Correction: Second paragraph of my post should say
If an animal belongs to a sexually reproducing species like most of the earth's complex organisms do, the animal will have a sex - and in nearly every case, the sex will be either male OR female.
Correction: Second paragraph of my post should say
If an animal belongs to a sexually reproducing species like most of the earth's complex organisms do, the animal will have a sex - and in nearly every case, the sex will be either male OR female.
This is like a moral panic phone tree. The daily mail finds the random case that has all the elements to whip people into a frenzy, and those people (you) make a thread to whip more idiots up into a frenzy, and then eventually everyone is having a stroke over this relatively minor example of the thing you're convinced is the dawn of the apocalypse.
And at the end of the day, it's the biological female (the not-yet-transitioned FtM transgender athlete) who wins, which is the opposite of the thing you're telling us we need to have a stroke over. Which confirms that anything in this arena is just like chum in the water, because it doesn't even need to fit the narrative to send you all into a frenzy. But you'll tell US "the world has gone INSANE" when you are the ones driving yourselves insane over this.
Write an editorial if you have something you actually want to say.
So what's the problem here? If/when Iszac Henig has hormone therapy that makes him no longer eligible for the women's.
Henig will be in the mens and Thomas in the womens. Would the other competitors in the women's division prefer competing against Henig because of the existence of XX chromosomes? 7th place is 7th under any rules, one outstanding athlete is swapped for another, the integrity of the sport remains intact.
pointing out the obvious part wrote:
Help me out with this, because I’m actually missing the controversy about Henig. He ig was born female, hadn’t had any hormone therapy (as stated in the article), but intends after college to take it to transition to being a male.
What exactly is the problem? I’m unsure how I feel about Thomas competing as a female, but most people that are worried about women’s sports maintain that the sex you are born as is the one you compete as. Since Henig isn’t taking hormones, Henig can identify as male, but is biologically female.
Someone explain the uproar.
People don't need a reason for moral panic.
I agree with you 100%. Thomas competing as a female raises a serious concern. This one does not.
OozmaKappa wrote:
pointing out the obvious part wrote:
Help me out with this, because I’m actually missing the controversy about Henig. He ig was born female, hadn’t had any hormone therapy (as stated in the article), but intends after college to take it to transition to being a male.
What exactly is the problem? I’m unsure how I feel about Thomas competing as a female, but most people that are worried about women’s sports maintain that the sex you are born as is the one you compete as. Since Henig isn’t taking hormones, Henig can identify as male, but is biologically female.
Someone explain the uproar.
The problem is you're using normal logic rather than holding them to their own standards. If you hold them to their own standards then a logical inconsistency is revealed.
The trans man from Upenn wants to compete with women bc he thinks he's a woman.
However the trans woman from Yale also competes with women, despite believing she is a man.
If the woman from Yale wants to be a man then why is she competing with women? Why doesn't she go and compete with men?
These are the questions that arise if you follow their logic.
My common sense position is that if she's actually not doping yet then she is a fantastic female athlete who earned her victory and she should continue competing as a woman. If she's not doping yet then there is no problem, so long as you ignore the logical inconsistency between what she says and what she does.
Who are "they"? NCAA? Ivy League? Or "anyone who does not agree with Great OozmaKappa"?
Henig and Thomas swim for different teams under different coaches. It seems their decisions were made independently of each other's. Does Henig have to explain what Thomas is doing or vice versa?
You seem to be fighting an invisible enemy who exists only in your head.
Just Another Hobby Jogger wrote:
pointing out the obvious part wrote:
Help me out with this, because I’m actually missing the controversy about Henig. He ig was born female, hadn’t had any hormone therapy (as stated in the article), but intends after college to take it to transition to being a male.
What exactly is the problem? I’m unsure how I feel about Thomas competing as a female, but most people that are worried about women’s sports maintain that the sex you are born as is the one you compete as. Since Henig isn’t taking hormones, Henig can identify as male, but is biologically female.
Someone explain the uproar.
People don't need a reason for moral panic.
