A woman speaks out! Competing vs trans women is unfair.

Luv2Run wrote:

First, calling someone a name like "transphobic" is a way to stifle debate. Often I see it as the unwillingness to confront the arguments put forth by the object of the slur (and yes I think it is a slur).

What should we call this post?:

pygymy wrote:

How many times does it need to be said, trans-girls are not girls but are mentally sick men who wish they were girls and men don't belong in girls' sports!

If I say it's transphobic many people will boo but it is transphobia. Almost every thread contains stuff like this but we can't call it for what it is because it is now "name calling" to say someone's a transphobe.

Tatar wrote:

Luv2Run wrote:

First, calling someone a name like "transphobic" is a way to stifle debate. Often I see it as the unwillingness to confront the arguments put forth by the object of the slur (and yes I think it is a slur).

What should we call this post?:

pygymy wrote:

How many times does it need to be said, trans-girls are not girls but are mentally sick men who wish they were girls and men don't belong in girls' sports!

If I say it's transphobic many people will boo but it is transphobia. Almost every thread contains stuff like this but we can't call it for what it is because it is now "name calling" to say someone's a transphobe.

That’s not the general tenor of the thread. Sure, there will be some transphobic people in any debate about trans people.

But overwhelmingly, most people here are in support of trans people living their life they want to, but acknowledge the simple truth that males and females are different.

Lastly, gender dysphoria had always been considered a mental illness. It’s only been within the last 10 years that transgender lobbying has reskinned it as normal.

shill wrote:

Tatar wrote:

What should we call this post?:

If I say it's transphobic many people will boo but it is transphobia. Almost every thread contains stuff like this but we can't call it for what it is because it is now "name calling" to say someone's a transphobe.

That’s not the general tenor of the thread. Sure, there will be some transphobic people in any debate about trans people.

But overwhelmingly, most people here are in support of trans people living their life they want to, but acknowledge the simple truth that males and females are different.

Lastly, gender dysphoria had always been considered a mental illness. It’s only been within the last 10 years that transgender lobbying has reskinned it as normal.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. The general theme of many threads is adult trans people are free to say they are women/men but they are not entitled to legal recognition, protection, healthcare or representation.

Gender dysphoria is still a disorder. It's often experienced by trans people because of the conflict between their identity and their bodies. It's not universal though - not all trans people have it and not everyone who has it is trans.

Lenny Leonard wrote:

This is old news. And don’t pretend that this isn’t racially motivated. This would not be an issue in states that aren’t predominantly white.

Trans girls are girls. They run against girls. Stop bending everything to your transphobic narrative.

Lenny has it right.

I agree.

However the selfish part of me says - this is payback for every single endurance sport being 5-10x deeper on the men's side since the birth of sport. It's a hell of a lot easier for a woman with decent genes and work ethic to podium versus a man with great genes and super work ethic. Maybe the decent women have just gotten used to the idea that putting in work guarantees results?

If you truly believe that gender is a social construct, just have a look at the mixed 4 X 400 m world championships.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUUWYOqxR84

My point is that the reaction should be outrage whether the roles are reversed or not. I'm consistent. Anti-trans people only get outraged when it goes against their narrative.

Your asking me to "imagine if..." or "I think a few conservative rich guys from Greenwich should..." Neither of those things are relevant because they are not happening. I am dealing with actual events that have happened. Chelsea lost to female runners.

Lenny is clearly trolling.

shill wrote:

Lenny Leonard wrote:

Protect women from what? I thought it was to provide athletic opportunities to women that otherwise would have been unavailable.

No opportunities were taken away. They can compete against biological males (the same as them) or trans women exclusively (the same as them).

There really is no reason why we can’t have trans Olympic competitions just like the special Olympics.

One reason would be that about 5 athletes will show up.

Lenny Leonard wrote:

Your asking me to "imagine if..." or "I think a few conservative rich guys from Greenwich should..." Neither of those things are relevant because they are not happening. I am dealing with actual events that have happened. Chelsea lost to female runners.

Watched this years ago and didn't forget it. Watch from the 12 minute mark.

I’m always fascinated by this discussion because it is 1000000% dominated by a bunch of dudes who want to express their opinion over and over and over again. How many people responding in this thread are female? And compete? And thus have an opinion about competing against trans women?

