs, coaching staff, court time, gym use, training support and locker room accommodations.
The fact that you think that a single ruling in a case about professional tennis in a NYState court from the mid-1970s can be used to undo Title IX - a federal law which affects US educational institutions and programs that receive federal funds - suggests you don't understand how legislation and the courts work in the US.
It also shows you've not kept abreast of what's been happening with the ongoing cases challening male participation in female sports in Connecticut and Idaho, and the 2020 ruling of the US Dept of Education Division of Civil Rights that allowing males to compete in female scholastic sports in the US violates Title IX and the civil rights of female athletes.
BTW, when the Renee Richards' professional tennis case was heard, nobody was"transgender" - there were transvestites, cross-dressers and transsexuals. Richards was in the last category, which for males at the time meant a man who had his balls removed and his scrotal sac reconfigured and penis inverted to vaguely resemble a vagina and vulva.
But nowadays, hardly any males who identify as "transgender" have genital surgeries. Nearly all of them keep their penises and testicles. Which is why the issue of testosterone suppression amongst "transwomen" athletes is now the major issue when it comes to "trans participation" in sports.
Also, for the record, it's inaccurate to describe males who claim to be "trans" as "transgender females." Female is defined by reproductive biology in sexually reproducing species. Female denotes plants and animals that are of the sex that develop to have the potential to produce large gametes (eggs or ova) which can be fertilized by the small gametes (sperm) produced by males.
SDSU Aztec wrote:
Just Another Hobby Jogger wrote:
Ummm... ever heard of Caitlyn Jenner? What do you think she would have done, had she been born 40-50 years later?
Bruce Jenner would have chosen to transgender to the Heptathlon? Really? He was capable of waiting until he was 65 to transgender so certainly he could have waited until his athletic career was over. He also seemed to be interested in getting married and having children.
No guy capable of winning a gold medal is ever going to transgender during their athletic career. It would cost them a fortune in endorsements and future contracts and they be hated by about half of the population.
Just FYI, using "transgender" as a verb as you've done here - and using it as a noun as well - is currently considered "transphobic," probably "hate speech" and an indication that the speaker/user is deeply "problematic" and most likely an evil bigot white supremacist fascist "cissexist" Nazi oppressor and colonizer.
Mind you, those aren't my views; they're the views of today's transactivist community and their woke allies that I follow closely.
As an online search will reveal, the rule about using "transgender" only as an adjective or hell to pay has been in place since at least 2010. So it's not exactly new.