I agree with you 100%. Thomas competing as a female raises a serious concern. This one does not.
The real story is that the UPenn (Male -> female) swimmer named Thomas set worlds records the previous month in Women's division swimming races. And i quote:
"Earlier on Saturday, Thomas won the first of four races by just two seconds - one month after she shattered two women's records with a 38-second margin against her closest competitor. "
But that kind of story has been played before and doesn't get the attention.
But what will get attention is simply that two transgender women athletes win the event - the point being that it would appear that Women's sports has been denigrated and diminished to competitions between transgender athletes allowed to compete as women. The subtle point that the swimmer born as a woman actually won that event is less important, but was very well explained earlier on this thread by an apparently knowledgeable poster "retired swimming coach", And his point is simply that the swimmer you would expect to win did not most likely because they were unrested late in the meet, but that is not the take-away most readers of the article would infer.
I believe the article is intended to strike emotional response rather than a careful analysis.
RunRagged wrote:
Depending on which source you go by, gender vendors say there are anywhere from 58 to 72 to 100 to more than 200 "recognized" genders today - and more are being invented and introduced every day. Still only two sexes, though.
I’m no doctor but Wouldn’t someone who is born intersex be like a 3rd one since they’re not male or female ? Aren’t there like dozens of types of intersex
RunRagged wrote:
Dwightarm wrote:
🙄🙄🙄
Oh please.
If there is life out there, it’s possible they also have varied genders. Even on this planet, we have animals that can change sex, some have one male and 2 hermaphordite genders within the same species, one species even has 7 genders.
We aren’t all that unique. We never have been. People just talk about it more openly now.
Animals don't have genders. Gender means the set of stereotyped characteristics, behaviors, personality traits, mannerisms and modes of dress and self-expression associated with each of the two sexes in human cultures. Sex = male and female; gender = masculine and feminine. Sex is binary and biological. Gender is a spectrum and it's cultural, social and political. Today, there are innumerable genders and gender identities, but still only two sexes.
If an animal belong to a sexually reproducing species like most of the earth's complex organisms do, the animal will have a sex - and in nearly every case, the sex will be either male and female.
Yes, a few select animal species out of the known 8.7 million animal species such as clownfish are hermaphrodites. Or rather, the male members of a few species have the capacity to become sequential hermaphrodites and play the female role in reproduction in situations where all the females have died off or are scarce. In many sexually-reproducing plant species, both the male and female parts can be found within a single organism too. Doesn't mean this is true of humans. Doesn't have anything to do with humans at all.
Some animal species also can reproduce asexually by cell division, copying, fragmentation and/or spores. Some animal species that have evolved the capacity to reproduce sexually also still maintain the ability to reproduce in another way, so if sexual reproduction fails they have another fallback means of perpetuating their species. But none of this has anything to do with humans or any other mammals.
Humans aren't clownfish, nor do humans have the capacity for hermaphroditism. Like most complex animals and plants, humans can only reproduce sexually - and reproducing sexually always requires a female gamete, an ovum or egg, and a male gamete, a sperm. There's no other way to do it.
There's never been a human hermaphrodite, meaning a person capable of producing both ova and sperm. Not even sequentially. Pointing to animal species that have the capacity for sequential hermaphroditism as evidence that humans can change sex is like saying that because birds can fly, fish can live under water and fungi can reproduce in multiple asexual ways, this means humans can too.
With the use of Big Pharma hormones, hormone suppressants, modern surgeries and cosmetic procedures, male and female humans can alter their bodies to make themselves appear and sound more like the opposite sex than their actual sex. Male and female people alike can also give the superficial impression that they are the opposite sex through hair styles, clothing and costumes, make up, wigs, prostheses, etc and by making efforts to change their mannerisms, movements and vocal pitch and tone and speech patterns. Males and females also can have have their gonads removed and their genitals reconfigured. Males can "tuck" and females can wear "packers."