Here, I’ll start. I’m a female. Trans women are women. Let me race them. I usually beat them anyway. And a lot of men, too.

See? That ... wasn’t that hard.

I don't care what is between someone's legs or how they identify. What I care about is, do they have an unfair advantage? If you have testosterone levels in the male range, then you are at an unfair advantage in competition against females. That is the issue. The NCAA allows trans women to compete in the female category after one year of hormone therapy. The IAAF ruled similarly in the Caster Semenya decision. If you wouldn't allow female XX athletes to dope with testosterone, then I don't know why you would allow XY individuals to compete in female competitions with naturally elevated testosterone levels. It isn't right or fair.

Lenny Leonard wrote:

This is old news. And don’t pretend that this isn’t racially motivated. This would not be an issue in states that aren’t predominantly white.

Trans girls are girls. They run against girls. Stop bending everything to your transphobic narrative.

Nope. Trans girls are trans girls. There's a difference. You're a dogmatic tribalist. Learn to think for yourself. Don't just repeat activist tropes.

I'm a female and I compete, and no, I don't think that XX females should have to compete against people with an unfair testosterone advantage, just like I didn't think it was fair when the East German women doped with T in the late 80s. This is exactly the same thing to me. If you identify as female and want to compete in the female category, that's fine, but only after you've brought your testosterone levels into the female range. That's what the NCAA requires, and I think it's the right decision.

quick comment wrote:

I’m always fascinated by this discussion because it is 1000000% dominated by a bunch of dudes who want to express their opinion over and over and over again. How many people responding in this thread are female? And compete? And thus have an opinion about competing against trans women?

Here, I’ll start. I’m a female. Trans women are women. Let me race them. I usually beat them anyway. And a lot of men, too.

See? That ... wasn’t that hard.

I was a very average high school runner. I ran a 4:36 mile, 9:53 2 mile running 35 miles a week. I never qualified for state...never even close. I can guarantee my average self would have absolutely clobbered every female HS runner in the state, probably the country.

Think about that. I wasn't even good and I would have won state in the 1600, 3200 AND 800. Something that's never been done in my state. You don't see a problem with that?

Charlesvdw wrote:

The argument you make is not a good argument.

The fact that they didn't beat her doesn't mean they don't have an unfair advantage. It means they were not so genetically gifted to begin with.

No, I didn't make an argument that you think I did. I didn't argue that trans girls didn't have any unfair advantage. I pointed out that Ms Mitchell did not suffer from that unfairness, because she beat those trans girls and won state titles. She is also currently competing at a D1 school. So she did not lose any opportunity to compete at the next level, either.

In other words, she does not have "standing" in this case

Now someone who missed her opportunity to compete at college because she lost to trans girls at high school does have standing in this case. But even in that case, her opportunity was lost to another cis girl. The roster spot she didn't get went to another cis girl. The two trans girls are not competing at college, so they didn't take away anyone's opportunity to compete at college.

This is a complex issue which does not have any good solution. We only have bad and worse solutions that are unfair to at least some people involved.

quick comment wrote:

I’m always fascinated by this discussion because it is 1000000% dominated by a bunch of dudes who want to express their opinion over and over and over again. How many people responding in this thread are female? And compete? And thus have an opinion about competing against trans women?

Here, I’ll start. I’m a female. Trans women are women. Let me race them. I usually beat them anyway. And a lot of men, too.

See? That ... wasn’t that hard.

I am not female and I'm only competitive in the old folk's class. I guess that means my opinion on the matter has no value to you. I coach high school girls. I see the work they put in and the sacrifices they make. I also see their reluctance to make waves in the face of woke culture. Privately, they all think it's unfair for biological males to compete in their classes. As their coach, I am willing to speak for them.

If we're going to bend to everyone's feelings, then what about Age Dysphoria? Some people feel older or younger than their actual self. So under the same set of circumstances of the woke left, than anyone should be able to compete as any age they want.

Time to go smash the 70-80 Age Marathon Record.

uhhh guys? wrote:

This is affecting fair competition in women's sports.

This should not be a liberal versus conservative issue. Come on, can everybody just use some sense?

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2021/05/22/transgender-athletes-girls-women-sports-track-connecticut-column/5149532001/

The irony being you mentioned liberal and conservative, ergo turning into exactly that. Fly over to the UK and I’ll also teach you about irony as I knock out your veneered unnatural teeth.