Some parents intent on having a trophy "trans child" today go so far as to "tuck" and tape up the genitals of their little boys, and to make their little girls wear prosthetic penises and balls. Silicone "packers" are available for girls under 5
https://youtu.be/eAW9UZe0X44today, and crocheted and knit ones for younger girls can be easily be obtained through Etsy or from gender vendors like this:
https://stitchbugstudio.com/product/bittybug/But none of this results in anyone actually changing their sex or their kids' sex.
Similarly, some people claim to be neither sex, and with the use of the aforementioned means, some today are trying to rid themselves of all sex characteristics. "Genital nullification" is one of the new kinds of surgeries being offered by the gender vendor industry today. At the same time, some females who have fake penises surgically constructed today elect to keep their vaginas, and some males keep their dicks and balls whilst having a cavity created in their pelvis that they call a vagina. None of this changes their sex.
Depending on which source you go by, gender vendors say there are anywhere from 58 to 72 to 100 to more than 200 "recognized" genders today - and more are being invented and introduced every day. Still only two sexes, though.
How do you know animals don't have genders? Are you Dr. Doolittle and have had conversations with them?
Interestingly, your New Speak definition of Gender hasn't always existed in the English language. The original 1828 Webster's dictionary does not include it, and it is pretty clear on the definition of gender:
1. Properly, kind; sort.
2. A sex, male or female. Hence,
3. In grammar, a difference in words to express distinction of sex.
5 iq functioning genius wrote:
so are they both dudes? this stuff is so confusing man...
No, one is male and one is female, both both identify as the opposite of their biological sex. The biological male (competing in a women's swimming event), was beat by a biological female (not taking any drugs yet) who identifies as male. So basically the actual man was beaten by an actual woman. The girl transitioning to male is just really good.
pointing out the obvious part wrote:
Help me out with this, because I’m actually missing the controversy about Henig. He ig was born female, hadn’t had any hormone therapy (as stated in the article), but intends after college to take it to transition to being a male.
What exactly is the problem? I’m unsure how I feel about Thomas competing as a female, but most people that are worried about women’s sports maintain that the sex you are born as is the one you compete as. Since Henig isn’t taking hormones, Henig can identify as male, but is biologically female.
Someone explain the uproar.
I'm with you there. I don't see any issues with Henig competing as female since she technically is one and has not taken any drugs that would make her competing in her birth sex category unfair. She clearly is just way better than the biological male she competed against.
But she claims to be a male and demands to be referred to that way but continues to compete against females.
fansofonly wrote:
Is this rojo posting under wejo's handle?
I thought about the same thing when I posted.
Seemed like a Rojo type thread. But when I saw the headline I couldn’t believe it.
wejo wrote:
fansofonly wrote:
Is this rojo posting under wejo's handle?
I thought about the same thing when I posted.
Seemed like a Rojo type thread. But when I saw the headline I couldn’t believe it.
My god! As you nearly fell out of your chair!
alanson wrote:
Henig had the hydrodynamic advantage (breasts removed).
Not sure breasts are really much of a "hydrodynamic advantage." My understanding has always been that objects and bodies that move the fastest and most efficiently through water are those with streamlined shapes and a smooth surface.
If breasts really provided a "hydrodynamic advantage" then the design of boats, submarines, torpedoes, surfboards, waterskis and such surely would have developed along different lines. Since Howard Hughes's interest as an engineer focused on both breasts and aeronautical design, I think he'd have noticed and would have recommended that the US war department start making submarines, cruisers, destroyers and carriers with breast-like bulges on them. Funny, that didn't happen.
The world's fastest fish and boats of all kinds are very streamlined.
https://youtu.be/DIn926nYeNYBTW, the added buoyancy that adolescent girls and women have which gives us an advantage in the water comes from the extra layer of fat all over our bodies, not specifically from our breasts. Contrary to what many guys seem to think, breasts aren't just bags of fatty tissue that function like flotation devices. There's a lot of glandular tissue, ductwork, veins, fibrous tissue and some connective tissue in breasts too.
Only 10% of women have breasts that are almost entirely made of fatty tissue. The vast majority of us have breasts that have significant amounts of "dense" and heavy fibroglandular and connective tissue. Ten percent of women have breasts that that are mostly this dense kind of tissue with relatively little fat.
https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/breast/basic_info/dense-breasts.htmhttps://www.cancer.gov/types/breast/breast-changes/dense-breastsRegardless of how much fat or dense fibroglandular and connective tissue they have, girls's and women's breasts can be a real hindrance in most athletic activities, including swimming, if they are of any size. Large breasts get in the way of a lot of activities, including certain swim strokes. Women with large breasts and "side boobs" often find they impede the ability to do the front crawl stroke used in freestyle events as well as the backstroke. Large breasts can also hinder the ability to do the breaststroke and sidestroke.
Also, no matter what kind of tissue our breasts are made of, many girls and women experience breast tenderness, soreness and pain that can get in the way of optimal sports performance. Some girls and women get such sore breasts that any movement and even sleeping is painful and difficult. Breast discomfort and pain might be less bothersome in swimming than in, say, running or jumping, but it's not like water sports makes these problems go away.
bio Domer wrote:
Anyone else think that the brojos need to find a new hobby?
Yes. Using their message board to whip up sentiment against people who are already pushed around constantly is a cr@ppy hobby. How about going to an actual running event, watching it and writing an article, maybe?
Wait, that would involve actual work. Easier to churn out the endless BS clickbait.
Lol at caring about Yales swimming program.
Just have an open division
Male division
Female division
Open division
Everyone is satisfied.
We're probably 10 years away from not having any women competing in women's sports.
The Mailman wrote:
Just have an open division
Male division
Female division
Open division
Everyone is satisfied.
This is what I’m saying. Give them their own division and throw them in to the Special Olympics.
The January 8 Ivy League meet results show that the only individual race in which the two trans-identified athletes Lia Thomas and Iszac Henig competed head to head is the one in which the "transman" handily trounced the "transwoman."
In that race, the 100 yard freestyle, Lia Thomas was so uncharacteristically slow that Thomas came in not second or third, but sixth. Thomas swam a 52.84. Henig's first place time was 49.57. Last time Thomas raced the 100 yard freestyle, on November 20, Thomas clocked in at 49.42 and won first place.
Also, it seems significant that at the Jan 8 Ivy meet, Thomas won the other individual races in which Thomas competed. The only individual race where Thomas didn't finish first just happened to be the race in which Thomas was pitted against a fellow/sister/sibling trans person who is female. What a coincidence.
https://swimswam.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/penn_yale_darmouth.pdf
Also Henig's winning time in the 100 free at the Jan 8th meet was slower than Thomas's time in the 100 at the Nov 20th Ivy meet in which Penn went up against Princeton and Cornell: 49.57 versus 49.42. So it can't be said that Henig is generally faster than Thomas.
At the Ivy League meet on November 20 in which Penn was pitted against Princeton and Cornell and for which Thomas first made the headlines, Thomas had these times:
100 yard: 49.42 First place (Henig's time on Jan 8 was 49.57)
200 yard: 1.43.47 First place
500 yard: 4.35.06 First place
https://swimswam.com/penns-lia-thomas-breaks-200-500-free-records-in-meet-with-princeton-cornell/
At the Ivy meet on 8th January, the times for Thomas were considerably slower:
100 yard: 52.84 Sixth place (first place was 49. 57)
200 yard: 1.48.73 First place
500 yard: 4.57.20 First place
https://swimswam.com/yale-dominates-ivy-league-double-dual-meet-with-penn-and-dartmouth/
Here are the times Thomas swam in the 500 yard freestyle at the Nov 20, 2021 Ivy meet, the Zippy Invitational on December 3, 2021, and the January 8, 2022 Ivy League meet in chronological order:
4.35.06 First place
4:34.06 First place
4.57.20 First place
Lia Thomas has slowed down considerably since December 3 and November 20. For whatever reasons is anyone's guess.
https://gozips.com/documents/2021/12/3//2021_Zippy_Invite_Finals_3_Women_500_Free.pdf?id=16721